AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => The Vinyl Circle => Topic started by: neobop on 7 Dec 2010, 03:29 pm
-
For those who have a Clearaudio MM cart, you can buy a replacement stylus that's a perfect fit. AT is the OEM for Clearaudio MMs. The AT-95 has the identical plug (rectangular part that holds the cantilever and fits into the body) that fits the Clearaudios. The only thing is, you have to trim off the plastic wings from the stylus holder. A Jico made shibata give very nice results. It is available from LpGear for $130, or from TurntableNeedles for $79 (on sale).
neo
-
I thought the Clearaudio MM styluses were not replaceable. Can you show a picture of what you have and how you mounted a Audio Technica stylus to it? That would be very helpful. Thanks...... 8)
-
OK, I'll try to post some pics. I notice there's a little button up top that says insert images. Do I have to use a server or can I insert from my computer?
I'm kind of retarded when it comes to this stuff.
In the mean time, if you have a Clearaudio MM you can see that the cantilever is attached to a little rectangular piece of plastic that is flat on the bottom of the body. If you carefully pry up the plastic, with a small screwdriver under the lip of the plastic, you can remove the stylus/cantilever. You'll see that the assembly is the same as any AT MM, with magnets attached. However, AT used different plugs (that piece of plastic) for different carts. A modern plug for a 440/120 series stylus won't fit. I think Clearaudio ordered this style body/plug for just that reason.
The Clearaudio plug is identical to an AT-95 plug. [remember the rest of the plastic has to be removed] There are no really high end styli available with this plug. The Jico bonded shibata is quite good however. If you wanted say, a boron cantilever and a micro line stylus, you could transplant a 150MLX stylus into a 95E plug. There is a little screw on top of the plug to accomplish this. It is hairy though.
This all started for me when a guy called Glrickaby posted some of this on Agon. I was curious about Clearaudio MMs, and this is a way to try one inexpensively. I bought a Virtuoso with a busted cantilever. With a Jico AT-95 shibata, it sounds really nice. Because the compliance is dictated by the stylus, it works great in heavier arms. The AT-95 has the stiffest suspension offered by AT. Cu is 6.5 @100Hz. BTW, the AT-95 has a nice balanced sound. No need to load at 32K like my 440.
It also seems that all the Clearaudio MMs are identical electrically. The only difference seems to be in the stylus/cantilever and the wood top in the Maestro. There could be a difference internally, like nylon vs teflon, but I doubt it. The electrical specs - resistance, inductance are the same.
neo
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39751)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39752)
The first pic is a Virtuoso on top and the stylus assembly from a 150MLX. The plug near the 150 stylus is from a 440. As I found out, the plug doesn't fit. Even trimmed down to fit, the cantilever is at the wrong angle. That's why it must be transplanted into a 95 plug. To complicate matters further, the Clearaudio plug has no screw, just a fitting. I've been meaning to see if I can get that out in one piece. I think Soundsmith does it, but I'm no soundsmith.
Pic #2 is my AT collection illustrating the different plugs - styles.
Top is a 15SS with stylus right behind it. It has a round plug with severe angle.
Next is a 440ML OCC. Notice the front is angled, as opposed to the Virtuoso just below. The styli are interchangeable on a 440/120/150. Matter of fact, the bodies of the 120 and 440MLa are the same.
The bottom cart is my AT95 modded. It's potted internally and has an aluminum top plate epoxied on the top. Sounds good with the Jico shibata.
neo
-
Thanks for the info Neo!
-
Yes, very cool info Neo :beer:
-
Actually, any ATN95E/3400 stylus will fit any Clearaudio body at least through the virtuoso.
You actually do not have to trim it as it will snap right on, but look a little funny because
there is a slight gap in front- doesn't hurt anything. Units will work on the old LINN K9 etc.,
in the same way, with a slight gap showing. Neo and others believe there is better sound
with trimming the wings right at the plug base. I've got a Virtuoso listed now for sale on
Agon but you can see from the picture when I trimmed the wings off the plug, one side
is not straight and they can look a little ragged if not careful. Also, the AT92E/3003 stylus
will work with a little trimming but the compliance is different as this is a Pmount. Styli
can also be transplanted back and forth as Neo shows, provided the plug has the little
white spot, which scraped away, reveals a screw. Some generics do not have the screw
and the Clearaudio plug itself, has a insert rather than a screw so is not usable unless
there is some way to remove the insert. I've retipped several Clearaudios in this fashion
with good success. The AT95E was a recommended class D component in the list by
Stereophile some years ago. For a $50 type cartridge, it seems to perform way above
it's class and with a stylus improvement to an HE or Shibata (ATN95HE,S or ATN3400S)
from LPGear or Stereo Needles, is quite a performer. When these styli are inserted in a
Clearaudio body, there is at least an illusion of increased performance, when one considers
what Clearaudio charges for its wood bodied units.
-
Neobop, You are very brave. I would not do that with a $800.00 cart. But it all seems to work. Thanks for the posting and the pics........ 8)
-
Neobop, You are very brave. I would not do that with a $800.00 cart. But it all seems to work. Thanks for the posting and the pics........ 8)
I thought I mentioned, I bought a Virtuoso with a busted cantilever. Not so brave. :D
What I did forget was the P mount styli. I had a 92E sitting around just in case I ever fixed a broken Technics TT that is a P mount. Actually, I'm using the Technics for record cleaning so I'll probably never use the cart. Anyway the 95E stylus (plug) fit right in the 92. I never played it though. I understand the 92 plug is a little loose in the 95 body. I hold them in with some tack anyway. What this means is that any P mount AT with that unique shaped stylus holder, will fit. I guess you really would need to trim off the plastic on those.
Here's my modded AT-95SA. I made the top piece out of an old headshell.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39783)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39784)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39785)
neo
-
A couple of recent developments I think are worth mentioning. I was looking at the plug that comes with the Clearaudio. With 10x I can see that the lip of the cone shaped insert that replaces the compliance screw, is actually U shaped - has an opening on one end. This is so small I have no tool to mess with it. To see if it will unscrew I'd have to grind down a tiny cart screwdriver. To give you an idea of size, a compliance screw (the little screw in the plug that holds the cantilever) has a 1mm (I think) thread. Most cart screwdrivers won't fit. This insert fits inside the recepticle for the 1mm screw.
I have an extra plug that Glrickaby gave me, so I decided it wasn't worth messing with the Clearaudio plug. I just haven't decided what stylus I'm going to use.
If you have a Clearaudio MM and want to replace the stylus yourself, I'd recommend getting an AT-95 shibata replacement or buying a cheap 95 or 3400 stylus for the plug and transplanting an AT stylus. This is a bit hairy but I'm sure many could do it. What this entails is cutting away the plastic on the 95 plug and removing the stylus by unscrewing the compliance screw. Then remove the stylus you want to use and put it in the 95 plug. It has to be aligned and tends to move on you a little when you tighten the screw. It takes a little patience and probably a few tries. You have to use a little common sense and not muscle it or you'll bend or break the cantilever. If you buy a stylus with a boron or beryllium cantilever, I think your cart would rival the Maestro, even if you have a less expensive Clearaudio. As I said previously, the specs of all the Clearaudio MMs are identical. That means the generators are the same. The only possible difference is some body difference or maybe the use of OCC wire in some models and not others.
The other development is that I just put the AT-15SS back in action. The 15 is the same as a 20. The 20 is a selected 15. I guess it's like a Grado Gold and Silver? Anyway, this is one of the best MMs I ever heard. I think it's just as good as my Stanton 980LZ, maybe better. So, after I have an exotic stylus in the Virtuoso, I'll have a little comparison.
neo
-
Perhaps a separate post, but on the interchangability of styli, just found the
Shure M91 stylus will fit a Garrott K1-2-3, provided you leave the shaft about a mm out so the stylus does not touch the Garrott body. This is a $12 Pfanstiehl fitted into a $265 type Garrott body. Down under take notice
as most of the Garrott K series are sold from Australia though I understand
they now have a NA distributor. I'm sure a Jico SAS will work also!
-
Hi Glrickaby,
What's up with Garrott? Are those the models current? I was under the impression that they're now selling only super expensive ones.
I remember some guy came on VE and said he thought the $1200 one was better than sliced bread. He left because of censorship. Apparently he had a few nice MCs, too. Interesting :scratch:
neo
BTW, that guy was from Australia (home of Garrett) - he had some good equipment including a Manley Steelhead and high end TT/arm. Their current offerings look like MCs to me.
http://www.garrottbrothers.com/index.html
-
Believe the K series is still current. Listed at the
Australian dealers and the U.S. distributor never
said anything otherwise. On stylus' only, they may
furnish the same thing for K2 and 3. Last I
checked, Decibelhifi and Terryanderson still had
listings and Needledoctor also,though ND apparently
had no supply when I talked to them. Just Google
Garrott K-2 and these come up. Very fine sound.
I'm sure Garrott's current owners have them made
by some other company just like Goldrings new
series made by Nagaoka, Shelter 201 by Sumiko,
Clearaudios by AT, etc., Appear to be a Shure
design with an updated engine. I've tried M44
and M97 styli but only the M91 works though
the others fit. Of course, the Garrott name was
bought by some other company. The K series
could even be the V15's in a sheeps clothing?
They are definitely mm and lower end from the
mc stuff. simplymusicmarketing@me.com is the US distributor. Only comparison with the "shimmer"
of this K-2 is the Goldring 1042 in my ear.
Tonearm pivet must be raised 3-4 mm for
proper sound.
-
Looks to me like the K series is history. There are still people selling it and it looks like it could be a good value, but obviously there's no one making it any more. The Garrott bros are dead and the guy who took over is supposed to be making improvements where they left off. No one left to make the K series.
It's the new ones that are supposed to be so good. I guess they're not super expensive, the top one is around $1200? The 88 might be half that. I think they're actually MMs. One has a low output - could be a LOMM like that old Stanton/Pickering. I'll see what I can find out.
So, an M91 stylus - what's that, a bonded elliptical on a straight cantilever? I think I read somewhere there is an SAS that fits the M91. Might make it brighter though, like an M97. You should call LpGear. They're a distributor for Jico. Maybe they have one that fits perfect.
You think those K2 or 3 would be good to get before they're gone? Seems like you really like em. Better than a Virtuoso?
neo
-
Neo- To my ears, they sound better than a Virtuoso-stein. Have a "shimmer" that I like.
Perhaps the difference between a Shure vs AT sound. Can't find words to describe it any
other way. I have two, the OEM and the Shure/hybrid. The hybrid sounds like a souped up
M91, perhaps more the V-15 III type sound. The OEM more like a Goldring 1042. Then again,
the fantasies of an old man.... Believe the K series comes after the passing of the Garrott
Brothers. Things stopped. Old jigs resurrected for a new owner. The 88 was the main line.
Still some around with intensly loyal owners and apparently a new one available along with
higher end new models,well reviewed. Don't know what they actually make and what is
farmed out. Still apparently do retips according to their website. Two dealers in Aus. on
the web. Needledoctor has no stock and apparently doesn't know how to get any,though
still shown on their website. New US distributor back east,believe in NC-Simplymusicmark-
eting does not appear to have a website Apparently the Garrott Bros. were not good
business managers prior to their untimely demise. Will keep Jico in mind but right now
have the K-2 OEM with the extra clone and a little spent out buying TT parts for my
1229. The K-3 is probably the best in the series at around $300 last I looked. Decibel
HiFi is good to deal with. Sorry to mess up your thread with this which is probably a
separate topic....just thought the stylus clone idea was interesting enough to carry
forward on another cartridge. Sorry I picked one under a bushel basket that not
many know about except down under. They need some break in.
-
Hey GL, don't worry about the thread. It's about stylus substitution and related insanities anyway. I really like the DIY aspects.
A lot of this comes down to taste and preference. So it's good to get a description. The 1042 is the best Goldring I've heard. They have a new top MC that's supposed to be a big step up from the Eroica. Other than that, I never cared for them. IMO the 1042 doesn't hold a candle to a comparably priced AT ($400?). I was never a Shure man either, so I guess this is where we part company as far as preference, shimmer or no shimmer. But don't let me dissuade you from putting your 2 cents in. You've got plenty of company with your preferences.
Some ATs have to be loaded down for flat system response. I think that's the reason many people don't relate. But I never really thought the AT-95 was that close to a Virtuoso. Even my potted and top plated 95 doesn't have the detail and finesse. Just because AT makes Clearaudio and you can stick a stylus in there, doesn't make them the same. So, it still leaves me guessing about the Garretts. I wouldn't dismiss them because of your comparisons, to the contrary, it makes it more intriguing. I've heard others recommend them too.
I get the impression that Garrett is now a pretty small operation. Wonder if they can increase production. It takes a lot of carts to stock dealers. If they farm it out it would probably be AT or Jico, LOL
neo
-
Try: avguide.com/forum/remembering-the-Garrott-Bros= you can also
google K-2 and it should come up. Interesting history along with current
ownership. Committed ritual suicide in 1991. Actually brought out the K
series as a cheaper alternative to the P77 et al. They hated MC's. Anderson
in Aus. has the complete K line. His site will show up with a K-2 google.I've
had and sold: 1042, Rega Exact, V-15 Vxmr, At440, a Dyno/5, BPS, and
pretty much everything in the same price range and sold them all. My
equipment doesn't justify some of the low MC though I've had the 103
and an AT- believe At130 MC with the changable stylus and a few
others Like the lower Benz's though generally I prefer a MM or Hoput
MC for a mulitude of reasons. I've kept the Garrotts, Pickering XV-15
(681), some OM Ortofons, and the various guises of the AT95E. I like
the M91(more mellow) as a cheaper alternative to the V-15III(sharper).
Flat response is an ideal but I prefer feeling, shimmer, mellowness and
involvement from my sound and look for the cartridge to provide what
my system may otherwise lack. I also think the M97XE (have 2) shows
potential. In ATs, I like the 120E better than the 440ML I had. My 120/
125E currently has a transplanted stylus only. I like Goldrings in the
new series and have a 2200 and 2300. These are all reasonable company
for most Audiophiles who can't afford to buy whats in the Stereophile
reviews. Coming from this background, suggest you consider Garrott.
If not the K line, then the P77 if you can swing the cost but read
the history first. May our search never be satisfied....nor flat
response a dream fulfilled.
-
Try: avguide.com/forum/remembering-the-Garrott-Bros= you can also
google K-2 and it should come up. Interesting history along with current
ownership. Committed ritual suicide in 1991. Actually brought out the K
series as a cheaper alternative to the P77 et al. They hated MC's. Anderson
in Aus. has the complete K line. His site will show up with a K-2 google.I've
had and sold: 1042, Rega Exact, V-15 Vxmr, At440, a Dyno/5, BPS, and
pretty much everything in the same price range and sold them all. My
equipment doesn't justify some of the low MC though I've had the 103
and an AT- believe At130 MC with the changable stylus and a few
others Like the lower Benz's though generally I prefer a MM or Hoput
MC for a mulitude of reasons. I've kept the Garrotts, Pickering XV-15
(681), some OM Ortofons, and the various guises of the AT95E. I like
the M91(more mellow) as a cheaper alternative to the V-15III(sharper).
Flat response is an ideal but I prefer feeling, shimmer, mellowness and
involvement from my sound and look for the cartridge to provide what
my system may otherwise lack. I also think the M97XE (have 2) shows
potential. In ATs, I like the 120E better than the 440ML I had. My 120/
125E currently has a transplanted stylus only. I like Goldrings in the
new series and have a 2200 and 2300. These are all reasonable company
for most Audiophiles who can't afford to buy whats in the Stereophile
reviews. Coming from this background, suggest you consider Garrott.
If not the K line, then the P77 if you can swing the cost but read
the history first. May our search never be satisfied....nor flat
response a dream fulfilled.
Well said GL, although I don't think musicality and flat response are mutually exclusive. But I know what you mean. Just because I put a high value on transient response, neutrality and detail, doesn't mean our ultimate goals are different. You have to work with what you've got, and get it to sound like music - something you can relate to. To be honest, my experience with LOMCs - some have the potential to greatly outperform, but they can be hairy, fiddly, and go wrong easier. I also have a phono stage (AHT) to go with. The only MC I have left is a Monster Genesis 1000. I love that cart. It might be better than the current ZYX. There was a 2000 model you'd probably like better. It had gold coils and was a little sweeter. It was a hair slower as well. Sounds like magic on classical. The 1000 is still my ultimate for jazz and all around listening. I like it better than most any $2K - & up cart I've heard. I've heard a few. Some VDHs, maybe that new funny looking Ortofon might be better. There's always something better, unless you're rich and obsessed. IMO the trick is to find what you like and can live with.
So, why budget MMs? They're fun. Replaceable styli and a whole lot more for your money. Some of them sound damn good. I sure wouldn't be tinkering like this with multi thousand dollar carts. Unfortunately, my situation has changed recently and I won't be buying anything for awhile. I'll keep Garrott in mind though for the future. I've seen P77s on Agon a couple of times, and after all the top ones now are around the same $ as a Maestro.
neo
-
Last night I transplanted an ATN-7V stylus in a 95 plug. I put this on the 95 body for use on the heavy Sony PUA-7 arm. I have it on a Technics headshell which is 4g lighter than stock shell. The 7V stylus is a .2 x .7 nude square shank elliptical on a tapered cantilever. The compliance is 7cu @100Hz and tracks at 2.0g +/- .25g. Initially I had it set at 2.2g. I reduced it to 2.0g and it didn't sound as good, so I'll have to see how that develops. Sometimes it takes a few records for the suspension to loosen up. I chose the 7V because of the compliance/suitability for heavier arms. The Jico 95SA stylus also required 2.2g for best sound, in 2 different arms, one being somewhat lighter (Kenwood 770d).
The 7V is more detailed than the 95SA. This was obvious from the start. Comparisons with the Virtuoso should be interesting. The new stylus sounds cleaner with more impact and bass dynamics. The high end was also more detailed. The shibata was more forgiving and sweeter. I only had time to play a couple of sides of Herbie Hancock's VSOP Live. This LP has electric boogie type bass and electric keyboards. It sounded great. The mix of electric and acoustic might have favored the sound of the new stylus. My impression is that it sounds more like modern ATs, without emphasis on any part of the frequency spectrum.
A note about AT replacement styli. Any modern AT stylus should come in a plastic box with a cardboard outer box. This is a blue and white box that is clearly marked AT w/stylus number, bar code and serial number. LpGear sells genuine AT styli. I bought a ATN150MLX from somebody else, previously. It might have come off a new cart, but it was in a generic box and not packed properly. I can't say that it was used or counterfeit, but it seemed to break too easily. I also wonder where some companies come up with stock on long discontinued styli. I was on a waiting list for arrival of NOS ATN-155LC stylus. This is long discontinued and nobody has it that I know of. After the last experience, I passed when it came in. Older styli like this or a 15/20SS don't come in the newer AT box, so you have to trust who you're dealing with.
neo
-
Hi Neo
on the topic of AT stylus surgery....
I have an AT20SLa - with an original stylus... but the stylus seems to rotate on its axis at the slightest movement. (Microscope is telling me of uneven wear.... not surprising!)
I thought I would try to see whether I could remove, or just tighten the stylus in place.
Got out my 1mm micro-driver, felt around inside the plastic "plug" (that being the only place I could think of where the screw might be)
Space is so narrow that I really cannot see into it... so it is all by feel.
Moving the driver around I feel something that I think may be a slot, but for the life of me I can't move it....
Am I doing something wrong? looking in the wrong place?
or perhaps has a previous owner gone and super-glued the screw in place....
If I can work this thing out, I might be able to do a transplant to equip the AT20 with a stylus.... I still can't quite mentally work my way up to the current price of the AT15/20ss styli...
bye for now
David
-
David,
From you're description, I'm not sure what's going on. The round plugs of the 20 series are tricky. The screw head should be recessed from the top of the plug, about 1 or 2mm or so. They are painted over with a black or white lacquer. This has to be scraped off/loosened, so you can turn the screw. It should be obvious, but if it's black paint on there, it might be hard to tell. Is it possible that the screw (called compliance screw) was removed previously? Check it out again with a light and some magnification. It could be that there is no screw.
The older round plugs are harder to work. Modern styli have a brass sleeve around the back of the cantilever - the part that fits into the plug. I don't think the 15SS stylus has the sleeve. I removed one that was worn, just to try it. I probably have the old plastic stylus holder w/plug, somewhere. Send me a PM if you need it. I'll hunt it down. I didn't check if the opening for the cantilever has a different diameter than modern ones. I'll look into that and let you know. If so, the project might not be worthwhile.
$150 for a 15SS stylus seems steep. But if you consider that it's a beryllium cantilever with a nude square shank shibata, it's actually a good deal. Check out the price of a 2M Black stylus on an aluminum cantilever. I know how it is though. I paid around $200 for the 150MLX stylus. I should have tried it on my 440 first. Maybe it was paying learning dues.
I forgot to mention that the 7V stylus didn't track right on my 440 body. I got sound, but it kept repeating. This was with the plastic holder/wings. Either the plug isn't as high or somehow the holder isn't right. I double checked everything. After I transplanted it, there were no problems with it on the 95.
neo
-
hallo Neo,
great idea and shows you to be a true adventurer.
keep it up!
regards,
bas
-
Bas,
Great to hear from you. Don't be a stranger. We're all looking forward to reading your insights.
Did you ever get that Grado Statement or Statement Master? I guess the top one would be the Statement Statement. Kind of like Catch 22, Major Major. :wink:
neo
-
hallo Neo,
yes i did get one. it is the New Statement....top of the line Grado. :dance:
i still have the Reference Reference.....ok, the Reference as Grado calls it..... :roll:
i was going to use it as a trade in, but didn't, so i may have them make it into a mono version for me.
i already have the mono Sonata so there is no hurry.
i am actually using my Transfiguration Aria mostly now for everyday listening.
the Statement is on my Stax UA-90 and i use a couple of 9-10" arms for mono.
i still use a Grace as the main arm in my 3 tonearm setup, but a G960.
this has a removable headshell for Koetsu or Allaerts duty when the Transfig is not used.
yes, a three tonearm Beast!
was that inappropriate on an AT 95 thread?.....sorry.....not :peek:
love the idea and you seem to be enjoying messing with the big boys.
i bet it would not be difficult to make a mold for your own carrier plug to mount a cantilever into for Clearaudio stylus replacement.
regards,
bas
-
Hey Bas,
Would you happen to know what thread Clearaudio uses for their cart mounting screws? I think it must be 2.6mm, cause nothing I have seems to thread properly. I bought it used and only got the nylon screws, which I destroyed when removing the cart.
An Aria for everyday listening must be nice. I thought you had a Grace 940.
I'm using my Genesis 1000 much of the time now. I never heard an Allaerts. I think you have a sweet tooth.
neo
-
hallo Neo,
i take turntables and tonearms apart. make em better that new.
but i have not gotten to cartridges yet. don't even have a Clearaudio here to take apart.
i bet they use standard 2,5mm screws. i know, metric is a problem for youz in the US,
but the rest of the world gets ticked off at the bloody inch hardware that we have to put up with. :o :lol:
i do have a Grace G940, actually 3 of them. simply, i can use 12" tonearms (2) so i do. have 2 of those G960s. :green:
really like the Stax too with its carbon fibre armwand for high compliance cartridges.
i do love my cartridge sweeties.
regards,
bas
-
I think the Clearaudio screws are an odd size, like 2.6mm. I have plenty of misc cart screws and 2.5 seems to thread about a mm or two and then get stuck. Metric is actually easier to work with. Many of us are used to measuring arm mounting and such in mm. We translate to inches to get a better conception of actual size.
I take back anything negative I ever said about NeedleDr. I called them to ask about the screws and they're sending me a set from a busted cart - N/C. I buy record sleeves and RCM fluid there so I'm a previous customer.
David,
The AT15/20 stylus holder will accept any AT cantilever. The offer stands, if you need it.
neo
-
I think the Clearaudio screws are an odd size, like 2.6mm. I have plenty of misc cart screws and 2.5 seems to thread about a mm or two and then get stuck. .....
neo
hallo,
that is because of the threads, not the size of the screw.
some threads are larger than others, so you will need to try different ones to see if the threads are the same.
regards,
bas
-
David,
The AT15/20 stylus holder will accept any AT cantilever. The offer stands, if you need it.
neo
Hi Neo
that would be great actually - I think my one may be missing the screw... and I have no other obvious examples to work with.
I am currently debating between ordering an ATN13 needle so I can try out the AT20 and TK7su I have and decide whether I want to spend more on them, or whether I just bite the bullet and get an ATN20ss/ATN15ss ... or maybe get the Jico ATN20 equivalent?
I've been vacillating on this for some weeks now!
Still have concerns about compliance/tonearm - both the 15 and 20 are too high compliance for the tonearm theoretically speaking.... but concensus out there seems to be that the high compliance designs give the "silkiest" HF... and the lower compliance designs give more punch but a grainier HF detail....
Bye for now
David
P.S. apologies for not responding earlier - Audiocircle stopped sending me reply notifications for some unknown reason....
-
David,
No Problemo. Just send me a PM with your mailing address. Good thing you live really far away. They'll put it on a jet plane and you'll probably have it sooner than if you lived in New Jersey.
You might want to consider the ATN7V. I just got one for my AT-95. It seems to be working out nicely. It's a .2 x .7 nude sq shank on a tapered aluminum. Cu is 7 @100Hz. It seems to outperform the Jico shibata, at least to my ears. The shibata might be a little sweeter but the 7V is cleaner, faster and more detailed. The high end sounds more extended, although I don't know if it really is. It might not be the ultimate, but for $79 the cu is right and it sounds damn good on the 95.
I'll see if I still have that old 15SS stylus that went with the plastic holder. I think it still has a little life left. That's why I was messing with it in the first place. If I can find it you should be able to get an idea about its suitability. I still have an unopened ATN20SS, so I really don't need it.
neo
-
Hi Neo- It's me-GL. See your ATN7V. Just picked up an AT7V complete unit
with very low hours on Agon and find it has a very sweet sound on my
Rega 3/2000. Don't know why you would transplant the stylus though, as
the body is probably higher quality than the AT95E body-gold and all...
Apparently the A120-440ML will also fit this body, so logically, it could
transplant to a Clearaudio Virtuoso etc., Apparently new ones at LPGear
at a knockdown price...
-
I made a decision a while back to focus on Line Contact styli rather than elipticals....
So the AT7V fell off my list.
I don't fully stick to that - 2 of my MC's are elipticals, and some of my MM styli.
-
I think a .002 by elliptical can actually produce a sweeter sound than an LC.
Some LC's sound "astringent" to me; i.e. detailed but not full. In any case,
the AT7V is apparently a Japan market unit which is an astounding value
at LPGear and a tapered .002 by is certainly not junk. The cartridge body
has a very high class finish. This cartridge does not exhibit some of the
shrillness that some Audiophiles claim is pervasive with the AT line. It
really is sweet and mellow.
-
Hi GL,
I got the stylus because of the value, compliance, and I thought the sound of a .2 x .7 would be better with these carts. I still have the Virtuoso, so I can I can certainly try it on there. I agree about line contacts. Sometimes they're great but it depends on the cart. I didn't buy the whole cart cause I really don't need another generator to break in. Do you have the inductance and impedance of the 7V? I was told that it's in the 500mH + range. Maybe that was the original Signet TK-7Ea. Everybody seems to love that cart, especially with med/heavy arms.
Funny, I just played a Japanese pressing of Stan Getz, Oscar Peterson trio. It has Ray Brown and Herb Ellis. This is with the 95/7V on my heavyweight Sony with a 7g headshell. Maybe I got some extra bass cause it's mono record, but boy did it sound natural and sweet.
Seems to me that there are some cantilever/stylus combos that usually work out better than others. This is irrespective of the body. I have the feeling that a micro line is better on an exotic cantilever. AT seems to be getting away from MLs on aluminum too. Maybe it's a cost thing, but somehow I doubt it. They seem to be voicing them differently. They don't make line contact any more. On the other hand, I think putting an elliptical on my M20FL Super would be a downgrade. The fine line sounds great on there.
David,
I sent you the old 15SS stylus holder. I found a stylus I think goes with it. You'll have to check it. It probably needs aligning. I only have 30x - It's a nude square shank and it looks like a beryllium cantilever, so I think that's it. LOL
neo
-
AT7V specs are: 15-25,000 Hz,5.0mV output,1.75 to 2.25 Tracking,47K Load impedance, 27db channel separation,Channel Balance 1.5db,Dynamic compliance 7.0 x 10-6 cm/dyne,vertical tracking angle 23 deg,Static compliance 35 x 10-6 cm/dyne,size H17.3 x W15.2 x D26.5 mm. Wt 6.2 gm. Instructions are in Japanese. Got these from an ebay listing. Also believe the diamond is a nude square shank. Made with 99.997 copper by Ohno Continuous Casting process.- Some of the Japanese has english numbers- Looks like inductance is 650(symbol is a half circle ear phone type) and resistance is 100-200pF? Stylus is ATN-7V and Cost 7500 yen. Anything made with 9's copper is high class. Neo- I believe, with respect to the AT95, that this AT7V is superior quality,a japanese market product, not intended for export. How LPGear got them, I don't know. When you're nude, square shank diamond with a .002 x elliptical, I'll take that over a ML or LC anyday, most of which are bonded. Exception: on a high class TT like the VPI type with perfect set up. Incidently, I transplanted a conical 560371-2 generic stylus to my AT120 via loosening the screw method. Mounted on an AT125LC, sounds excellent. Don't know if the body makes the stylus sound better or hat?....Not sure I understand the difference between impedance and inductance, particularly in Japanese but you can reverse the numbers if I have them backwards. Apparently, resistance has to do with the wires to the preamp and 100-200 is apparently a common range. You know,if AT put 9s wire in the Virtuoso......
-
I think a .002 by elliptical can actually produce a sweeter sound than an LC.
Some LC's sound "astringent" to me; i.e. detailed but not full. In any case,
the AT7V is apparently a Japan market unit which is an astounding value
at LPGear and a tapered .002 by is certainly not junk. The cartridge body
has a very high class finish. This cartridge does not exhibit some of the
shrillness that some Audiophiles claim is pervasive with the AT line. It
really is sweet and mellow.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying eliptical is junk...
It's just that the contact patch is more limited (although with a 0.2mil it is as fine a radius as any but the very best LC's)...
But you are only reading a limited vertical area of the groove wall - and if (as is the case with me) much of the vinyl is old and worn - then reading beyond the eliptical/conical vertical area is of great importance.
My Sony XL-MC104p is probably my sweetest cartridge (from my last round of critical listening and comparison) - and it is a "super eliptical"
In terms of pure sound quality - assuming good vinyl - an eliptical can match most LC's - in fact it will come down to cantilever quality. (assuming all else is equal, and properly set up)
I think cantilever quality, total effective tip mass, and cantilever resonant frequency define the sound of a cartridge far more so than anything else....
My choice to focus on LC is primarily based on the type of vinyl I have and plan on having....
bye for now
David
-
Seems to me that there are some cantilever/stylus combos that usually work out better than others. This is irrespective of the body. I have the feeling that a micro line is better on an exotic cantilever. AT seems to be getting away from MLs on aluminum too. Maybe it's a cost thing, but somehow I doubt it. They seem to be voicing them differently. They don't make line contact any more. On the other hand, I think putting an elliptical on my M20FL Super would be a downgrade. The fine line sounds great on there.
David,
I sent you the old 15SS stylus holder. I found a stylus I think goes with it. You'll have to check it. It probably needs aligning. I only have 30x - It's a nude square shank and it looks like a beryllium cantilever, so I think that's it. LOL
neo
I think that you are primarily talking about voicing of the stylus (primarily resonance, and damping which impacts on that resonance)
I am testing an ATN12S stylus tonight for its cantilever resonance.... if it comes up where I want it, then there will be the possibility of creating an ATN1512S. Which would be nice as the ATN12S is readily available at a good price... - but everything hinges on that resonance .... ie: the voicing
I now have the ATN440MLa mapped out - and tonight I am mapping out the ATN12Sa and the Ortofon Digitrac 300SE - If I have the time and patience maybe even the VMS30mkII
Bye for now (and thanks)
David
-
I think that you are primarily talking about voicing of the stylus (primarily resonance, and damping which impacts on that resonance)
I am testing an ATN12S stylus tonight for its cantilever resonance.... if it comes up where I want it, then there will be the possibility of creating an ATN1512S. Which would be nice as the ATN12S is readily available at a good price... - but everything hinges on that resonance .... ie: the voicing
I now have the ATN440MLa mapped out - and tonight I am mapping out the ATN12Sa and the Ortofon Digitrac 300SE - If I have the time and patience maybe even the VMS30mkII
Better stay away from designating cart-tip combos that way. With AT you're likely to be talking about another model entirely, and not realize it. ATN designates a stylus. So you're going to try an AT-15/ATN12S? I thought you had an AT-20 body. Maybe you mean transplanting a ATN12S into the 15SS plastic? See what I mean?
I think voicing is using every parameter to get a desired performance, at a particular price point. The 7V is a Japanese model. It's $189 from Japanese on-line retailers. LpGear imports them. They also import some other models - ATs and the Deft carts made by Jico. The Deft is a pretty nice cart for little money. Jico makes an SAS stylus for it, but will only sell it in Japan. That's why I didn't consider it. The Japanese practice of domestic only models, puts me off, although in the US, they're all discounted and our prices are are less, depending on where you buy.
neo
-
Heh... let me be more specific.... the AT15 & AT20 styli appear to be identical with the possible exception of compliance....
I have a really good AT20SLa body (almost perfect match on inductance and resistance....)
So I am looking at the possibility of taking an AT12Sa stylus (ATN12S) - which is one of the nicer economy shibata's around - with a tapered cantilever
And fitting it into the ATN15SS stylus plastic housing (ie the plastic housing for the stylus for an AT15ss cartridge) - which you are sending me.
The ATN15ss housing being a perfect fit for an AT20...
In any case - along the way I will learn a bit about how these styli are put together.
I did complete a characterisation of the AT12Sa tonight - and it is quite similar (not identical) to the ATN440MLa - so there is a definite "house profile".
Interestingly - putting this into excel and using goal seeking/solver to achieve as small a level variation as possible across various frequency ranges results in 2 optimal solutions for the stylus... one at minimum C (60pf) and another at very high C (550 to 600pf)
I've run the model for AT150ea, AT20SLa and AT12Sa - all using the ATN12S (AT12Sa) stylus resonance profile.
The loadings vary a bit - primarily due to the varying inductances - but the variation is minor - overall the 2 solutions still apply - High C or Low C - with appropriate R adjustment.
This is interesting
bye for now
David
-
I'm dragging up this old thread to post a pic of the AT plugs. There should be renewed interest in transplanting now. The Virtuoso has been crowned king in the ongoing Audiogon MM thread.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=50278)
Both plugs are CA/95 type. Only a plug from a AT-3400 series or a 95 will fit and have the correct angle to the cantilever. The screwdriver with the white handle is a regular freebie that comes with a cart. You can see that it's a little too big for the compliance screw. The screw head is recessed. About a quarter turn will loosen it enough to remove the old cantilever. It's a good idea to know about how much to tighten it after inserting the new one. You don't tighten down like mounting a cart, but you have to snug it up enough to prevent movement. The tricky part is getting the magnets aligned. You'll probably have to adjust it 3 or more times. It tends to move a little as you tighten the screw. This has to be perfect. You check it by viewing from the front. It's obvious.
Although AT has a reputation for producing overly bright carts, this is by no means true about all ATs. These sound great at 47K. Having the capability of using a stylus from another model allows voicing the cart. Put a 152 or 155LC on a 440 (transplant not required), and it doesn't need loading down.
neo
-
You know Neo, those plugs end up looking a LOT like a AT25/TK9 style stylus....
Have you tested the CA bodies for inductance/resistance balance?
I am curious to know how tight their specs are, especially on the lower end versions...
-
The Atn95e/3400 stylus will in fact fit the TK9 body. There is a gap at the front which doesn't hurt anything other than looking funny. Since the TK9 stylus is no longer made, this is in fact the only solution to continue using the TK body if it needs a stylus.
-
The Atn95e/3400 stylus will in fact fit the TK9 body. There is a gap at the front which doesn't hurt anything other than looking funny. Since the TK9 stylus is no longer made, this is in fact the only solution to continue using the TK body if it needs a stylus.
Actually the TK9/10 are the signet versions of the AT24/25, and the AT22/24/25 styli fit just fine..
My TK9e is currently running with a NOS ATN25 and sounding great....
But given the every climbing pricing of replacement needles for these - and the fact that the replacement needles are now very close to the price of a new cantilever & needle from a retipper....
The possibility of creating a hybrid with even higher performance than the original exists!
And with the screwed in original AT/TK styli for these the vibrational properties should be on a par (or better?) than the CA approach with a adhesive attached AT95 type plug...
As another interesting aside - for those who (like me) particularly like the p-mount's, the AT95 and the AT92/3472 families share the stylus plug - although the rest of the surround differs...
There is an opportunity there to concoct something with potentially CA-Maestro like performance for p-mount setups....
Neo - did you mention earlier that you had potted an AT95? And if so, have you documented the process?
bye for now
David
-
I just woke up to the fact that I have a bunch of AT92 type bodies lying around... :duh:
Applying the lessons from the Maestro should allow the creation of something nice... :thumb:
-
I've cut back the wings on a 3003 AT stylus-same as AT92E and used the plug on a Clearaudio
Virtuoso. The sound was O.K. but could have been better- the diamond may have been worn.
I'm sure the same plug will work on an AT95E, though possbly not an advantage as the AT92E
type is actually a pretty good cartridge in its own right....I have a generic from "Ed"? which is a
.0002 x .0007 or 8 which may actually be higher quality than the 92E and would probably work
on a Clearaudio or AT95E body, though again, probably not an improvement on the AT95E
compared to sticking it in the 3003/92E body... However, clip the wings on an AT92E and it will
probably fit your K-9?
-
Hi guys,
David, there's a couple of pics of my potted 95 on page 1 of this thread. With just about any AT (I think) there's a screw holding the top onto the body. With most standard mounts you'll probably have to dig through the paper with the model #. Once the top is off, the epoxy has to be gently pushed down the threaded insert into the cart. I suggest tilting the cart back so it's almost sitting on the pins. You can't get any epoxy near the suspension (plug). This was pretty easy with the 95 cause the top screw is near the back. You have to be careful of the delicate wires connecting the output pins. It didn't take much epoxy. This necessitates gluing the top on cause the threads fill up with potting, or at least get fouled. I filled the spaces in the orig top with mortite and glued it back on. After it set I glued on the aluminum top piece I made out of an old headshell. If you have a higher quality cart and want a wood top, I suggest removing the orig top and fitting the wood to the body as a replacement. The 95 is the only one I did this to.
In an ultimate sense I think the electrical parameters are the key to TOTL performance. Check inductance and resistance on the most highly regarded models. Impedance is around 5 or 600 ohms and inductance is < 500pF. On the other hand, I don't think the 95 even has OCC coil wire and the potted version sounds very nice. I don't think the alum top is necessary. So satisfaction depends on your goal. If you're looking for the holy grail you might want to look beyond the 95. If you want to be able to play a record and have it sound like a master tape with a little less harmonic detail, you'll like the potted 95.
Anybody know the electrical parameters of the 110E? It has OCC wire! LOL
neo
-
Hmmmm- well, I have a collection of the AT92's - so I will take a look at how they are built...
I don't mind sacrificing at least one to destructive testing...
I don't know about the wood in a p-mount, and I also wonder about the response of potting materials other than Epoxy...
What about an elastomeric material - a Silicone glue?
I also have a spare 105 and a spare 110....
bye for now
David
-
Sil-glyde grease in a tube from NAPA is also an excellent potting material.
-
I used epoxy because it's traditionally used for potting electronics AFAIK. Check the label on whatever you're considering. Some of the ones I looked at were corrosive to metals, including copper. 5 minute epoxy was easy to use.
What are the specs of the 110E? That one actually might be a better candidate than the 95. LpGear says it now has OCC wire. It looks like it might have the same plug as the 95. I keep thinking that I might not have enough hours on my 95. So many carts, so little time.
neo
-
You might want to take a look at the analog review section at Audiogon under Virtuoso. In his
8-21 thread, Raul seems upset that I pointed out the Virtuoso stylus is replacable, contrary to his review. He also groups me with named others as a DYS (?) and apparently feels I've disturbed the purity of his review which claims the Virtuoso is apparently next to? as the best ever. I've filed a further reply apologizing but pointing out several cartridges which approach the Virtuoso in quality
at a much lessor price.(Hopefully the moderator will publish). Not sure what I stumbled into here
but apparently a DYS is a euphemism for some kind of Rif Raf. The Virtuoso is obviously an
overpriced cartridge, though a good sounding one, considering it is a modified AT which is the point
I was trying to make, along with the fact the stylus can be replaced if broken, without an exchange. Raul says he has an AT95SA but apparently feels the Virtuoso (or any Aurum Beta series for that matter) is not intended to be replaceable as that is what Clearaudio intended....He mentions
several other names of which you may be one....guess I didn't realize the implications of what
I did. Strangely, the threads go on as if no one cares the Virtuoso is a modifed AT.
-
It's not that no one cares... it is that we accept that a hot-rodded cartridge is no longer the original - and that there is a cost to the hot-rodding process...
If I spend a day on a job - expect to be paid accordingly.... working out the labour costs of doing these cartridges, for a skilled craftsmen at German labour rates..... the cost is not all that unreasonable.
But for those interested in DIY CA have shown us what can be done, and how it can be done...
It is not yet clear exactly what the CA body is though.... Would be nice if someone could measure and compare impedance and resistance for these - then we would pin down what body it is (and whether it is a standard or custom body!)
bye for now
David
-
Believe Neo did measure the CA at another site and another post. Perhaps
he remembers? Don't recall that the electrical difference was significant
but of course one does not know about the quality of the copper etc.,
-
He measured resistance - I have measurements of resistance for the AT95 and AT110...
But we don't have measures for impedance @1kHz....
-
David,
The CAs are all 660 ohms impedance, 420mH. I measured 408 & 409 ohms resistance. The plug is a 3400 (95) series but the body is different. The resistance being within 1 ohm/ch would indicate careful matching.
I think this is a custom made high end cart and CA chose the 95 plug for obvious reasons. How many people are going to do transplants? I think these were released before the Jico 95 replacements were available. I'm not sure. I think all the current top ATs have high impedance and higher inductance. The Virtuoso doesn't seem to have that aggressive high end like the 150 or 440. The balance is more neutral like my 15/20SS or even the 95. The ML stylus seems to have a tendency for brightness. The Maestro apparently has a boron stylus and micro tip. The more extensive use of wood is probably to tame the top. The boron also is more controlled. If you look on CAs web site, you'll see the specs. You can probably get an Concept or Classic, put in your stylus of choice, and have a $1K cart. They might not be as well matched. BTW, the 7V stylus is very close to the orig Virtuoso. It's a .2 x .7 nude sq shank on tapered alum. The cu is 7 @ 100Hz.
neo
http://www.clearaudio.de/_en/Tonabnehmer.php
-
It seems to me that the difference between the more neutral AT15/20 and brighter AT440 presentation is in the stylus and not the body.... cantilever resonance...
The thing that I want to know is what is the mechanics behind the difference in impedance/resistance ratio ...
-
The 440 has 3.2K impedance. The inductance is 570mH? The 440 and the 120 share the same body. The 120 has a nude .3 x .7 on a straight alum cantilever. It's still somewhat bright. I think the generator has a tendency toward brightness. You're right about the combo of stylus and body. I had a beryllium ML on a 440 and it was only a tiny bit bright. Something like 42K would have been perfect.
I don't think you can discount the impedance/inductance. Look at those specs on the 20SS. They're in the same ballpark. I never heard my 15/20 with an alum cant. I bet it would sound similar, with a little damping.
neo
-
I have the AT20SLa with the ATN15ss fitted.... I also have an ATN14 I could try on it....
-
You might want to take a look at the analog review section at Audiogon under Virtuoso. In his
8-21 thread, Raul seems upset that I pointed out the Virtuoso stylus is replacable, contrary to his review. He also groups me with named others as a DYS (?) and apparently feels I've disturbed the purity of his review which claims the Virtuoso is apparently next to? as the best ever. I've filed a further reply apologizing but pointing out several cartridges which approach the Virtuoso in quality
at a much lessor price.(Hopefully the moderator will publish). Not sure what I stumbled into here
but apparently a DYS is a euphemism for some kind of Rif Raf. The Virtuoso is obviously an
overpriced cartridge, though a good sounding one, considering it is a modified AT which is the point
I was trying to make, along with the fact the stylus can be replaced if broken, without an exchange. Raul says he has an AT95SA but apparently feels the Virtuoso (or any Aurum Beta series for that matter) is not intended to be replaceable as that is what Clearaudio intended....He mentions
several other names of which you may be one....guess I didn't realize the implications of what
I did. Strangely, the threads go on as if no one cares the Virtuoso is a modifed AT.
Hi GL,
My internet was out for a couple of days and I didn't see your post. I also didn't see your exchange with Raul on the review. Last I read, the Virtuoso was crowned king. I wouldn't worry about it. Although Raul has an extensive knowledge of carts, YMMV applies to everyone. He loads all MMs at 100K. This mystifies me, but I chalk it up to preamp/system differences. In the final analysis we get similar results with most of the carts he talks about, which I'm familiar with. The CA carts are not modified ATs. They are custom made by AT and are unique. This might seem like a technicality but there is no AT that is the same as the CAs. Although David might disagree, I'm convinced that the generator makes a significant difference. If not, then why doesn't a 150MLX sound like a Maestro w/o the wood?
Just because we transplant styli and use the Jico 95 replacements after wing removal, doesn't mean it's really a user replaceable stylus. I don't abide by CAs policy and greed, but Raul was reviewing the cart and maybe your comments should have been on the thread rather than the review. CAs prices have always been high. On the other hand a 2M Black is $670 and the Garrott MMs are $1200 and 1400? They don't make those less expensive MMs any more.
http://www.garrottbrothers.com/opt.html
You might feel that there are other MMs that are just as good or better. I'm not arguing with you. I just want to set the record straight.
neo
-
Neo- I can understand the CA being custom made by AT but wouldn't this show a difference in the
electrical measurements? Also the case itself seems AT "common", whereas AT has much fancier
cases on the AT7V for instance and the 150MLX. According to Raul's equipment list, he has some
pretty powerful stuff including about every cartridge ever made and TT's that cost more than
most can pay, yet he says unqualifyably the Virtuoso is the best cartridge he has ever listened
too? Even with my butchering, I've never heard that potential, though my equipment would
never approach his in quality. The maestro, next model up, has apparently a Boron-vital type
of stylus. Why would AT custom make a unit for CA that exceeds anything in their own line
up? I have an AT7V and it does sound better on my equipment as does my Precept and 13EA...
I accept your explanation but am still puzzled?
-
Neo- I can understand the CA being custom made by AT but wouldn't this show a difference in the
electrical measurements? Also the case itself seems AT "common", whereas AT has much fancier
cases on the AT7V for instance and the 150MLX. According to Raul's equipment list, he has some
pretty powerful stuff including about every cartridge ever made and TT's that cost more than
most can pay, yet he says unqualifyably the Virtuoso is the best cartridge he has ever listened
too? Even with my butchering, I've never heard that potential, though my equipment would
never approach his in quality. The maestro, next model up, has apparently a Boron-vital type
of stylus. Why would AT custom make a unit for CA that exceeds anything in their own line
up? I have an AT7V and it does sound better on my equipment as does my Precept and 13EA...
I accept your explanation but am still puzzled?
GL, There is a difference in electrical measurements. The 95 has an impedance of 2.8K vs 660 ohms for the CA. The 95 doesn't have the OCC wire. There is no AT with the same specs as the CAs. Most of the ATs with the heavy metal case weigh around 8g. CA wanted either wood or more extensive alum top/sides and the result would probably be too heavy with the deluxe case underneath. It doesn't matter. CA probably contracted with AT to make them carts with those specs - low impedance/inductance etc, and finishes the tops themselves. Electrically the results are reminiscent of long discontinued models like the 20SS, even a little better.
So, your results differ from Raul's. Surprise, surprise!! Really GL, since when did everyone get the same results? I must say that my results so far are closer to Raul's, but I'm not prepared to say it's the best ever. You know how that goes. On that score your results aren't the norm. Ever since the CA MMs were released they got glowing reviews and recommendations. I remember reading - no need for MCs any more - about the Virtuoso. Your bafflement comes from the discrepancy with results and to a certain extent mine does too. I don't listen to it at 100K with the tail up in the air. On the other hand I get harmonic detail and a presentation that seems to elude my modified 95. It seems more live and open than my 15/20SS. Who knows, in a few months maybe that Garrott will replace the CA on Raul's list. BTW, Soundsmith has a new top LOMI. It goes for around $4500. It was a tough decision but I'm not going to rob a bank or sell my car to get it. At least not until Raul says it's the best. :wink:
neo
-
Why would AT custom make a unit for CA that exceeds anything in their own line up?
Sorry if it seems like I'm beating this to death, but that's an important question. Maybe AT was unaware that the generators were top quality? I think they were very much aware. They had to know that CA sold uber expensive MCs. They also probably figured that it would eventually get out that they were ATs in high end clothing. This would help the company. AT has a reputation of being a mass market manufacturer. If CA accolades were for an AT type generator/stylus, that would be prestigious for AT. The contract is probably lucrative also. My Virtuoso measured within 1 ohm between channels. I guess CA is paying for high end type matching.
David and I were discussing on another thread, how modern companies seem to be getting away from making the great carts of the past. Like rock/pop radio stations they try for the highest output and sacrifice the resistance/inductance specs. I noticed recently that AT seems to be making a conscious effort to voice the carts differently. The 33EV has an aluminum cantilever and an elliptical. It's said to have a nice balance. The OC9MLIII is redesigned and has a boron/line contact. That too is said to be a little more mellow. It will be interesting to see if AT redesigns the 150MLX. If they sacrifice some output and get the impedance/inductance down, it might outperform the CAs at 47K.
It seems like the vinyl resurgence is going stronger than ever. It's sort of like the late '80s when the awful sounding CD reared it's head and most people were hanging on to their record players for dear life. Digital is much better now if what you listen too happens to be on a newer recording or decent remaster. I have some new stuff on CD and some of it sounds pretty good. I also have records that haven't been digitized. Somehow digital is still less involving. Maybe it's continuous vs sampled, I'm not sure. Record players are cool and fun to mess with. Like modifying a car, it's a hobby. When was the last time you changed the laser on your transport? They say PC based digital can be even better. Good for them! I'm glad vinyl is going strong. I can still get involved when listening, and improving the set-up.
neo
-
Raul touched on the AT connection in his Virtuoso review on Agon. Also mentioned connection in
his Agon review on the AT20SS... My problem is I'm cartridge driven(because of the small size)
rather than hardware driven and given the limitations of my various Duals and my top piece being
a Rega 3/2000 with upgrades, it becomes a matching problem with cartridges where one must
not overkill with a cartridge on the priced equipment I'm using. I guess balance is the word.
Consequently, I'm always bottom feeding so to speak...An AT,Shure or Orto with a better stylus,
a lower end LOMC such as the Samba... Units always bought used. Buying and selling to support
my habit...but never being able to afford a VPI (except my cleaning machine), buying a broken
Virtuoso instead of a whole one... Realizing I'll never have most of the equipment reviewed in
Stereophile for buyers that I can't believe really exist,yet again with the rationalization that after
all,most vinyl really is not capable of performance on the level of my unobtainable equipment
desires anyway! But as Neo says, it still is fun to fool around! Maybe my next garage sale will
have a 301 or 401 Garrard for $10, or another $17 1229!
-
GL,
I don't think all that's entirely true. You obviously can hear a qualitative difference. I bet if you put a great high compliance cart on one of your Duals, you could hear the improvement over a mediocre cart. Previously you spoke about preferring some Garrotts over ATs. I assume that comes from what you heard - results. It's been my experience that a crappy sounding disk sounds bad on a modest or high end set-up. Maybe on the high end system a little more of the crap is revealed and there might not be tone controls to help get through it. On the other hand I have 50+ yr old records that sound great on any decent player. Don't be intimidated. There is no holy grail. It doesn't exist. Everybody wants "the best". Ever notice that the best varies with every reviewer and self appointed guru? In the old days reviewers were bribed with gifts of the equipment they reviewed. Impartial, objective? LOL that's about as likely as finding a politician who's not in a big corporation's pocket.
I transplanted a 7V stylus into that Jico plug you gave me. I had it on the 95 and it was sounding good - better than a Jico SA. I have another Jico shibata for the Stanton 980. It seems better on there than the one on the Virtuoso. I went to switch the 7V to the CA and noticed it looked slightly askew. So I "fixed" it and then had to fix it again cause it was crooked. This really isn't a user replaceable stylus. There seems to be a big gap between the Jico and a real AT. I don't know why. I think the 7V is very close to the orig stylus. CA lists the cu at 15 and VTF at 2g+. The 7V is 7cu @ 100Hz. I don't have the 7V body. They say it's a reissue of a Signet TK-7_. Raul got his Virtuoso with a busted cantilever too. He sent it to Soundsmith and got an alum/ellip. Not a bad idea for someone with a CA. I've had a couple of MCs re-tipped by Soundsmith and he does great work. I wonder how it would sound with a ruby cantilever? :roll:
neo
-
Go on... you know you want to..... ruby - listen to the way that rrrrolls off your tongue... rrruby....... and imagine what it might sound like on your turntable.... :icon_twisted:
Yours truly
Mephistopheles....
-
Could be the Jico is not a Jico. Understand there are 3 makers in Japan. May have picked that up
from the Turntable Needles site. In any case, the Jico is bonded whereas the AT7V is a nude,
square shank, tapered shaft. Though not a Shibata, it is .0002 Elliptical which in my book, means
it has a somewhat less astringent sound than a Shibata bonded. I use my AT7V in its original gold
body. Also am currently using a Excel S700ER 0.2 x 0.8 in my Garrott K-2 body which may be higher
quality than the original K-2 stylus. Sounds so good, I sold my other new K-2 where Decibel sent
me a complete unit when I only ordered the stylus. Incidently, I sold my Virtuoso/Shibata finally
to finance ongoing.....who knows? Am also playing an At13EA body with a Precept 220 stylus-
trimmed down of course, which is quite similar to the AT7V. I had Soundsmith do a BPS retip
and then broke it again....glad it wasn't a "Ruuuuby! (ha) Incidently, NOS AT Precept 220's are
going for 2@69.00 on the Bay if any of you experimentors need good AT styli.
-
I didn't know there were 3 aftermarket stylus companies in Japan. I know there are only a couple of diamond cutters that make tips for styli. Maybe that explains the difference in results. My Stanton shibata (Jico) sounds better than the 95 one I bought. I think I got it from Needles and the Stanton one from Gear. The Precept plug fits the AT-13? Is that the same plug as the 15/20? Isn't that high cu, VTF- 1.5g? I'm getting a little gun shy with this transplant thing. They break so easily. You have to keep redoing it to get it perfect. My instinct is to tighten down like a cart mounting screw. Boron or beryllium will snap right in half. Even aluminum will crease and break if you bend it a few times. LpGear has a Precept 550ML stylus - beryllium cant - for $200. I'm not getting anything exotic right now, though. That Precept 220 stylus deal is a good one.
neo
-
The AT13 has the thin sled so the Precept 220 will only fit if you trim down the sides but no stylus
transplant is necessary. Believe higher numbers than 13 also have the thinner sled. Actually, any
round plug stylus will fit with the sidewalls trimmed. The Precept 220 stylus and shaft look like a
clone of the AT7V but the AT7V has the rectangular plug I believe so an actual transplant would
be necessary....@2 for $69, the Precept 220 would be a good deal for AT15-20, provided they have
the round plug as a side haircut is pretty simple. Since I don't have the higher numbers, don't know
for shure.(ha) Haven't been able to find specs on the 220 but believe it is higher compliance than the
AT7V which resembles it, except for the plug. I have two 220's, one trimmed and one not. The nice
thing is I can still use the trimmed one on the Precept body.
-
That's what I thought. The 15/20 have a round plug and an angle on the bottom of the body. Sometimes the plug might fit and the angle is wrong. If you trim down a 120/440 plug to fit a 95, it still won't work cause of the angle of the cantilever. On page 1 of this thread there is a pic of the bottom of a 15. Your 7V is the same as the 2nd series of Signet TK7__ The plug is the same as a modern 120/440. You could use one of those styli on your 7V w/o trimming. However, the 7V wings are too tall to use on a 120/440. With a little trim on the sides, it's a perfect fit.
A little note about voicing - I put a 140LC stylus on my 440. That's a nude line contact with a tapered cantilever. It tracks at 1.5. After a few hrs loosening up it sounds great at 47K. Capacitance is around 100pF or so. The 140 is high cu. I have it on my Alphason with 10" cable, going into the AHT. With stock stylus I used to load it at 32K.
neo
-
Some thoughts on voicing; I wound up with a 39K load on the 440 with the 140LC stylus. I also changed an acrylic mat for a thinner hard rubber one that came with the Kenwood 770d. I have it on an Alphason 100S/KD500. It was a tad bass shy at 47K. Changing the mat got rid of a little mid/treble glare. The mat that came with the 770 is the only rubber mat I really like. Voicing a cart/stylus is no different really than changing stuff around to find the right combo. The 440/120 cart body is exceptionally tricky. It seems that a capacitance load of < 200pF is manditory. With this cart I got best results with a Sonus unipivot, modified to approx 5.5g eff mass. I also had a 152ML stylus on there. That's beryllium. It's important to remember that using a different stylus necessitates using the VTF (cu) of the stylus. It doesn't matter what the orig VTF was. The 140LC is high cu and I would probably get better results on one of my lighter arms.
That brings us to the Clearaudio MMs. All the alum cantilevered CA seem to have a straight cantilever, not tapered. Raul (the guy who reviewed the cart on Agon) reported that Soundsmith said it was a bonded tip. I never saw the orig tip so that's all I have to go on. It's starting to look like CA has bodies by AT and styli by Jico. I don't know this for a fact, but Jico has the capability to make the Maestro boron/micro tips. It could be an SAS type. All the alum cantilever Jico tips have straight cantilevers. Whatever, the Soundsmith tipped cart that was reviewed had a tapered cantilever with a nude .3 x .7 elliptical. But why stop there?
How to tame an AT:
Cantilevers - My findings indicate that aluminum tends to have less control and a more robust sound. Exotics are more rigid so fine detail goes up and excursions go down. It's the movements of the cantilever that excite the generator, so it's importance shouldn't be underestimated. Often an alum cantilever is preferred.
Tips - The AT ML tip seems to be the same as a micro ridge. It tends to be hot in the high end. An exotic cantilever will aleviate this to a large extent. The difference between a 440ML (alum) tip and an exotic ML seems pretty dramatic. I was listening to the 440/152ML at 47K and it sounded good, really good. The 440/140LC combo was still a little hot. So in this case the cantilever made a bigger difference than going to an LC.
The shibata is slightly soft on the extreme high end which can also be taken into account for voicing. The contact area is not like that of a micro though. It's more like a line contact. It sits low in the groove so you must have clean records. The Jico tips are bonded, except for the SAS. They are very high quality for bonded. It doesn't have a giant metal plate, but it's not a nude square shank either. I think CAs approach to voicing their AT generator is BS. With the retail prices being what they are, the least they could give you is a tapered cantilever and a nude tip. LOL, it looks as if you could buy the least expensive CA, put a Jico AT95 SE on there, and have a Virtuoso! Like I said before, I don't know if there are any internal differences between models, but they all appear to share the same generator. Don't get me wrong, I think this is an excellent generator. Buying a busted one is a great way to go. The alum/ellip from Soundsmith is $150.
neo
-
Neo- I went directly to the JICO website, not LPGear or Turntable Needles. They do not offer an
AT95SA. All the 95 types are shown with 3400 series type numbers and the most expensive is
a 3451@56.00 which is green and shown as manufactured by Audio Technica. My conclusion is
the 3400 SA or HE offered by LPG and TTN is not manufactured by JICO but someone else. Why
would JICO make these for the two vendors but not offer them at their own website? I would
agree the best course is probably a Soundsmith retread on a used CA, but don't understand
why Raul would get such a good result on a .0003 x .0007 Bonded elliptical when the LPGear
and TT Needles site are selling a bonded HE or Shibata for less money?.. It would almost seem
that a nude ML or other transplant to a plug fitting the CA would yield a better result, even
with the trouble of the transplant being such a pain. Why wouldn't a 440ML transplant to the
CA plug (salvaged from elsewhere as the CA plug itself is not usable), yield the best results
with a nude tapered ML on the CA? Even an AT7V or Precept 220, transplant would yield a
.0002 x .0007 nude square shank which is a step up from a Soundsmith? I just bought a $22
.0002 x .0007 Bonded Pfanstiehl for my AT13Ea which would transplant to a salvaged plug to a CA?
Probably not the diamond quality but it sure sounds good. I notice that CA bodies are now
going for around $150 in BETA S or Virtuoso so others are obviously on to this too.... Apparently
the Maestro does have a tapered Boron LC stylus which may be nude. Sorry for the Rambling-
the air is thin here in Colorado.....
-
A couple of things I have noticed about Jico and their website...
1) Not all the stuff they make is up on their website... there are styli they currently make and/or used to make that are not there
2) There are additional styli on the Japanese language website (I used Chrome browser with the google auto translate function) - the Japanese language website also has additional information about the styli
3) They obviously custom manufacture styli to order (especially for larger orders) - and some of these may not end up on their website.
TurntableNeedles, LPGear and Garage-A-Record all sell Jico styli, but I believe they also sell other Japanese manufactured styli.... there are I believe at least 2 other Japanese stylus manufacturers.
So we are in fact guessing as to whether the ATN95SA styli sold by TTN & LPGear are made by Jico or by someone else (and they may be from 2 different manufacturers!)
With regards to sound profile / results.... cantilever has a greater impact on the sound than the needle does.... (at least once you get past conical and 0.4mil eliptical)
And when I say cantilever, I include the suspension and damping...
So I have a TK9e 0.2 mil eliptical which is a fabulous sounding cartridge.... but it is a nude square shanked needle on a berillium cantilever.... and there was a step up from that which was an ML on the same cantilever.
That TK9e will take on and beat many a lesser Shibata / MicroLine because of the quality of the cantilever.
If you take an AT95 and have a SS Ruby cantilever with TOTL needle put on it, you can expect exceptional results.... to get the best from it would of course require other steps (potting, non-resonant mounting, fixed stylus mount, etc... etc...) - but might well match or beat all but the top CA cartridges...
How much better could it be if the same was done with an AT150 body? (or an AT15/20, or TK9/10 ?)
bye for now
David
-
neobop, you might want to revisit some of your assessments of the sound difference between the AT 150 ML and the AT 440ML styli. The AT 150ML has a Vertical Tracking Angle of 23 degrees and the AT 440 ML has a VTA of 20 degrees. These specs are from the AT owners manual. The AT150ML was found on-line, the 440ML specs are from my own owners manual. The difference in the VTAs between the two styli may also be a partial explanation of the difference observed in how the two styli reproduce the upper midrange and high-end.
Scotty
-
You will find the frequency response plot for the AT440MLa up on my website...
I did not mess with VTA adjustement - instead I used the basic assumption that the manufacturers intention would be met when the cartridge is perfectly level... I adjust the arm using a small spirit level and flat topped headshells...
The F-R for the AT440MLa clearly shows why the AT440MLa sounds the way it does, and when you deduct the LCR response from that plot, what is exposed is primarily cantilever resonance - which is present from below 10k and reaches peak between 14k and 16k Hz
The ATN152LP stylus on the other hand (I don't have an ATN150MLx) has its peak (cantilever resonance) up around 21kHz, with influence down to around 15kHz.... so the resonance has far less impact on the main audible range. - I believe the ATN150MLx is tuned in a similar way.
I am not convinced by the VTA difference - I believe that is a reflection of the way the stylus cantilever/suspension is tuned - and with the higher compliance of the 150MLx - the variance in VTA may be related to slighly greater flex of the cantilever...
Bye for now
David
-
there are I believe at least 2 other Japanese stylus manufacturers.
Namiki & Ogura?
-
GL,
The cartridge reviewed on Agon had a Soundsmith nude .3 mil on a tapered alum cantilever. I really don't know the parentage of the aftermarket styli. The ones sold by TT needles could be made in China for all I know. I bought a 150MLX stylus from them that I suspect was counterfeit. It was not in the proper AT box and was improperly put in a generic plastic box so it was bouncing around. It could have been taken off a new 150MLX, but wasn't even secured for shipping. The ML tip is extremely fragile. So is a boron cantilever. When I removed it from the plug it seemed to fall apart w/o any pressure or force. All I did was loosen the screw and it came out in 2 pieces.
I believe LpGear is the US distributor for Jico. I can't say they sell Jico exclusively as aftermarket, but my limited experience is that their replacement styli are higher quality. I assume they have distributor pricing and it would probably be to their advantage to buy in bulk - big orders. Needles sells a 95SA cheaper. I doubt if they could do this if they were getting them from Gear. BTW, LpGear has 3 Internet outlets. LpTunes and Atelier Something are also LpGear. When I buy a modern AT stylus from them it comes in an orig AT box. Vintage AT styli don't have the box. My mistrust of Needles is based on a couple of bad experiences. I've had no problems with Gear.
A high quality bonded tip can outperform a cheap nude one. I have a Pickering 3001 - .2 mil nude stylus for my 980. I also have a shibata from Gear. At first I thought the .2 was slightly better. After using the shibata for awhile, it was a toss up. I think I might actually prefer the shibata. The Pickering isn't a cheapo, it's an orig from KAB. A well made bonded tip won't add a lot of mass and diamond quality/polish is a big factor. All other things are never equal and sometimes you get what you pay for. That's why I guessed that Jico might be the stylus OEM for CA. CA might be charging way high prices but they're not stupid. If the carts didn't perform they wouldn't have the accolades. This is probably the best MM generator AT has produced in the last 30 or 40 yrs. Instead of a deluxe case it has a wood top. Whatever works.
neo
-
I find the idea that AT (who have a certain pride in their product) would sell their best engine through a third party exclusively, extremely strange.... possibly non-credible (as opposed to incredible).
I find it far more credible that an excellent existing generator would be onsold to a third party who would modify it further themselves...
An existing generator might also be a recently discontinued production item - the line would still be capable of producing it....
I just think we have not identified the exact model being used - rather than assuming that AT would be manufacturing their very best for a third party.
bye for now
David
-
Scotty,
VTA is one of the most misused terms pertaining to record players. I often misuse it myself. It really refers to the angle of the cantilever. SRA, stylus rake angle, refers to the angle of the tip. It makes no difference if the VTA differs when I make long term comparisons. I adjust arm height, by ear, according to individual results. It often takes 3 to 5 hrs to break in the suspension of a new stylus assembly. I don't think you can pull one off and slap another on, and get any kind of meaningful results.
I never did a direct comparison of an ATN150MLX and an ATN440MLa. The exotic ML I had was an ATN152ML - beryllium. The cu is much higher on the 152 and I was using it on a very low mass arm. It was not a direct comparison and the combination might have been a factor. Never the less, that is my impression of results. I'm certainly not alone in loading a stock 440 at 32K. I don't use another body to cancel inductance, but I use low capacitance load. The upper mid glare I mentioned was caused by the acrylic mat. Sorry if that was unclear. I still think the cantilever made a bigger difference (in loading) than going to a less aggressive LC tip. I'll have to try it on a lower mass arm as the 140 is also high cu. I don't think results will change.
neo
-
I just think we have not identified the exact model being used -
David- Per your quote above, I find it interesting that the
old Linn K-9 which they had put free on their turntables, has
the exact same body as the CA-that is the slightly shorter
one, compared to the AT95E. In fact the N95E is often
suggested as a replacement, even though it leaves a small
gap at the front. So what is the magic that CA performs
for their excellent reviews?
-
With regards to sound profile / results.... cantilever has a greater impact on the sound than the needle does.... (at least once you get past conical and 0.4mil eliptical)
And when I say cantilever, I include the suspension and damping...
So I have a TK9e 0.2 mil eliptical which is a fabulous sounding cartridge.... but it is a nude square shanked needle on a berillium cantilever.... and there was a step up from that which was an ML on the same cantilever.
That TK9e will take on and beat many a lesser Shibata / MicroLine because of the quality of the cantilever.
If you take an AT95 and have a SS Ruby cantilever with TOTL needle put on it, you can expect exceptional results.... to get the best from it would of course require other steps (potting, non-resonant mounting, fixed stylus mount, etc... etc...) - but might well match or beat all but the top CA cartridges...
How much better could it be if the same was done with an AT150 body? (or an AT15/20, or TK9/10 ?)
David
David,
I sort of agree about your cantilever statement, all things being equal. But they never are and I think you underestimate other factors. So far it seems like the 95 does not have quite the potential of the Virtuoso. I don't have a ruby/micro to compare them, but with the other styli I consistently get more harmonic detail with the CA. The potted 95 is really nice in it's own right. It's very enjoyable, but I hear what's missing when I switch to the CA. As I said previously, maybe I don't have enough hrs on it. Some ATs take forever to fully break in. I keep thinking that I'm prejudging because I know it doesn't have OCC wire and the impedance is 2.8K. I'll get it going again and let you know if things change. Believe me, I'd like nothing better than a modded 95 beating or equalling the Virtuoso. So far it's not happening.
I think that using a level to set VTA/SRA is a mistake. This has to be done by ear or a test record. You're working with mass market carts and should expect some variance. What if a suspension is sagging slightly or you vary the VTF? You should do all your samples over!! :lol: Really, IMO you have to find the sweet spot whether it's level or not.
neo
-
neo,I used the VTA term even though it often mis-applied because it is found in the product literature and readers of the thread are may be more familiar with this term than SRA/Stylus Rake Angle.
Did you feel you had better high frequency detail from the beryllium cantilever or the tapered aluminum cantilever? Regarding the AT 95, did you notice the presence of a Mu-Metal shield between the coils when you were in there potting the body of the cartridge. I suspect its presence or absence will figure into the separation specs and into how the cartridge sounds.
I have been considering trying the AT150 ML stylus,boron cantilever, on my AT 440 ML. It should be a direct swap and I might get better low level resolution as well as high frequency resolution when compared to stock stylus due to a higher resonant frequency of the cantilever and the stiffer cantilever loosing less information into flexation. My cartridge loading is a total of 10kohms to ground and somewhere in the megohms looking at the preamp input from the output of the cartridge. The signal is taken from the junction of two 5k ohm resistors, one in series with the cartridge output and the other in series to ground with the cartridge body.
Scotty
-
Scotty,
With your set-up it's impossible for me to quantify the improvement going from stock to boron. All I can do is relate the results I had in a more conventional set-up. The improvement in cantilever resonance is something you'll get regardless, and I suspect you'll have to increase the value of the load resistors. I went from alum - 32K, to beryllium - 47K. Something like 45K might have been perfect, but it was very close. Yes, it was more detailed and a lot more refined. The control exhibited by the cantilever was obvious. If it was less robust, I didn't notice. Acoustic bass sounded great and I thought it was a great improvement overall. The 150ML stylus is a direct replacement for the 440. I don't really understand your set-up and the load. Are there still load resistors in the preamp?
I never really saw the inside of the 95. There's a tiny screw in the top of the body that holds the plastic top on. I filled the hole with epoxy and glued the top back on. I'm glad you mentioned the mu-metal shield. It's things like that and having or lacking the better wire that make a cart what it is.
neo
-
The preamp has a FET input with an input impedance in the megohms and there are no loading resistors except the two 5kohm resistors. The resistors are in a Y configuration and the signal is taken from the junction.
Half of the signal is shunted to ground through the 5k ohm resistors that are in series with the inductors in the cartridge body.
Scotty
-
OK, I just re-read your previous post and see the M-ohms at the input. With almost no inductance I was a little surprised to read 10K load. But I guess the inductance doesn't change cantilever resonance. If you get the stylus I suspect you'll be changing the value of those resistors. Please let us know what happens if you do get it.
neo
-
Namiki & Ogura?
Hi Krenzler, welcome to the monkey house.
Thanks for your input. Phono stylus info on these companies is not readily available and both seem to have their primary focus elsewhere. Namiki Jewel co makes motors and scientific instruments. They also mount diamonds on cantilevers for microscopes, possibly electron type. They are named as the supplier for ZYX so maybe they are one of the supposedly 2 diamond cutters for styli, in Japan.
Similar story for Ogura. They are supposed to supply diamonds for Lyra. Whether or not either of them is involved in aftermarket styli isn't known. I suspect that they are the diamond cutters and other companies might be in the replacement stylus biz.
I think Jico is in the jewel biz but I don't know if they cut diamonds on a micro level. They probably do. Neither Namiki or Ogura look like companies that would make lesser quality styli than Jico, but you never know.
neo
-
Something not previously discussed: Pfanstiehl is obviously a large supplier of styli on the lower
cost side...Apparently swiss made. Do they make their own? Still in business or old stock? One
vendor(Saunders) has been selling V-15 III styli which are apparently equal to the original along
with several other Shure types. All apparently from Pfanstiehl? Could they be making the LP Gear
and Turntable Needle ATN95SA/3400 styli? I'm reasonably sure this model is from the same mfgr.,
wherever purchased...Same grey skirt. Same blue skirt on the HE. I've actually had good luck with
Pfanstiehl styli though my declining ears could simply be providing assurance that is not there..
-
GL,
The way I heard it Pfanstiehl is long out of biz. Many retailers like Needles have NOS or still use their model number system. I found them listed on Gear, but it was just a cross reference for their own styli. I don't think Pfanstiehl actually made anything. Apparently they had a hugh stock of orig replacement and aftermarket ones. So the quality was hit or miss. If you find a good quality one maybe you should buy an extra. It's probably an orig replacement. They also had poor quality aftermarket ones that hurt their reputation. I think you can scratch them off your list of possible Japanese manufacturers.
If there are more Japanese companies making replacement styli, I have no idea who they are. The Needles 95SA looked just like Gears. That doesn't prove anything though. It could be a knock-off. I dismissed that notion at first, but they go for quite a bit of money. Even at wholesale prices it could add up to a lot. It could also be that the ones I tried were both Jico. The 980 has a short cantilever. Maybe it turned out better or maybe all samples aren't equal quality.
neo
-
Something not previously discussed: Pfanstiehl is obviously a large supplier of styli on the lower
cost side...Apparently swiss made. Do they make their own? Still in business or old stock? One
vendor(Saunders) has been selling V-15 III styli which are apparently equal to the original along
with several other Shure types. All apparently from Pfanstiehl? Could they be making the LP Gear
and Turntable Needle ATN95SA/3400 styli? I'm reasonably sure this model is from the same mfgr.,
wherever purchased...Same grey skirt. Same blue skirt on the HE. I've actually had good luck with
Pfanstiehl styli though my declining ears could simply be providing assurance that is not there..
Chiming in a second.....not trying to hi-jack the thread. I'm not sure who or where Ed Saunders gets his styli from, or if they are made to his specs or not. Comparing a NOS N91ED to Eds version was a tie. Although the Shure M91ED cart is not really a micro detail one to begin with. Comparing the orignal V15-V (roughly 200 hours over a very long time), to Ed's replacement stylus was a draw as well. Neither were compared to a Jico SAS.
-
I had a chat with Ed about his V15V stylus...
I specifically asked him about cantilever resonance, he stated that his version has a slight resonance at around 11kHz...
So not on a par with either the original or the Jico SAS, the SAS version for VxMR has its resonance around 21kHz, which is very good, but nowhere near the original at 35kHz....
So the original NOS versions are still be best you can get for a V15V (if/when you can get them) - but I think in terms of value for money, both the Ed Saunders version and the Jico version(s) are excellent.
-
David, that doesn't make sense. What's a slight resonance around 11K?
Isn't that a boron or beryllium cantilever? If Ed's replacement is one of those materials, chances are it's an original. I seriously doubt if anyone else made replacement styli with exotic cantilevers. Maybe the brush is rattling. :wink:
neo
-
Ed's replacement is aluminium - and yes he states he has a slight (1db) cantilever resonance at 11kHz.
Which is not that unusual for an aluminium cantilever.
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39751)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39752)
The first pic is a Virtuoso on top and the stylus assembly from a 150MLX. The plug near the 150 stylus is from a 440. As I found out, the plug doesn't fit. Even trimmed down to fit, the cantilever is at the wrong angle. That's why it must be transplanted into a 95 plug. To complicate matters further, the Clearaudio plug has no screw, just a fitting. I've been meaning to see if I can get that out in one piece. I think Soundsmith does it, but I'm no soundsmith.
Pic #2 is my AT collection illustrating the different plugs - styles.
Top is a 15SS with stylus right behind it. It has a round plug with severe angle.
Next is a 440ML OCC. Notice the front is angled, as opposed to the Virtuoso just below. The styli are interchangeable on a 440/120/150. Matter of fact, the bodies of the 120 and 440MLa are the same.
The bottom cart is my AT95 modded. It's potted internally and has an aluminum top plate epoxied on the top. Sounds good with the Jico shibata.
neo
I wanted to post these pics again from page 1, for those contemplating buying a Clearaudio MM. I believe the generators are identical on all the CA MMs. The differences appears to be in the stylus assemblies. If they had different generators, they would have different specs. Because of the difference in cantilever angle between the different plugs, I recommend against using a boron or beryllium cantilevered stylus from a different series for transplant. It will probably break. A modern 440/120 series alum cantilever can be successfully transplanted. After it is transplanted and the magnets are perfectly aligned, the cantilever must be bent down slightly to correct the discrepancy between the plugs. This can only be bent once, so first make sure that it is aligned properly. If you bend the cantilever and it's not right, bending it back and trying to correct, will break it.
IMO one of the best stylus transplant candidates is the 7V. It is a .2 x .7 nude tip on a tapered alum cantilever. The cu is similar to the CA and it will be good on med/heavy arms. If you want a line contact, the 140LC is probably your best bet. It is nude/tapered but much more compliant, and will probably work best on light arms. VTF is 1.5g. IMO, both these styli are superior to the stock Virtuoso stylus. Any other alum cantilevered stylus from this series (compatible), like the 440 or 120 will work.
There are Jico styli made for the 95 that will plug right in once the plastic wings are removed. Besides the SA - shibata, there's a VL - vivid line (LC), and the SE -.3 x .7. I think the SE is the same as a stock Virtuoso. I never had the stock stylus and I'm going by what others described, including Soundsmith. The beauty shots of these carts show a straight cantilever.
Even though the generators appear to be the same, the separation specs are different. Whether they actually are different or CA makes them look worse for the cheaper ones, is unknown. From the Beta S on up, the separation is 30dB! The Beta is 24dB and the Classic is 20. How much of this is due to stylus and how much is due to internal differences, is also unknown.
neo
-
neobop, when you potted your AT 95 did you see a MU metal separator between the coils to lower the cross talk between them. This could be source of the better channel separation specs that are given on the AT 150MLX. If you recall the AT 150MLX is rated at 30dB of separation at 1kHz as is the AT 440ML, the 30dB figure may be a result of the MU metal shield between the generator coils.
Scotty
-
Actually, the skirt does not have to be trimmed on the AT95E/SA styli and will simply snap on the CA but look a little funny with the gap in front because the CA case is a little shorter, similar to the
Linn KT body..... I have an AT 125LC body and have been using a AT120 skirt with a transplanted
generic. If I buy a 440MLA stylus, will it be similar to the 440 or to a 120 since I'm not sure what,if any, difference there is in the 125LC body?
-
GL,
The 440 and 120 are the same body. Those styli fit right on with no modification. Here's a chart with groupings. Group K and L are interchangeable.
http://stereoneedles.com/audio-technica.html
The 140 has a nude LC on a tapered. I believe the 125 was bonded. The 130E is a little hard to find. It's a nude/tapered elliptical. I believe Wm Thakker has it. Best price for the 440 or 120 is probably in the US.
neo
-
Scotty,
I never really saw the inside of the 95. There's a tiny screw in the top of the body that holds the plastic top on. I filled the hole with epoxy and glued the top back on. I'm glad you mentioned the mu-metal shield. It's things like that and having or lacking the better wire that make a cart what it is.
neo
Scotty,
There's a threaded insert in the top, all the way in the back, that receives the screw for the top plate. I did look down in there, but I couldn't see much, just a nylon or teflon rectangular piece.
I'm glad you asked about this again. This could very well be the difference in specs between the models. Tracking ratings are probably due to different styli. I think the new Concept, Classic, and Alpha might be w/o the shield, if indeed the others have one. That's a big discrepancy - 10dB.
neo
-
Guys, I sincerely doubt it...
The AT120e and the AT150 both have the shield - at substantially different prices!
The additional manufacturing cost of having two models one with and one without shield would be far greater than the added cost of the shield on the top model.
My take on the specs differences is that we are looking at tolerances - on the body also but especially on the stylus and the precision of its mounting.
A wide tolerance, or another way of saying it, a low level of quality assurance - requires a wide spec to ensure all production (or whatever is the desire %) - meets the spec.
Tight tolerances, along with a high level of checks and tests allows for a narrower spec range....
Two devices can be identical (from a manufacturing perspective) and have substantially varying specs based on cherry picking and QC.
For good classic examples of this process look at the AT12/14/15/20 family...
The generators are the same - 370mh / 500 ohm
But seperations specs (1k/10k):
AT12Sa 26/20
AT14sa 27/20
AT15XE 28/23
AT15Sa 30/23
AT20SLa 30/25
(AT20SS 35/25) - in brackets as the later models had a slightly different generator 450mH/500ohm
I will admit that the variance is far greater 10db is a lot(!) - but I still can't believe they would have a substantial manufacturing variance... not for a machine made body.(if it was a hand made body, the proposition would be quite different!)
The implication of my take on it, is that Neo's proposal of taking the bottom body and fitting something like the ATN7V to it would effectively provide something very very close to the TOTL CA cartridge...
bye for now
David
-
Putting the AT7V stylus on the AT125LC body seems to give me noticably better sound. Though
the AT7V body has a higher level gold finish, the AT125LC is 29db separation vs 27 and 28,000 Hz response vs 25,000 for the AT7V. Don't know if these figures would be right with the switch. Have
a new 125LC ordered and will try a further comparison then. Believe the 125 stylus is higher compliance. Present AT7V/125LC combination is on a ULM (Dual arm). Really quite nice. More
presence and depth-No high end AT brightness but still fine detail. Having sold my CA, am reluctant
to try an AT7V transplant to the AT95 body. Doesn't really make sense as the 95 seems lower on
the food chain compared to the 7V and 125LC.
-
I wouldn't have thought the lower compliance AT7V would be a good match for the ULM arm... In fact keeping it on the lighter AT125 body would exacerbate the problems (related to the resonant frequency being too high... the result would be an expected resonance and its harmonics within the audible range...)
With a ULM I would definitely opt for the higher compliance styli...
-
David,
I think you're right about the shield and the stylus. I also suspect the specs are tighter on the top models. Separation is measured at 1K, so 20dB is poor. I guess it's really higher, even with the cheap-ass stylus provided.
If someone owns one of these carts, and the the stylus is different from what I read, please let us know. The cantilever appears to be straight on all of them. If indeed, the Virtuoso has a bonded tip, what kind of stylus does the Classic have? One other thing, the output is 3.6 mV on the top models. It's 3.3mV on the bottom models. This could only be one of two things. Either the spec is made to look worse than it is, so there's more difference between models, or the magnets are different like the AT-440ML OCC and the 440MLa. LOL, I seriously doubt if they have different magnets.
neo
-
David's comments regarding cherry picking, QC and production tolerances have reminded me of a factoid I hadn't thought about in awhile.
Joe Grado flat out tells you that you are paying more money for cartridges that meet a tighter production tolerance when you move upwards in his product line.
In the case of the cartridge body in the AT line there are a lot of precision parts inside that have to be very closely aligned and positioned in order to produce the best results. Slight variations that are invisible to the naked eye could account for the differences in specifications between models with no change in the basic design at all.
In fact though, mis-alignment of the internal parts would amount to a change in the design specs
which explains the different levels of performance observed. We are also paying for the rejects that fail QC and are unusable. In the case of the stylus assemblies this could be a fair amount of the price differential seen in the more expensive cartridges. One has to wonder if it is cheaper to throw a reject out or re-manufacture it and salvage the diamond if possible.
Scotty
-
in one of my past lives I worked using the 6Sigma quality system.
Motorola are one of the worlds biggest users of that analytic system, and when they looked at their mobile phone repair/quality system, they worked out that it was cheaper to simply toss out a faulty phone and provide a new one manufactured on a highly efficient production line.
This was hugely cheaper than having a tech dismantle, debug and fix a faulty unit.
Expert labour is expensive, mass production is cheap - even salvaging the diamond might be questionable. (but then I havn't seen the actual labour costs vs materials costs....)
bye for now
David
-
Scotty,
Tolerance might differentiate a Virtuoso body from a Classic. I measured the DC resistance within 1 ohm/ch on my Virtuoso.
Often vintage or moderately priced components aren't worth fixing. These days it might cost $80 or so, just to have it looked at. An extensive repair might cost way more than just replacing it.
neo
-
Neo-Guess I'm getting slow in my old age. The difference between the Classic and Virtuoso pricewise
is 4-5 times? Surely some difference in electrical specs in the cartridge itself, (perhaps Grado's grading
method), and perhaps a better diamond is all the difference? Buying an AT95/3400 Shibata is +-$100
from TT Needles. Is it possible to upgrade a Classic to Virtuoso status with such a stylus upgrade? Surely
not! Is there not some hidden difference ? We are not talking about an upgraded AT95 now, which I think
all agree may not be in the CA catagory but within the CA line itself? I can't believe the mystery here- CA
is Sc----ing the public? (Afraid to say it) I'm headed to AZ again soon- maybe the desert air will
clear my mind!
-
The clearaudio MM's are very similar in format to the AT95, but the interior coils appear to be wound differently, and they have much lower resistance...
The now defunct AT105/110/115 series used the same format as the AT95, but OFC coils.
It is not clear (and never discussed in any marketing information) what is on the inside of these bodies....
You can take an AT110, open in up and pot it, mount it in a wooden mounting, and fit a shibata.... perhaps it will compete with the CA cartridges?
The body is a standard AT design, albeit fitted with high quality coils, the styli are also nothing special.... standard aluminium cantilevers with bonded needles....
So the magic has got to be in the techniques used for vibration control - the interface between cartridge & headshell, and the fact that they are designed to mate with the currently fashionable mid mass arms (like Clearaudio's own arms).
The CA's seem to be excellent examples of the primacy of synergy.
bye for now
David
-
Neo-Guess I'm getting slow in my old age. The difference between the Classic and Virtuoso pricewise
is 4-5 times? Surely some difference in electrical specs in the cartridge itself, (perhaps Grado's grading
method), and perhaps a better diamond is all the difference? Buying an AT95/3400 Shibata is +-$100
from TT Needles. Is it possible to upgrade a Classic to Virtuoso status with such a stylus upgrade? Surely
not! Is there not some hidden difference ? We are not talking about an upgraded AT95 now, which I think
all agree may not be in the CA catagory but within the CA line itself? I can't believe the mystery here- CA
is Sc----ing the public? (Afraid to say it) I'm headed to AZ again soon- maybe the desert air will
clear my mind!
I know it's a little hard to believe. All the CA MM carts seem to have identical electrical specs. They used to list 1 ohm difference on the impedance on the least expensive, but I think they stopped. It's ridiculous anyway. They used to list the stylus dimensions on the CA site, but they no longer do.
Just because the 3400, 95, CAs, K9, and countless P-mounts and other AT-OEM carts share the same basic body and plug, doesn't make them the same. If you look into it, it seems like the inexpensive ones have high impedance even if they have lower output (AT-95). If you notice, the 95 has only 400mH but 2.8K impedance. I'm guessing that this may be due to not having the OCC wire. This cart sounds really nice, but it's not a CA. I think it's the wire that makes the difference in resolution, harmonic texture etc potential, between the top ATs and the inexpensive ones.
Go right down the list of these carts that share the same body or even a different body and come in at an inexpensive price point, and you can guess why they aren't the best, even if they might be nice. The 110 has more output and impedance/inductance to go with. Maybe if you stand on your head and fit it with a boron/ML it would compete or better the 150MLX? It would be cheaper to just buy a 150 (less than $350).
I've reached the conclusion (w/o proof) that AT makes the entire cart for CA including the stylus. CA probably makes the tops. The stock CA has the same fitting that replaces the compliance screw, as a 95. For a minute there I thought it might be Jico, but all their styli seem to have a cu screw.
So, if you want a Virtuoso-like performance you can buy one with a busted cantilever and replace the stylus. Right now on the Agon thread the Soundsmith alum/elliptical is preferred. That's $150. The ATN7V is a nice nude sq shank .2 x .7/tapered alum and has almost the same cu as a 95 and costs $75 at LpGear. That has to be transplanted. The ATN120E is around $50, also transplanted. I have a 140LC that I haven't broken yet, LOL. Maybe I'll try it on the 440 first.
I believe the CA Sigma, Beta etc have the same potential. The specs are identical. There could be some body difference but I doubt it. It would cost CA more to have these produced with differences in the body/generator. In defense of CA, it seems like these are overpriced, but on a high end line the dealer gets 40 to 50%. As the OEM AT is making a profit also. We can thank CA for designing or ordering an AT that competes with an AT-15/20. AT doesn't seem to have enough brains to figure that out themselves. They're still making higher output carts at the TOTL to compete with CDs. I guess that's the dynamic range mentality. I'm sure they're reluctant to change that, and the line. They probably figure they're lucky to still be making carts. Their main biz seems to be microphones and headphones.
neo
-
I have a cartridge I purchased as a TK10ML.... except that the stylus on it looks like a TK9 (the label is missing off the top) - and seems to be worn out...
Today you can purchase an AT15/20/21/22/23/24/25 or TK5 through tk10 with a broken or worn out stylus for less than $100... which is cheaper than a CA in the same state.
I am not convinced that the CA has necessarily greater potential than one of these! - And when ordering a stylus for it, you can opt for aluminium or ruby, and a compliance to suit your arm, not to mention your favoured needle profile....
A TK10 body, fitted with a ruby cantilever and ML needle, setup with mid compliance suspension (say 14cu?) - would be a perfect match for the current generation of arms.... this combo should be possible at a price of circa $450 (allow $100 for a cartridge, and $350 for a TOTL retip with ruby cantilever)
Then to get something similar to CA, it would need to be mounted in a wooden headshell....
End result would be less than half the price of the TOTL CA, for a product that should be superior....
And by the way, you can opt for whatever balance between inductance/resistance you want by choosing the relevant body... (which in turn has implications for the capacitance/resistance loading of the end result...)
bye for now
David
-
Actually, I have an AT13Ea which I mount a Precept 220 stylus (skirt cut back) or a Pfanstiehl 679DE
and get magnificant sound. Both styli are .0002 elliptical, the 220 with a tapered shaft. The Precept
is slightly more dynamic but considering the price difference, the DE is pretty good. Have $30 in the
body. The Precepts were NOS @ 2 for $69.00. The DE is like $23. Probably sound as good or better
than the AT95/3400Shibata-Virtuoso I had. Precept stylus shaft and diamond appear identical to the
AT7V with no need for transplant as the 13Ea and Precept 220 both have a round plug.
-
That's just the thing. You can get really nice results with lots of combos. Everyone has their own criteria for exactly what they like and what might be better. BTW, LpGear has NOS beryllium/ML stylus for Precept. I'd like to try one on my 15SS, but I'll have to hold off. The cart sounds excellent with a 20SS stylus and I don't need to spend another $200.
I haven't heard all the carts on David's list. Some of them are rare and I doubt if you can get all of them, or possibly any, for under $100, even w/o a stylus. Maybe you can find one or two, I'm not sure. But for people not familiar with all these models, you might have to custom load or have problems finding a stylus. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from getting into this. It's just not always easy to find what you're looking for. StereoNeedles used to have AT-23, 24, 25 needles. They're sold out. Many great NOS styli available a few yrs ago are becoming extinct. I would guess (based on my past TK-10MLII) that fitted w/ruby-micro, would definitely need loading down. Even loaded down, it might not sound completely "right". Maybe it would be fabulous if you can load it, but until that's tried, you're taking a chance.
neo
-
OK GL,
How's this for a budget stylus? I trimmed down the wings on an AT-92 P-mount stylus. I picked up the 92 a few years ago for $20 and never used it. I've only played a couple sides on it so far. It sounds pretty good. I get the feeling though that this won't be the ultimate stylus for the Virtuoso. The occasion was getting the Sonus Formula 4 arm, going again.
There seems to be a lot of resentment about CA and their MMs. I don't agree with your performance conclusions, but I've always felt that way about the company. I'm not positive about any body differences with the least expensive ones, but the generators are identical. The naked cantilever looks exotic and everybody thought they were not user replaceable when they first came out. So the mentality was that they were MC-like in quality. In that respect CA is getting over on the customer. Re-tip fees are ridiculous. All but 1 is a POS anyway (tips). Why all the models, indeed!! They all have budget stylus except the Maestro. I"m convinced that you could by a used or broken tipped Beta, Sigma, whatever and have virtually the same cart. The little gold plate on the front will have a different letter. Mine fell off and I glued it back on. Maybe I should have put an M on there, :roll:
I know that a boron or beryllium ML would be killer on it. A ruby micro would probably be just as good. I'd go for it but I don't want to spend the money right now. Truth is, I've been listening to a Genesis 1000 and don't need to chase this down at the moment. I like the Genesis a lot. It sounds like a $2K cart. When I broke my 152ML stylus trying to get it into a 95 plug, I knew that this was turning into insanity. I have yet to get the CA to sound as good as my 440 w/152ML.
neo
-
Actually Neo, I agree with most of your CA conclusions. The Caveat is I find
it hard to believe a reputable company would not substantiate a bigger
difference in their line, notwithstanding the source. The AT92E is a .0004
by .0007. Interestingly enough, I read on another thread about the AT92E
being an old spec design etc., which with say an 97XE would kind of turn
into an 15 type. I hooked up an 97HE generic which might have actually
sounded like a 15 series in an at92E body so be careful of what you
wish for! Regarding 440ML, I've been playing an AT125LC which sounds
close-that is the holographic sound we all look for. I know its a titanium
bonded LC but as I say, it may be close!I'm back in the desert now, so
who knows what I'll find at one of these Sun City Garage/Estate sales!
The CA broken bodies now seem to bring $125-150 so I'm looking for
the K-9 or K-18 which actually has the shorter length CA cartridge
body without the wood which may work on some of the CA
transfers we are all familiar with.
-
One of the problems right now is my not putting in enough listening hrs to make a proper judgement. A new stylus usually takes at least a few hrs to loosen up mechanically. Much of the time I just feel like listing to the Genesis or 980. I have both set-up at the moment. The 92E has an output of 3.6mV and a .3 x .7 elliptical. Maybe it's the P-mount version of a 95, LOL. It has a noticeably thinner cantilever probably because of the P-mount cu. The Sonus arm has eff mass of 4.1g. Mine has a custom headshell which weighs an additional 1.5g, so mass is around 5g and it's great for high cu.
All the carts we're talking about are part of the 3400 series including the 95. There were a ton of different P-mounts and carts like the K9 etc are included. The CA carts are also included. ALL are just high end variants. I believe they have OCC wire and the right specs. The wood tops make them easy to voice. It can soften the blow, so to speak, and it's one of the main reasons my gut tells me that the right exotic cantilever/stylus will be killer on there.
From a practical standpoint you can get a broken tip CA for $150? Put a Jico Vivid (LC) on there for $90 and have an excellent cart.
You can also get an AT7V for $129 (med/heavy arm) - everybody seems to love em. If you want the "ultimate", VDH probably has boron cantilevers, maybe a S-Smith ruby. I'm not sure yet.
neo
-
I tried an AT-92E P-mount stylus on the Virtuoso. Here's a few pics on the Sonus Formula 4 -
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=53589)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=53590)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=53591)
I've only played a few records so far, a Kenny Durham and an Ornette Coleman. They sound really good, better than I thought it would. One thing about a low mass arm, it can sound fast, clean and natural. The cart is not encumbered with the mass and slower response necessary for a lower cu. Many people use relatively high cu carts with massive arms. I know you can often get them to sound good despite a low res frequency, but I think it will sound much better with a low mass arm of comparable quality. That has been my experience anyway.
I think some people misunderstand the implications of different carts sharing the same body type, like a 95, 92E, 3400, K9, Virtuoso etc. The body is only the housing. The generators can be very different, and they are. I think the 95 doesn't have the OCC wire. Look at the specs for output, impedance, and inductance. If they are all the same..... I also think that tolerances are the difference between the CA models. My Virtuoso measured 1 ohm difference between channels. That's pretty good.
A friend from another forum sent me an AT-3400 stylus. This is a conical on a carbon fiber cantilever. I think VTF is 2 to 4g. LOL - from one extreme to another. I have the AT-95 mounted on a Sony PS-X50 (20g arm). I'll let you know.
neo
-
Nice!
Very nice arm too... damped low mass unipivot, eccentric CW :drool:
nice fit of the needle!
You are right about the body only being the housing... but my reading of the specs implies the 92 and 95 are in fact the same body...
The next notch up in that family might be the 105/110/115 which do have the OCC wiring.
And the internals and materials used in the CA are still a ??? along with whether there is (was?) an equivalent in the AT range.
The proposal to pick up some basic 50 euro CA's and have them upgraded by Alex with Boron or Sapphire cantilevers and Line Contact styli appears to have merit...
bye for now
David
-
Hi David,
I wasn't sure if the 110 took the same plug as the others. Now that I see the picture, the body looks the same.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATC110E.html
With 4.5mV output it probably doesn't have the low inductance of the 95, but it might sound very nice. I've never heard one. Most of the magnets on the various AT are the same (I think). The only one I know of that's stronger is the orig 440ML OCC. So the 110 coils must have more turns (higher inductance) for greater output. It might be a great cart for $70.
You might find this of interest. The specs on the back of the arm manual-
Pivot Friction - Below .005 gm at headshell.
Inertia Moment - 5213 gm cm2 with 5 gm cartridge. (This extremely low figure is largely the result of skeletal headshell and profile of counterweight.)
I guess my custom headshell messes that up a bit. I don't have one of those Sonus 50cu carts either. It seems to work out pretty good.
neo
-
Know this subject is at a ripe old age but couldn't resist one last comment-actually,
two- 1. Neo, on your 92E on the V, you can trim all the way back to the plug
and it will work fine. Did this on an AT3003 which is essentially the same unit.
2. Now that I'm back in the desert, picked up an old Garrard 60 MkII changer
which works fine. Had a Pickering V-15 which I put on a D71EE stylus which
is quite suitable. However I was playing an old Mono recording (Charpentier)
which sounded kind of fuzzy- mounted an AT95HE (LP Gear Blue) and things
cleared up quite well- clear as a bell- stereo quality sound! Must be the
desert air (78 deg.today). The AT95 rides again!
-
Hi GL,
A Garrard 60 MkII? Does it have a big old heavy curved arm? When I was a kid my family had a Type A. That thing was cool. I loved it. You should see the mechanism underneath. It's amazing. The sound of records was even more amazing, especially back then.
For those swapping styli, the cart will take on the compliance, VTF etc of the stylus. The AT95 cu (and replacement styli) is equivalent to 15 @ 10Hz. That's the same as many MCs. It turns out that the P-mount styli like the 92E are more like modern 120/440 cu. This varies with tip type. The sphericals will be lower, closer to the 95. The 92E is more like the 440/120. The 140LC (120 compatible) discussed earlier, is considerably higher than either. The p-mount cantilevers are thinner than the low cu ones like the 95. Not being tapered isn't such a liability in this case. It might actually be beneficial, improving rigidity. The entire AT-92E(CD) cart goes for $25 and it's a bargain if only for the stylus. I'm not sure about the inductance and impedance, David thinks they might be the same. It comes with an adaptor, which could come in handy in a pinch. For those with a 95 or Clearaudio, you might want to try the 92E stylus. If you have a med/light arm, I suspect it will outperform the 95 styli and variants, and all the stock CA styli with the exception of Maestro.
neo
-
Hi Neo-My 60 has a tube shaped arm,like a Dual but somewhat bigger round.
The headshell is cocked at an angle with a mounting plate which attaches to
the headshell by one screw through the top. A roller table. I have a new 92E
but don't want to trim it. Still had my 3003 which I believe is the same,
trimed down to the plug only and put it on the 95 body. Am playing some
Correlli now... more delicate and detailed sound-overall I like it somewhat
better than the LPGear HE. Probably much higher compliance as a thinner
shaft. Used the same stylus plug on my Virtuoso body (now sold) and
wouldn't you know, the AT95 now sounds like I recall the Virtuoso did!
Just as holographic if not more so. Didn't have the Mark 60II than and
had played the V on a Dual 1229 (also gone). The shorter tube with the
long angled headshell seems to handle things beautifully....The AT3003
body was identical to the AT92E. The shaft is a dull silver whereas the
92E is bright-both OEM. Believe I'll plow this ground awhile with my now
poorman's Virtuoso (without the wood) but looks from the bottom
identical as the 3003 is a plug-shaft only. Try trimming your 92E back
to the plug only and see if that doesn't help the sound? Will still fit
back on a 92 body, even without the wings. 70's today in the desert
which is probably confusing the Virtuoso sound I imagine from this
setup! My the Corelli is nice! Thrift store purchase of 13 records total
@10 cents each!
-
All the AT P-mount styli with that unusual plastic holder are 3400 series and they will fit if trimmed.
The LpGear replacement for the 3003 is an identical .3 x .7 tip. I'm virtually positive they're made by Jico. Gear is a Jico distributor and AT dealer. They also sell the SAS. Just as you can get AT95 styli like VL and SA, you can also get them for P-mounts.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATN3472LC.html
http://www.lpgear.com/product/LPGATN3472SA.html
The reason I didn't try it sooner is because I was using the Kenwood 770 and I thought cu would be much higher. Not sure what eff mass of the Kenwood arm is, but I guess 14g. I got caught up in the transplant thing. As soon as I heard the Virtuoso with 92E stylus I knew it worked better. It's faster and more natural sounding. Maybe relaxed and effortless are good descriptors. I have VTF around 1.3g and it seems to track just fine.
I haven't tried the 95 with a P-mount stylus. The 95 is reserved for the Sony PS-X50. I keep trying out carts and headshells on the Sony. A couple of MCs worked out pretty well. Other than that the AT-15/20SS was the best on there. I might sell the Sony with the 95. Think I'll keep the SS. I'm also thinking of selling a Denon 1250 and my KD-500. I have a Sota rim drive project sitting forever. Maybe I'll sell that too. I'd like to get an LO-7D or one of those Japanese only DD battleships.
neo
-
Neo, regarding your AT92E clipped and mounted on a Virtuoso, I have a 3003,
same as an AT92E, clipped and mounted on an AT95E body which gives very
good sound. Higher compliance so running the P stylus at 1.25gm on my old
Garrard 60 MKII, in the desert. Also have a 92E OEM and 92HE non-oem but
hate to clip them for the 95 body when the used 3003 stylus is sounding so
good. Would be interesting to hear side by side, the AT92E variant mounted
on the 95 body vs the Virtuoso body. That would obviously be the final
determination of whether there really was a difference in bodies, though
the wood block on the V might bias the outcome!
-
I haven't attempted to measure cu of these P-mount styli, but they seem lower than I first suspected. Maybe I'll look into that. I have a test record (although I have yet to open it), and I know the Magnapan arm has an eff mass of 7g. So I could get an estimate from the res freq and figuring it backwards. I don't even know if the record has tracks for that - probably does. I know that the spherical P-mount styli have a similar cu as the 7V, approx 7cu @ 100Hz. But I suspect that 100Hz cu has no direct relationship to standard 10Hz cu except in individual cases. It could be a sliding scale where low 100Hz cu is more than doubled for equivalent 10Hz, and as the 100Hz figure increases, the equivalent multiplier for 10Hz decreases.
Anyway, your 92E and 3003 is the same stylus AFAIK, so no need to trim both.
The 92HE might be interesting to compare. Guess I don't have to tell you that trimmed, it's still usable on the P-mount, except for the weight reduction. Do you have P-mount arms? I've read conjecture that the Jico HE and vivid line are virtually the same, but I don't know this as fact. Could be the vivid and shibata, not sure. Maybe David has seen microscope pics. They might not be much different from the shibata. The shibata is supposed to have different facets on the front and back surfaces (for a sweeter high end?). Have you ever listened to a 92E?
These P-mount styli have lower tip mass and outperform the 95 styli. The cantilever contributes more to tip mass than the stylus. There's no doubt in my mind that if one has a lowish mass arm it's no contest. I suspect that even with med mass arms, like in the 11, 12g variety, they'll be much better. As far as 95 being the same as a Virtuoso, the door closed on that a long time ago. One has an impedance of 2800 ohms and the other is 660 ohms. If you go by inductance only, the 95 wins. 400mH vs 420mH. They're just not the same whichever one you prefer. I'll take the Virtuoso, although I don't want to demean the 95. It's a very listenable cart. It reminds me of a 103, very nice, but I'm more of a detail freak. If you have an inexpensive high mass arm I doubt if you can do much better, especially for $50. My 95 is modified anyway. It's potted and has an aluminum top plate. I like it a lot. It sounds like music.
neo
Just to clear up the cu business - the 95 has a 100Hz cu of 6.5 and is = 15cu @ 10Hz.
The 440/120/150 has 100Hz cu of 10 and is = to approx 18cu @ 10Hz.
-
I have a complete, bought new, AT92E which sounds good but probably not as
good as the AT95 with the 3003 stylus and plug. The AT95/3003 has a more
forward and somewhat fuller soundstage. I also have an AT92HE (brown wings )
stylus which was bought from one of the Needle Daddy type places on eBay.
Paid like 29.95 for the hyper-elliptical stylus alone.. (at least it was listed as
a hyperelliptical) maker unknown. Since I also have a AT95HE, some interesting
possiblities arise...but trimming wings etc., is involved so don't want to
disfigure too many styli here. The AT92HE when mounted on an AT92 body
does seem to have more detail. The general issue is the 92 pmount body
will only mount on a pmount TT of which, the TT itself is of lower quality. One
can use an adaptor, of course which I guess I can do... Back down here in the
desert, I only have the old Garrard 60, an Ion manual with an S arm and an old
Hitachi linear track which is Pmount. Did pick up an old Sansui QR6500 4
channel with a mint face plate (scratched on top)@$30 which does give the
TT's a more tube like sound...am also rediscovering that some conicals sound
pretty good! Sorry to wander.... when you asked If I'd heard an AT92E...glad
there is an impedance difference on the V. Redeems my faith in CA. There is
an interesting (long) review of the Clearaudio Concept on Audiogon. Makes
it sound like the Virtuoso. Didn't like my comments....
-
That Sansui sounds pretty cool. Maybe you could pick up some thrift 4-ch records, but I guess you'd need a more extended cart. The rear channels are encoded at 30K I believe. Maybe you'll stumble on an AT-14S or SA, that would do the trick.
I think the difference between the V and 95 might be the wire. The 95 doesn't have the OCC stuff. The coils must be pretty much the same - inductance (close), magnets and output are, so the impedance difference is probably the wire.
I would think the cantilevers are the same on the 3003 and 92? So perhaps you're describing the difference between the 2 with virtually the same stylus. I might have forgotten to mention, someone gave me an original 3400 stylus. They're still available - it's a .7 spherical on a carbon fiber cantilever. It tracks at 2 to 4g. I tried it on the 95 and it sounds pretty good. That HE for $29 seems like a pretty good deal. A 3472VL goes for $80. It seems like the VL has replaced the HE in the Jico line-up. I'm trying to get an answer about the orig 3472ML - whether it's nude or bonded. I guess I could transplant an ATN440MLa, but I'm not sure if it would be right. I think the ML might need an exotic cantilever. I'm afraid it might be too aggressive up top. I have a 140LC that I got for my 440. Initial test was disappointing. I'll have to try it in a different arm. The Alaphason 100S never sounded good with the 440. Best I ever heard that cart was with a 152ML (beryllium/ML) on the Sonus arm. Wish you could have heard that, it was spectacular. At 47K it sounded like a VDH Grasshopper, I shit you not.
I've got a project I'm working on that's taking up a lot of time and I haven't done much lately with audio. If you could use another 92E body and 1/2" mount, send me a PM.
ne0
-
Okay guys bear with me. I am very new to this whole world so please go easy. Glrick, I was referred to this thread from a guy on audiogon. I had the problem of bending my original stylus on my virtuoso. A step by step was posted which you had written. I replaced it with the ATHE and all seems to be successful. I looked for pictures but did not find any that would address my question so... This may be a stupid question but, can you snap off the case the AT comes in? Does that make sense? It does not impact the playing but I am afraid to basically snap it off. If the stylus is installed in the original plug hole, is it removable? As I said, bear with me but this fix was amazing!! It truly sounds great and saved me a ton of money! Thanks in advance.
Cheers,
Drewdown
-
Hi Drewdown,
I don't know about snapping it off. I use a wire cutter. Hold it firmly and put the flat side of the blade against the plug. Watch for clearance, depending on the size of your cutter. The angle of the blades will give you a little lip on the bottom of the plug, like this:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=61813)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=61814)
This is an ATN95E stylus with the excess plastic removed. To remove it from the body, just carefully pry it out by the lip to get it started.
-
Once implanted, with or without the "wings", it can always be pryed back out so the
Virtuoso thus has an immortal life with an owner replaceable stylus! By the way, I
think trimming to the plug does improve the sound. It certainly tends to keep the
original appearance. This also works on the Linn K series which seem to have a
similar body to the Virtuoso.
-
You guys rock! Thanks so much!
-
Could be the Jico is not a Jico. Understand there are 3 makers in Japan. May have picked that up
from the Turntable Needles site. In any case, the Jico is bonded whereas the AT7V is a nude,
square shank, tapered shaft. Though not a Shibata, it is .0002 Elliptical which in my book, means
it has a somewhat less astringent sound than a Shibata bonded. I use my AT7V in its original gold
body. Also am currently using a Excel S700ER 0.2 x 0.8 in my Garrott K-2 body which may be higher
quality than the original K-2 stylus. Sounds so good, I sold my other new K-2 where Decibel sent
me a complete unit when I only ordered the stylus. Incidently, I sold my Virtuoso/Shibata finally
to finance ongoing.....who knows? Am also playing an At13EA body with a Precept 220 stylus-
trimmed down of course, which is quite similar to the AT7V. I had Soundsmith do a BPS retip
and then broke it again....glad it wasn't a "Ruuuuby! (ha) Incidently, NOS AT Precept 220's are
going for 2@69.00 on the Bay if any of you experimentors need good AT styli.
I remembered Glrickaby mentioning the Precept PC-220 stylus quite a while ago on this thread. I should have picked up a Precept body back then and checked it out. I had been looking at a PCN550ML stylus for years at LpGear, but didn't even know what other carts it fit. It's a beryllium/ML.
The Precept line was like the AT Signet line, requiring a separate dealer franchise. It must have begun before the Signets, all the carts have a round plug. Now, a year or two later it turns out that Raul, the guru on the Agon MM/MC thread, thinks the PC-440LC is the absolute best. You might take this with a grain of salt and I admit I question the methodology, but this guy has tried a million different carts and identifies the winners consistently. :dunno:
He's now getting back into MCs and finds some are better than former top MMs. This resurgence started out as recommendations from J Carr - ones with coils having non-permeable cores. You might think it's easy to pick the TOTL from hundreds over the years. It's not.
So, I picked up one of the last PCN550ML stylus and I'm currently trying it on an AT-15SS body. I normally use an AT15 or 20SS stylus on there - beryllium/shibata. I know you're all sitting on the edge of your seat for results, but you'll have to be patient. These are delicate matters, LOL.
There's a ton of good information in this thread, which now covers some of the history of AT, Signet, Precept, and Clearaudio MM. Further questions, comments or contributions gratefully accepted.
neo
-
Neo, a question for thou. There are several shaped styli, as you know. And there are pivoted tonearns and radial tracking ones. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking that depending on the cut of the stylus, some might be better on one than on the other. An epiliptical stylus would seem to fit both. However, a stylus with fine honed edges may be more suitable for a radial tracking arm than a pivoted one. That makes any sense?? If so, what is your take? Thanks
-
Whether pivoted or radial, the objective of any arm is to get the needle perfectly geometrically positioned on the record groove.
The better the arm, the better it achieves that goal.
Pivoted arms have a variable level of "error" based on their geometry (when properly adjusted they usually have two points on the record of zero error, and the further they track from those points the higher the error), and the longer the arm the lower the max error.... Linear/Parallel tracking arms have a more linear error/position relationship with in many cases a very low tracking error and the tracking error being relatively non variant across the surface of the record. (so the sound does not change from start to finish of record on a linear, where it can vary more greatly on a pivoted)
Lots of other pros and cons between various arms, but the crux of the matter is this:
the finer the edge of the stylus, the more sensitive it can be to tracking error - a conical/spherical tip is relatively insensitive to minor tracking errors, and a ultra fine micro-ridge type is very sensitive - a 0.2 tip eliptical is just as sensitive as many micro-ridge types - the side (contact) radius being the critical aspect....
So there are many good reasons to use a spherical/conical tip on very basic turntables where the tracking is more likely to be suspect!
Once you reach a certain level of quality - the decision is driven by many many other variables, but whether the arm is pivoted or linear is definitely not one of them. (whether the arm is well engineered or not is more of an issue!!)
bye for now
David
-
Great answer David, as usual. I don't have anything to add.
A question for you: I saw an old post on VE about a PC-110, I believe. You said that inductance was 1050mH? I was told that the higher numbered PC models have impedance around 500 ohms and inductance somewhat less than 500mH. If that is correct it would seem like the AT-12S/SA might be their counterparts, if there are counterparts. It seems like a big jump going from 1050mH to less than half that. Any other info on the Precepts?
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I have a Precept PC110 body which measures 1038/1013mH and 1165/1168 ohm
I agree that the closest mainstream AT siblings seem to the the AT12/13...
Although mine is a lowly 110 the measurements are very closely matched - more so than the AT12's I have measured - which appears consistent with AT hand picking the bodies for their premium series
bye for now
David
-
Hi Neo,
I have a Precept PC110 body which measures 1038/1013mH and 1165/1168 ohm
I agree that the closest mainstream AT siblings seem to the the AT12/13...
Although mine is a lowly 110 the measurements are very closely matched - more so than the AT12's I have measured - which appears consistent with AT hand picking the bodies for their premium series
bye for now
David
Thanks David, I figured there was no mistake in that old post I dug up. Not exactly sure where this puts the PC-440/550. The AT-12S/Sa have an impedance of 500 ohms, at least that's what the VE database shows, they seem to be the only ones from back then with a low impedance like that. Looks like they share the same body and have a different cantilever w/bonded shibata. I guess the low impedance is for 4-ch high freq response (45K), probably low inductance and output is 2.7mV, also rather low.
Somebody on Karma told me about the low impedance and inductance of the PC-440, it might be true, only the output is higher - 4.2mV, which would imply more coil windings. Has Raul invited you to visit in Mexico? That might be a fun vacation even if it's a long ride from New Zealand. If you go, don't forget to take your meters. :wink:
neo
-
It would be fun!
But having just come back from my cousins wedding in Washington (along with side trips to NY and New Orleans).... and expecting a baby in a couple of months (our babymoon)- along with renovations (baby generated - our first) - the TT's are being packed away along with a LOT of other stuff...
A trip to Mexico might be a while away!
bye for now
David
-
It would be fun!
But having just come back from my cousins wedding in Washington (along with side trips to NY and New Orleans).... and expecting a baby in a couple of months (our babymoon)- along with renovations (baby generated - our first) - the TT's are being packed away along with a LOT of other stuff...
A trip to Mexico might be a while away!
bye for now
David
Congratulations, on the blessed event to be. Packing away the tables? Don't know what to say, but hope everything comes out all right. Luck and good fortune to you and your family.
Getting back to really important matters, :roll: I tried the PCN550ML on the AT15. It sounds good, but bass was deficient. I only had a couple of hrs on it, but I figured I choose the wrong arm - the Unitrac. In removing the stylus I noticed that it might not have been seated 100%, so I cleaned up the plastic trim and I'm about to try it on the Alphason 100S. I probably just need some hrs on it.
In the mean time, I think I figured out the PC-440 counterparts. There are a few 12E and 13E variants with 4.2mV and 1200 ohm impedance. I know the output is right, and they seem to be the only ones. The impedance might be right based on your DC resistance measurement of the 110. I found a 12E body that looks to be in good shape. I should have it this weekend.
Raul's a laugh a minute, or I should say every few weeks. Now the AT-150ANV is tied for first with the PC-440LC. I honestly don't know how he does it, loading every MM at 100K and 350pF on the ANV. Maybe the cart is extended enough that he cap play it at 100K and control it with capacitance? Every time I tried 100K with one of my MM, I got an ear bleed. I must have messed up the capacitance thing, or maybe just different preamps.
Stay tuned to this channel kids, for the next exciting adventure!!!
Do these carts really beat Goldfinger, Atlas and Universe?
What combination of inductance and impedance wins the HO lifetime achievement award?
neo
-
Yes - I experimented with 100k - and quickly eased back off it - depending on the cartridge I can set up R up to around 75k.... but so far never 100k!
Worth remembering that the magnetic strength of the magnets will also impact on the output - so some of the AT styli may have used superior magnet materials, rather than having more coils?
I do enjoy Raul's thread though....
We are moving out of home for a few months into a much smaller space, while the house gets a new kitchen, bathroom, laundry and sundry other reno's ....
I am also redesigning my TT setup in the lounge room to make it somewhat toddler proof... so no TT's for probably 6 months
bye for now
David
-
When I switched the AT15 to the Alphason, I noticed the stylus didn't seem to be seated properly, a good reason to be bass deficient. I cleaned up the plastic trim and after some more hrs, I'm starting to get some extraordinary results. It's rather confusing because I'm using a new line stage, a JC2 clone which can sound lean in the midbass when paired with the wrong amp/speakers. The long cables I had on the Alphason arm were great with the MC I was using, but were too bright with the AT. So, instead of using an older more forgiving phono stage, I moved the AHT over, put it right behind the TT, and I could use some 1' long VDH cables and put everything under microscopic analysis, so to speak.
The AT15 sounds like a different cart with the Precept 550ML stylus. The 15/20SS normally sounds lovely, nice detail and stage and all that with a touch of sweetness in the high end, which tends to make things more palatable. It's a terrific cart if you're looking for resolution, clarity and listenability with a natural sounding presentation. With the new stylus it sounds positively live, super detailed, revealing and unforgiving. This set up isn't 100% yet, but it's getting there. I only have 50pF in the AHT and I think I could use another 50pF with these cables. I'm running this at 47K. Gain is set for around 42dB. The JC-2 clone has 14dB gain, but on this set up I can get away with using a passive preamp. Lots of combos to try.
The stylus might not be entirely broken in yet. A new AT stylus might take anywhere from 3 to 8 hrs to break in mechanically. This stylus seems different from other ATs. I had a beryllium/ML before, the 152ML. I tried it in a low mass arm with the 440 body. It was amazing. I had the 440 loaded at 32K to prevent ear bleed, and I changed it 47K with the 152ML stylus. I think I would have settled on something like 42K, if I had the resistors on hand. The PCN550ML seems to be different in the way it changed the sound. I only have 30x magnification at the moment, but I think this beryllium cantilever might have a titanium sleeve, and the ML diamond looks bigger than the more modern ML which are so small I can barely see them with 30X. I'll have to get more magnification.
Look how ugly looking it is, all chopped up. I didn't like the look anyway. It's only a stylus and at least it's not broken. This is normally my "B" set up:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=76874)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=76875)
neo
-
David mentioned magnet strength as a possible variable with cart specs. With AT generators there are a couple of examples that seem to indicate that only output voltage is affected. The new Clearaudio line of MMs has stronger magnets for increased output and inductance/impedance are virtually unchanged.
The orig 440ML OCC has a higher output than the 440MLa. The specs are identical except for output. The orig 440 stylus (w/magnets) is available at LpGear, for additional price. I believe if this is used with a 440MLa, it will be identical to the orig 440. They must have used neo magnets. :wink:
I should be picking up the AT-12E body tomorrow. It may take awhile, I'll let you know.
neo
-
I have the AT-12E and I don't know. It came w/o a stylus and I'm reluctant to mess with the PCN550ML for this el cheapo looking cart. I'm still tweaking the stylus on the AT-15 so I'm going to think it over.
The problem is the front plastic part has only 2mm clearance to the bottom, so I'd have to trim the stylus plastic more. I was thinking of nuding the stylus like an Clearaudio, but the plug is round and I'm afraid it might twist slightly. The cart looks like the plastic part that holds the pins is one piece that includes the top and front. I don't think there is even a screw holding the plastic piece to the body, so I won't be able to pot it. I never saw one of these before and it's kind of disappointing. I'll take a pic and show you.
In the mean time the stylus is settling in on the 15. It's fascinating how the sound changes. I think it might be best on a higher inductance cart, like a SAS on a Shure M97.
neo
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=77330)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=77331)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=77332)
I guess the cart doesn't look so bad. I wish it had a removable top
I measured the resistance at around 1.1K ohm. Impedance is supposed to be 1200 ohms, and output is the same V as the PC-440. This is getting interesting. Maybe I will check it out
neo
-
Neo- I have a PC220 which may have the same skirt as your 550. I trimmed the side skirt back far enough to fit flush against
the top of the black part shown in your picture. Since there is still some side wall, the stylus is stable and won't move from
side to side. In addition, it is still usable in any other round plug body, including the Precept. My impression is the stylus is
probably lower compliance than the AT12 but then again, I have not played it for awhile.... my recollection is it sounded
more like the AT7V than other AT's but then again my memory is sometimes faulty....It is a perfect fit with about 75% of
the sidewall gone... Just played it and it has more "shimmer" than the AT7V and sounds quite good on a Dual CS450 with
the modern plastic headshell -different sound than the Ortofon MC-10 Super I took off but still very pleasant.
-
Hi GL,
It's been awhile. You're talking about the PCN220 stylus, right? Yes it's the same carrier as the PCN550.
There's been some recent developments in the hunt for the mystery cart, and specs thereof.
Some of the guys are having trouble posting on Agon, and started a thread of the same name, Who needs a MM... etc on Karma. To make a long story short, the PC220 is the same generator as the PC440. They both have inductance and resistance < around 500, similar to the top AT carts. I've been using the PCN550(ML) on my AT15 with interesting results. I formerly used an ATN20SS on there and there's a greater difference than I would have imagined. Where the 20SS is smooth and sweet, the 550 is more detailed, live and unforgiving. I expected that but not nearly so much. It might have stronger magnets. I'll have to put the 20SS back and see if I can tell the difference in output. The PC110 that David has, apparently is a different cart with higher output and different specs.
Timeltel, transplanted a ATN155LC into a 13Ea carrier and did a mini review. Seems like he had great results with that combo. The review is a page or two behind the current page. All you need is a $190 stylus, LOL. The ATN20SS will cost as much, but has a round plug. BTW, your PCN220 is a nude sq shank .2 x .7 on a tapered stylus? Max VTF 1.75g, at least that's what the spec sheet says - 1/2 way down the page:
http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=8831
And that's all the news that fits.
neo
-
Neo-Thanks for the update and info. From the specs, my pcn 220 appears identical to the AT7V i.e. Nude, 2 x 7,tapered
shaft etc.,except a round plug. That's why it sounded similar even though the AT12 body is not as good as the AT7V.
I've been recovering from surgery for some months and finally am feeling close to normal again. Understand the AT7V
is actually a Japan market item. Bought 2/220's which is why I could cut one down for the AT12 body. Also appreciate
the copy to the Tapeheads page. My, you have been doing some technical work in my absence.. no stylus Virtuoso's
are getting pricy- bid up to $150 on one and it went over $200. Since you say the bodies are the same, may go lower
in the line. Just rewired a Dual and followed VdH's advice and wound around the tube. cartridge carrier nuded so the
cart. plugs into cart. clips. Actually sounds better than OEM. I have several Duals and the sleds drive me crazy.Getting
more into roller units as I like the sound. Picked up an old Empire 999 SE/X(?) which I really like.(ha)Also been running
an AT125LC for which I paid dearly for an OEM stylus. Rambling I guess.... Again thanks, and look forward to your often
brilliant comments . Regards, Gerald Rickaby
-
GL,
Thanks for the kind words. I'd like to point out that it was you who first posted the fact that CA is really an AT 3400 series cart - body/stylus. Speaking of which, there's a "new" V2 series of CA MMs. It seems that output is boosted by around .5mV with stronger magnets and impedance/inductance is almost unchanged. More extensive use of wood better hides the 3400 metal body. A couple of people are raving about the V2 Maestro, but I doubt if the used price will come down much more for a crippled Virtuoso. As you know it was Raul's #1 as cart of the month, for quite a few months. LpGear sells the orig ATN440ML stylus for $150. Orig 440 had a whopping 1.0mV higher output. I no longer have the stylus to try. The orig CA line all used the same generator. More expensive models had better tolerances, like AT vs Signet.
The ATN7V prob has lower compliance than your PCN220. LpGear imported 7V, but I think now it is a reg US model. The inexpensive AT-100E ($90) has a 150MLX generator, PC OCC wire and everything. Comes with a straight alum/bonded 3 mil. Lots of potential there. The ATN140LC (nude) is around $90 at StereoNeedles.
What's this Dual thing, bypassing the headshell/arm wiring? You have quite a collection. When I was a kid my fam had a Garrard Type A. I loved that changer.
That's the news from over the top, at least all I can think of.
Have a speedy recovery so you can sit on your ass and play with your toys. :wink:
neo
-
I started investigating MM cart design parameters a few yrs back, because of the possibility of stylus substitution and availability of published specs, made it relatively easy to make correlations. AT was the obvious choice for this because of all the models over the years. I liked the detail on top AT carts even if some had to be loaded down for me to get the "right" balance, top to bottom. I don't want to discuss whether or not MM/MI should be loaded or not. The case is closed as far as I'm concerned. The situation is ridiculous. Options are usually provided for MCs where loading doesn't make much difference as far as amplitude response is concerned, yet MM/MI carts are supposed to all work into one setting with only capacitance loading as an option and most of the time you don't even get that.
The audio mfg and reviewer/press have failed the vinyl community in this omission, and failed badly. Outside of Werner Ogier's article in TNT (Load the Magnets) there's virtually no information on this subject outside of forums. With record sales increasing at a rate of 30% per year, for the last 5 years vinyl and record players are a growth industry and MM/MI carts have potential much greater than most have been lead to believe. This isn't about the superiority of one type over another. It's about options and making the most of what you have or making a more informed choice. It seems to me there's a difference in presentation between a MC and MM, and whether you prefer one or the other or can appreciate both is a matter of opinion, not fact. Many of the guys who participate on the longest running thread on Agon, Who Needs a MC..., have $50K + + systems and use MMs.
Because of the relatively long cantilevers, that seems to be the area of greatest potential for improving the sound of an AT. The TOTL Maestro has a boron cantilever and micro tip, just like a 150MLX, only the compliance is different. All the CA MMs are 6.5 cu @100Hz, = 15cu @10Hz. The AT-150, 120, 440, all are 10cu @100Hz, = around 18cu @10Hz, less suited for med/heavy arms. CA was on the ball in ordering the right generator for their MMs. There is no AT counterpart that has those exact same specs which is probably part of their agreement. The bodies are a 3400 series body, same as an AT-95, Linn K9, and about a million other AT made carts. The characteristics of the top AT performers, including CA, Signet, and Precept, is low inductance and impedance - AT-20SS, 20SLa, CA, PC-440, 550, TK-10ML etc are all considered top performers. Some of the ones with higher inductance might be less transparent, but have good listenability like the AT-12E, 13E. The AT-95 has low inductance but higher impedance, and has a nice neutral sound, but with less detail than the top generators. That may be due to its not having the PCOCC wire. More later.
neo
-
I'm playing an AT95 body with an HE stylus (bought used but probably from LP Gear) on a very nice BIC 980 changer. On
the 980, the tracking angle can be changed as it has a little non-concentric screw. Sounds very nice with lots of detail and
dynamics. To my ears, may sound as good as some of the CA clones I've had, notwithstanding the electrical differences you
have mentioned. I actually prefer the hyperelliptical to the Stereo Needles Shibata I had, which ended up on a Virtuoso
Body and was sold. Maybe the difference is in set up ( I guestimate a lot) as the Shibata/LC types may be more fussy
about set up etc., but on AT95 or CA bodies, they have more upper end detail but sound more "astringent", (hope that's
the right word!)... I have two Duals and a Rega 3 hooked up in my Den and two Garrard AT95s plus the Bic and a nice
Thorens TD190 automatic down the basement, plus 3-1200 series Duals that are "sick" and I'm working on, plus a
Hitachi Linear track I brought back from AZ plus an Old Garrard and "Icon" (?)in AZ and a Pioneer PL510a DD-manual
sitting on the floor in the back of my Den because I have no room for it. Really is a sickness I guess, kind of like some
places the Pickers on TV visit but not quite as bad....Unfortunately, this also creates a clutter of phono preamps also
which I won't go into... Your comments about the CA specs are quite interesting and obviously an attempt by them to
differentiate from the AT line so the Audiophile world will consider them different and unique rather than a wooden
cloaked AT with a somewhat different generator. Actually what you observe makes a lot of sense as their product
would appeal to the VPI and somewhat heavier tonearm people because of its initial cost in relationship to the quality
of the TT.
-
Good golly GL that's quite a herd.
I don't think differentiating from AT was the primary concern. I think CA was out to have the best MM they could, and AT was the right company for the job. Who else has the experience in precision mfg of phono carts? Some people think of AT as entry level carts or overly bright, but AT has made some exceptional carts like those previously mentioned. People remember the 881 being used as a reference, but seem to forget the AT-170 - less sweet but more detailed and transparent, mentioned in the same context. The wood tops or bodies is also a great idea and provides an interface like an exotic wood headshell. You're the one who recommends nuding all the styli and if it looks like an MC, all the more credible for the title, worlds best.
I am a little surprised that CA thought they could get away with the nonreplaceable stylus thing, but I guess it worked at first and helped get them rated as #1. Now V2 have stronger magnets and if you substitute an aftermarket 95 you'll have reduced output. But you could still have it retipped or even a new cantilever and keep the existing magnets. The CA is best with an exotic cantilever and micro tip, just like a Maestro or TK-10ML or all the other top ATs.
The 95 is a great inexpensive cart. With the right stylus it improves somewhat, but sounds pretty nice with the stock 4 x 7 mil. What's not to like, sounds like music.
neo
-
I have a couple of Shure M-91s with cheap needles. Tried one and was quite impressed. Found a JICO from the Stereo Needle Lady
(Elliptical) @$12.95 including free shipping that I'll try. Also found the Canadian Astatic web site. They have thousands of needles,
all except one, for $29.95 flat price regardless of needle, including ellipticals and if I understand the symbols correctly, a few
line contact types. No AT 150's but still lots of choices. Site looks like copies of old stylus lists so don't know the age of their
stock but worth a look!
-
Age of a replacement needle doesn't matter. The only thing that could show its age is the rubber damper. Modern rubber compounds don't dry up like natural rubber. I saw a post by Blue Angel, a guy who makes expensive MCs - hundreds of old carts were given to him and he takes them apart. He said he has yet to see a failure due to the rubber drying out. If anything is wrong it's usually a broken suspension wire that's to blame.
One part of this record playing hobby that's neglected IMO, is making the most of what you have, and loading a HO cart can make the difference between good and bad. Sometimes little adjustments like putting a shim in a headshell on an arm w/o height adjustment, or noticing an arm bearing isn't quite right and fixing it, or cleaning your belt and pulley, etc etc can turn a horrible sounding machine into something that sounds like music. Not everyone is obsessed like some of us, and not everyone can afford expensive record players. These days, people graduating college are lucky if they can find a decent job let alone spend thousands on a record player. When I was the table guy, it was more of a challenge to get an inexpensive setup sounding decent, than a high end setup sounding awesome.
I think this vinyl resurgence has gone on long enough and it's high time people are informed about loading and IMO should only buy a phono stage that can accommodate different loads. The little Vista for only $300 has plug in resistor loading like my AHT, which is now the Walker and costs $12K (I think). There are a few others that give you options, most with dip switches, but the Vista is said to beat $1K phono stages like the Graham Slee Era Gold V. I haven't heard the Vista but you can go to their circle and read the testimonials. With a conventional MM stage you can load down by using parallel resistors, but if you want to load a M97 at 62K, you're screwed unless you replace the load resistors in your pre.
This is the fault of the audio establishment, mostly reviewers. They drool all over $5K carts and discuss loading at length, yet every HO cart gets loaded at 47K and they don't even bother with capacitance loading. If they spoke out about MM loading, manufacturers would respond. As it is, things are ass backwards. Loading is more critical for HO carts, not less. If you drive a Porsche, you might not care about a Honda Civic, but do a few mods to that Honda and it will put a smile on your face.
neo
-
Hey GL,
There was some conjecture awhile back about the manufacturer of AT-95 replacement styli. I just checked out what LpGear and TurntableNeedles are selling these for now. Gear no longer sell the HE, it's replaced with the vivid line ($89). They say the get it from someone other than Jico (unspecified). This was told to somebody on Karma. Needles still sells the HE ($79 + nearly free ground ship) and Jico is specified on their listing. They also say the shibata is Jico. BTW, Gear has a SE stylus - 3 x 7 mil for $45.
For what it's worth.
I got a HE for my modded 95 and it sounds great right out of the box. David said that the HE and Vivid Line look like the same cut. I'm not using the Virtuoso at the moment. I'm thinking of sending it to Soundsmith for a level 3 stylus. Maybe I'll do another comparison first with the HE.
neo
-
Perhaps showing my ignorance- Capacitance has do with the wiring, i.e. cables? A short cable has less (or more) capacitance
than a longer one etc., ? A MI like Grado is immune to capacitance or is it loading? Neo, maybe your explanation will help
me out of the wilderness... There are certainly thousands of cartridge preamps @47K so the market would be slow to change
would it not.? Catman -i.e. Felix has explained how to add resisters to change from 47 to 62 loading but dummies like me
actually need a picture or diagram to do this. Believe he writes on AK and VE. While I'm wandering, someone needs to start
a thread explaining some of the equipment being reviewed in magazines like Audiophile such as DA converters etc., things
you can plug into your computer USB etc., Why a pre-amp is helpful, why Receivers are never reviewed and actually looked
down on etc., I'm not even sure how to ask the questions but my 1960-1970 mentality about stereo does cause some
confusion in the articles I read about new equipment. Incidently, just received my $12+ JICO N-91 from Caroles Needles
and though obviously not an SAS, does sound mighty fine so JICO made standard ellipticals are indeed a cut above.....
-
Capacitance is another form of loading - the wires/cables have both capacitance and resistance (including tonearm wiring) - but in addition to this, almost all phono stages (well all the ones I know about!) also have some capacitance loading built in - usually in the form of a capacitor!
With cables, capacitance is accrued (much like resistance) per length/distance - halve the length of a cable, and you will halve its capacitance.
To achieve a capacitance of circa 60pf on my JVC TT, I used a very short 6" interconnect hard wired at the table - the phono stage sits directly behind the TT, almost touching it.
The capacitance forms an LCR circuit (inductance / capacitance / resistance) with the inductance of the cartridge.... if the cartridge has sufficiently low inductance, then the system will be relatively capacitance insensitive.... The Grado MI designs are capacitance insensitive (relatively) not due to being an MI design, but due to being a relatively low inductance design!
Most MC's are also low inductance and therefore capacitance insensitive, as are the much rarer low inductance MM designs (eg: Stanton 881, Pickering 7500)
The recommended loading for a standard MM/MI cartridge takes into account the effect of a specified capacitive load along with a known (standard?!) resistive load of 47kOhm.
Werner Ogiers has an excellent article reviewing the Shure M97xE and looking at the impact of capacitive loading on this cartridges performance (http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/shure_m97xe_e.html)
On the same website he also did some other articles with the M97xE looking at loading...
With regards to resistive loading (such as switching from 47k to 62k per catmans advice on AK) - increasing the loading is difficult and usually requires some soldering, as you can only go down from whatever is at the phono stage input.... and with most phono stages being by default at 47k - you need to increase their internal resistance load to 100k or more which requires a soldering iron.
Parallel loading can be used to add capacitance or reduce resistance - good articles on this topic here:http://daveyw.edsstuff.org/vinyl/loading/
hope this helps
bye for now
David
-
On a more basic level, a transducer is a device that converts energy from one form to another. A speaker converts electrical energy to sound, and on the other end, a phono cart converts mechanical energy to electricity. Like a loudspeaker crossover, inductors (coils) and capacitors (capacitance) are part of the mix or properties of the generating system, but can't be eliminated like in using a full range speaker. It's my understanding that Grado carts have little inductance because the coils are hooked up to cancel, like a Humbucking guitar pickup.
A phono cart is a small generator and the movements of the cantilever are what excite the generator. A LOMC has tiny coils attached to the cantilever and inductance is very low, as is the output voltage. A LOMC might have only 7 or 8 turns of wire per coil - resistance might be 10 ohms and inductance is typically measured in micro henries. A HO cart has around 10x the output but the larger amount of inductance, which can be 3000 turns of wire, are also a property of that output. Total capacitance loading recommendations from the mfg (preamp + cables + arm wire) are based on the use of capacitance to tune the mechanical performance of the generating system by lowering the high frequency resonance (or not) and augmenting the treble. Just as it's necessary to maintain 250pF for an M97 to sound right, other carts might sound excessively bright with too much capacitance. Many modern carts have recommended capacitance load of < 200 or 300pF. If typical 1 meter cables + arm wire have 100 to 150pF, then preamp should be around 50pF for these carts. Some vintage carts needed much more capacitance like 400pF or so, to sound right. Sometimes you can increase the resistance load instead of adding lots of capacitance. It might be a combination of both that will yield flattest response, just like the M97 @ 62K, 250pF.
neo
-
Wow! Thanks Neo, it will take me a little time to absorb all this but am going to try a shorter cable from Phono preamp to TT.
How about the cable from Preamp to receiver? Does length make any difference? Again, thanks-GL
-
The critical cable with HO carts is from table to phono stage. AT (and others) recommends < 200pF for all their MMs. That's 200pF total and includes the phono stage. So if your phono stage is 100pF, which has become the modern default, you'll need to keep the cable capacitance really low. That's what David was talking about with his phono stage located right behind the table. Another approach is to use very low capacitance cables. Blue Jeans sells a cable that's only 12.5pF/ft, so a 4 ft cable has only 50pF. Many vintage tables came with low capacitance cables attached, but I don't think most were nearly as low as Blue Jeans.
The cable between phono stage and line stage is at high level and is the same as any high level interconnect, like from a tape deck or CD.
neo
-
Hey GL,
I got a HE for my modded 95 and it sounds great right out of the box. David said that the HE and Vivid Line look like the same cut. I'm not using the Virtuoso at the moment. I'm thinking of sending it to Soundsmith for a level 3 stylus. Maybe I'll do another comparison first with the HE.
neo
I hadn't used the 95 for quite some time and it was almost like breaking in a new cart. Last night I substituted the Virtuoso and used the same HE stylus. No doubt about it, the Virtuoso is a better cart if you want resolution and harmonic detail. Still, the AT-95 is pretty amazing for under $50. It's one of the few inexpensive carts that will work in a med/heavy arm and is easy to listen to. Compliance is 15cu. The sound still reminds me of the Denon 103 - naturally musical if not overly detailed. Great cart to have around if you're restoring a vintage table with a heavy arm. The aftermarket styli can take it up a notch or two.
neo
-
Neo, just ran my AT95HE on an old Pioneer PL510A manual TT through some Advent Legacy II(an updated large Advent)
speakers and had an "old glow" nuanced sound, using a Rotel preamp @100 watts power on an old AIWA receiver. Tried
several other cartridges mounted on S arm headshells while I was at it: an AT3400 (conical), Nag. MP-11, AT-11 Generic-
(Green) elliptical, AT70/3601 (came on thousands of TT- has the "hook" on the back), Empire 2000-gold case-red elliptical
and strangely enough, a carmel AT version of the AT-120 but has a round plug with the same specs- have the box somewhere
but don't remember the model #. Interesting, the AT95 stylus will fit the AT70/3600 body but leaves a gap on the front, just
like on the Linn K-9. Anyway, the 95HE was the "mellowest" of the bunch with the other ATs having a somewhat sharper
sound. The Nag.MP-11 may have had somewhat more detail but is a more expensive unit. The Empire 2000 had a similar
sound but not quite as mellow. The old DD Pioneer made even the AT "hooked" version sound pretty good. The 3400 is
of course, the conical version of the AT95 and did have a brighter sound. Music was a Boccherini Concerto on NM vinyl.
Either the PL510A is very forgiving or my ears can no longer tell, as nothing sounded bad!-only different.
-
GL,
Just for the record, the 3400 and the AT95 are different carts although the styli are interchangeable. Someone gave me a 3400 stylus. It has a carbon fiber cantilever, conical tip and high VTF. Maybe I didn't break it in enough, but I didn't like it on my modded 95.
Nagaoka had a version of the MP11 that came with a boron cantilever. Seems like there was much love for the MP11 boron. I never heard one.
Do you still have the Garrott?
Seems to me, if a cart has been sitting around unplayed for a long time, it requires some break in before it sounds right.
neo
-
Hey GL,
Any experience with Acutex transplants? Tubed1 in the Who needs a MM thread 4-28-13, is looking for advise. I have zero experience with Acutex.
How are you doing, how's the recovery going?
neo
-
Neo- for some reason, didn't receive notice of your reply. Feel so good it scares me! Having a cat scan end of week so will
feel even better after that.... I still have the Garrott K-2 which I'm running with an EXCEL S700ER .02 x .08 Elliptical. Also
have a virtually identical Excel cartridge which I'm running with another same stylus. Same sound, about a $20 cartridge
used. Bought because the picture looked identical to the Garrott... My problem is I have about 12 cartridges sitting on my
shelf, plus a few more in my box and 4-5 mounted on various TT's so its difficult to schedule playing time for everything...
Right now I'm enamored with an Empire 999 SE/X which I'm running with a round shaft stylus trademarked
A (for AVR?) .02 x elliptical which has a huskiness which is delightful, though a low rider as I believe the 999 series has a
larger shaft. I've had some Acutex 310 series in the past; had a pointed nose stylus which I don't know how you would
transplant except with the cactus method discussed on another thread at AK or VE. No tiny screw like with the AT's....
I knew the 3400 had higher output. A 95 on the 3400 actual body sounds good but the 3400 on the 95 body would
sound brighter. I have both bodies and both styli and often get the bodies mixed up. Even the 3600 body with the dog
ear hook on the back of the stylus , looks the same with the stylus removed... Believe word has gotten around about CA
stylus replacement because broken ones are going for more than I want to pay. Good to hear from you. GL
-
A quick update on the round plug Odyssey. It turns out that the PCN550 has an aluminum cantilever with a bonded needle that might be a microline. The PC550 stylus seemed to be a bit much on the 15. I put the 20SS stylus back on and traded off front row super live, in your face performance, for refinement. Back to the normal excellence and I could relax once again. So here I was, minding my own business and and I thought I might transplant the PCN550 into a 3400 type plug for the Virtuoso. I sat down at my bench and there was the 12E looking lonely and unloved, so I trimmed some more plastic and fit the stylus on. I'm not sure how far this will go, I've only played a couple of sides, but it sounds pretty good. This generator has higher impedance and inductance than the 15 which normally means more mellow, and it seems like a good match.
This started out trying to figure out the AT counterpart to the PC440. Some AT12 and 13 models have identical output. Timeltel, a guy on Agon transplanted a beryllium/LC into a round plug for a 13Ea, and got great results. Just goes to show you, the secret is in the combo if you can figure out what the good combo is.
neo
-
Can't tell whether my PCN220's have aluminum shaft because they are gray . Also stylus may be nude as it is glued on
the back. Also has a red dot. Have one cut back and mounted on an AT11E body, which actually sounds similar to my
AT7V...The AT120e type round plug previously mentioned is an AT12XEPQ which has a .3 x nude elliptical, a step up
from the 120 which is bonded. Paid $29.95 +- 20 years ago from J & R. Spec. sheet shows: Red ATS10,Yellow ATS11,
Green ATS11E, Blue ATS12, Carmel ATN12XE, Ivory ATN12S (bonded Shib.), Orange (.2 x Nude) Burgundy ATN14
(Nude Shib.). This whole round plug line was apparently replaced by the AT120/440 ML square plugs... Imp.1000,
Res.1200 on all except the Shibs. which are 450/500. Interestingly, the AT7V is Imp.500mH,res.650 if my Japanese
is correct (ha!) with what appears to be a .2 x square shank nude elliptical so it is voiced like the round plug shibs.
which go up to 45,000 while the 7 goes to 25,000, 3000 less than my carmel 12XE which should be mellower at
1000 IMP./1200 Res.This is almost like archeology without the dirty hands! Regards, GL
-
Hi GL,
The PCN220 is alum and I believe a nude .2 elliptical. Maybe that's why it sounds similar to the 7V.
The 120E apparently has gone through numerous incarnations. The current 120E/t has a straight alum cantilever and a nude .3 x .7
The round plugs were replaced by 2 sets of rectangular plugs, the 100 series and the 3400 series.
The older TOTL and 4-ch carts all had impedance around 500 ohms and low inductance. It was the shibata stylus that enabled 4-ch. It was the first extended contact tip. Soon after came the line contact. I saw a .2 x .7 listed somewhere that was for 4-ch. I think it was AT, not sure. The .2 x .7 has the smallest contact patch of any stylus, except if there is a narrower elliptical. You get good high frequency info, but it will wear out fastest, all things being equal.
Forgot to mention, the cart of the month last month is the JVC X-1 mkII. Now it's the Astatic MF-2500, said to be the absolute best etc etc.
neo
-
Clearaudio has come out with a version 2 (V2) series of their MM line. These are basically the same generators with more extensive use of wood and stronger magnets for greater output, which is boosted approx. .5mV. Now they (at least the top ones) are completely covered in wood except the bottom, and look like US civil war battleships. Raul (Audiogon MM thread guru), criticized the orig Maestro saying it was overdamped. Maybe the increased output overcomes that, but a boron cantilever tends to sound more detailed and refined, and a little more restrained - less dynamic.
I've read a few posts by V2 owners who say it's noticeably better. They seemed enthusiastic in their praise. I take this with a grain of salt however. Anyone who shells out over $1K for a MM is likely to say that.
Boys and girls, you can try higher output for yourself, depending on the series of plug you're using. The orig 440ML had 1.0mV higher output than the Mla. The rest of the specs are identical so the difference is in the magnets. When AT discontinued the ML, they said there was a part that was no longer available and they would keep it as close as possible. That part is the magnets, probably neo magnets :wink:
This stylus is still available. It will fit any 100/120/150 series plug or could be transplanted into a 3400 (AT95). I speculate that an alum/ML tends to sound aggressive, but I haven't tried all the possibilities. If it's too bright you could always load it down. The 440ML sounds pretty good to me at 32K.
It would also be interesting to transplant the magnets on an exotic cantilever/stylus.
neo
-
Well, well , it seems like Griffithds, on the Agon thread and now a member here, has tried the ATN440MLa on both a Virtuoso and Maestro.
His report is very positive beating the Jicos - and any other aluminum cantilevered stylus he transplanted.
I guessed wrong, thought it would be bright.
Trying to get a handle on generator specs correlating with stylus type to predict results seems easy on a very basic level, but nearly impossible for ultimate performance. Mechanical aspects, especially of the cantilever have to be factored in with things like augmenting, or not, treble response.
We've had two positive reports of Soundsmith level 2 and 3 on these carts and I think that might be the way to go. No feedback yet on 440ML higher output magnets on these. BTW, LpGear is sold out. Might find one on fleabey.
neo
-
It is possible to model the potential result of a hybrid.... the process is as follows:
1) get a working model for a cartridge (I have this in spreadsheet form, it is a bit rough, but it is a good approximation )
2) Measure the donor cartridge performance
3) deduct the electrical performance from the measured to provide a plot of mechanical performance (ie cantilever, suspension, needle, magnets)
4) Use model to superimpose measured mechanical with calculated electrical response of the hybrid cartridge
5) Use model to crunch numbers on possible optimal loading setups...
So the process is possible... although it does require a decent ability with spreadsheets (Excel), along with the right software/hardware and test discs for making the relevant measurements.
I think a CA body with an ATN150MLx stylus fitted should be the equivalent to the $1200 CA Maestro.... for circa $225.
Would this be better or worse than a SS level 2/3 ? - my guess is different!
On the other hand with a SS2/SS3 you can choose the level of compliance to match it better to the arm it will ride... which might be the critical factor!
bye for now
David
-
It is possible to model the potential result of a hybrid.... the process is as follows:
1) get a working model for a cartridge (I have this in spreadsheet form, it is a bit rough, but it is a good approximation )
2) Measure the donor cartridge performance
3) deduct the electrical performance from the measured to provide a plot of mechanical performance (ie cantilever, suspension, needle, magnets)
4) Use model to superimpose measured mechanical with calculated electrical response of the hybrid cartridge
5) Use model to crunch numbers on possible optimal loading setups...
So the process is possible... although it does require a decent ability with spreadsheets (Excel), along with the right software/hardware and test discs for making the relevant measurements.
I think a CA body with an ATN150MLx stylus fitted should be the equivalent to the $1200 CA Maestro.... for circa $225.
Would this be better or worse than a SS level 2/3 ? - my guess is different!
On the other hand with a SS2/SS3 you can choose the level of compliance to match it better to the arm it will ride... which might be the critical factor!
bye for now
David
Hi David,
Hope all is going well with your new family member.
1) Working model for a cartridge - an electrical model, inductance, DC and/or impedance? What about output, magnets are listed under suspension?
2) Measure amplitude response only?
4) Calculated electrical response is from step 1, but how do you factor in possible changes of measured response with new stylus/cantilever, known formula or guesswork, at least to some extent?
Nice to hear from you again,
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I have my lovely 2.5 week old on sitting next to me... in loud bawling mode at the moment (feed coming up...). Mum is still in hospital, it was difficult and traumatic from her perspective...
This resulted in my having some time while sitting in hospital to browse the forums...
(silver lining ?)
The base model is Luckydog's work, which he did for the experiments around the capacifier a couple of years back
it takes into account the electrical parameters including phase...
Variables for the model include: cartridge R, Cartridge Z, loading R, Loading C
I then hybridised it by combining it with measured performance,
by deducting measured amplitude / frequency I can deduce the mechanical/ magnetic behaviour as that is what remains
I have not focused on amplitude / magnet strength so can make no comments without further thought, and a closer look at the model...
BUT - there are some other issues potentially - (not being a physicist this is where I start to step into deep water...) a larger magnet might lead to saturation issues, and exacerbate various EM non linearities (the things that design features like lamination are designed to reduce).
Also I believe that pretty much all manufacturers now use rare earth magnets on their styli - although magnet size might vary.
Without any science to back it, I will make the comment that all the highest end MM's have been relatively low output... and a higher output stylus may therefore not be a desirable thing!
larger magnets = higher mass - also undesirable....
On the other hand a shorter cantilever might be a substantive improvement...
bye for now
David
-
David,
That still doesn't explain prediction of response change with a different stylus/cantilever. Do you have some kind of model that factors in changes like eff tip mass, cantilever rigidity, and resonance? How about stylus/contact type?
Surely there must be some guesswork involved. When you get to aspects such as more detail being desirable or not, I think it might be a little hard to predict.
I guessed that 440ML magnets would work on the CA generator based solely on inductance (coil size). I.e. 490mH vs 420mH, seems like it's close enough.
CA output is increased 0.6mV (Maestro), opposed to 1.0mV (440), but 440 is 4mV to start out with and CA is 3.6 so amount of increase might be more like CA? How they work is another question.
I'm not sure if Griffithds won the orig 440 stylus. If it works out, a magnet transplant on an exotic cantilever might be the ultimate.
You still with us Griff?
2.5 wks old and mom is still in hospital, you have your hands full. Give mom our vinylfool best and hopefully she'll be home soon.
neo
-
Neobop/Dialoum,
Yes, still hear. I did win a suspect 440ML from a UK eBay's site. It was from a dealer. The body is definitely a 440ML LC-OCC. The stylus does not have the guard so I questioned the dealer about this. In my minds eye, this could have been either ML or MLa stylus. He received it as a trade-in and felt that it is a ML. He did agree with me that not having a stylus guard leaves it open for questioning!
BTW. I also have the Sound Smith Level1 stylus/cantilever that came with my Black Virtuoso. I did move it over to the Maestro and will say, it is also a very good, (better than the Jico Shibata and the LPGear V/L versions. Go figure? The cantilever is extremely small in diameter and the elliptical tip sparkles with the tiniest bit of light shining on it. I don't often see that sparkle after the cartridge is install on the arm. It must be of a very high quality polish. I would rate the SS Level 1 better that either the Vivid Line or the Jico Shibata. Not saying their not good, just not as good. But no doubt, the 440MLa transplant is the most stunning of the 3, and not by just a little either!
Once I receive the 440ML and determine it is a ML, I will transplant it to the Maestro. It it proves to work out as I'm hoping, I want to try the cantilever/stylus in other AT housing. Like a round plug, etc. Before I spent $350 for a level 3 SS I would like to know if what I would own could be used to float around to other AT cartridge bodies (transplant into other housings), like Tom's AT13/155. How about a AT20SS/Sound Smith level 3 cantilever/stylus combination? Easily done with nothing more than a jewelers screw driver! But lets not get too far ahead of our selves. 1st. Is the 440ML magnets to much for the Maestro or Virtuoso? The dam may break after that!
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Neo,
I may be being vague - lack of sleep....
The electrical model does not cover all the various finer aspects of performance (those crucial finer details!)
But by deducting the electrical model curve from the measured performance curve, I am left with a plot which effectively is "everything else" other than the base electrical performance.
I then model a different cartridge body's electrical performance, and add it to the "everything else"plot, and voila - an estimate of performance for the new combination (freq/amplitude).
Things not catered for in this model:
Hysteresis, and other magnetic related issues that are improved by lamination, split/slit poles, etc...
The model DOES cater for things like needle profile, effective tip mass, cantilever rigidity and resonance as that would be included in the original measurement used.
I have the necessary test records to measure up to 70kHz - which will pick up the cantilever resonance on every currently available stylus that I know of - it would take something very exotic (and probably vintage 1980's) to have a resonance above 70kHz (EPC100mk4?).
Mum just came home today - last 45min we arrived home - things are looking up! - now I need to try to coordinate with her to ensure we both get enough sleep....
bye for now
David
-
Griff,
I don't know how I could neglect to mention your SS level 1 results. That was really a most enlightening comparison, your description of the cantilever/stylus.
"The cantilever is extremely small in diameter and the elliptical tip sparkles with the tiniest bit of light shining on it. I don't often see that sparkle after the cartridge is install on the arm. It must be of a very high quality polish. I would rate the SS Level 1 better that either the Vivid Line or the Jico Shibata."
I saw a thread on Karma where David was extolling the benefits of low eff tip mass as the most important parameter. I agree. The cantilever is the biggest contributor to tip mass. Considering that a SS level 1 is $150 and a Jico shibata is $130, the SS is a very good value.
I think the best value of all is a P-mount AT-92E(CD) stylus. This has a bonded .3 x .7, but the straight cantilever seems thinner and more responsive. Compliance is around 9 or so cu @100Hz, so it should work well on med/low mass arms. I tried it on my Virtuoso on a 7g arm so it's not really a direct comparison with a stylus with 6.5cu @ 100Hz, but it more than held its own compared to the aftermarket ones. There are some pics further back in the thread, residing on a Unitrac arm. Best of all, the entire AT-92 cart can still be had for $29 on fleabey.
I wonder if the length of a SS cantilever can be reduced a mm or 2 on an AT cart. In general, a shorter cantilever is much better. I just remounted my 980LZX the other day and was thinking about this. I suspect the biggest problem might be with SRA changes. Maybe I'll try to get ahold of Peter Lederman and ask him. I had a couple of interesting conversations with him previously when he retipped my Genesis 1000, and he's a great guy to talk to - a straight shooter who won't just try to sell you something. At least that's my impression.
Griff, what kind of plug does your level 1 have, does it have the compliance screw or press fit? Just wondering if it's the orig black plug. I suspect there's a way to remove the press fitting.
neo
-
Hello Neobop,
I do have a couple of questions but first lets start with answering yours. The SS level 1 came installed in the black plug with screw. I did look at it under a hand held 60X scope and can confirm that it does have the serrated marking on the side of the plug probably caused by some kind of cutting process. That tells me it has been trimmed down to size for some larger configuration. Just like we do with the 95e aftermarket housings. I had my original purchased Virtuoso returned to the dealer for replacement after I bent/broke the cantilever. What I got back was the green plug that had been painted black installed in the Virtuoso. Both, the original and the replacement plug had the insert ring for locking the cantilever in place. Peter has either figured out a way to remove the insert ring (without any damage done to the plug), and then installing a screw, or he replaces the plug with a screw type but still in need of the side flaps trimmed.
I have spent enough money on wrong type 95e or 34xx which did NOT have the screw to have bought another Jico shibata for my Virtuoso. One of them even had a great picture of what looked like a white painted screw head only to discover when I tried to remove it, that it was nothing more that a thin layer of plastic. The mold for this housing must have been taken from a screw type original which had the screw in place at the time of the mold forming. Frustrating to say the least. If you do get to talk to Peter, see if he will reveal how he goes from the received insert pin type plug to shipping the screw type plug.
I have discovered that all the AT cheap plugs have the insert ring. All the aftermarket plugs that I have bought has what appears to have been liquid plastic (usually black in color), inserted into the rear hole to lock the cantilever in place (no insert ring). Some of the AT housings with the insert ring also had this black plastic inserted. I carefully trimmed away the housing from the both the AT and the aftermarket types to see it I could salvage the cantilever/stylus. The problem with doing this is that once the cantilever has been removed, it still has the black plastic that had been injected around it still attached. It makes trying to reinstall it into a different plug much more difficult because it is now a very tight fit. It will no longer just easily slide into the installation hole.
Now for my questions. 1) I am not understanding your thought about shorting the SS cantilever. Your quote.
"I wonder if the length of a SS cantilever can be reduced a mm or 2 on an AT cart." I read this to mean remove the cantilever from the "nub" ( I can not recall the actual name for item where the cantilever get glued/solder, or how ever to the remaining shaft), and trim or replace this cantilever with a shorter one. Or are you thinking of some other way to reduce the length on a AT cart?
2) You installed the cantilever from a AT-92E into a Virtuoso. Can I assume then that the AT-92E is a screw type AT cart, and was there any of the black plastic material on the compliance screw end of the shaft? I also am not quite clear on the (CD) you mention after the AT-92E? Are you saying that there is a AT-92CD? Or a AT-92ECD? Please clarify so I can find additional usable plugs with screws and stop filling up my trash can with the wrong ones! Thank you Neobop.
BTW. I have a 160ML sitting on a 150MLX body. After I finish the 440ML transplants and make my decision on whether to send or not to send it off to SS, I want to transplant it (the 160ML), into the Maestro. This of course means finding more screw plugs. May Peter will sell some. (grin)
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Griff,
The AT 3400 series which includes the 95/CA, also includes all those P-mounts with the tall sided plastic stylus holder. If you cut away the excess plastic the plug fits right in - no transplant necessary. The AT92E is also called the 92ECD - same cart. They are a member of the 3400 series. If you go to Gear you'll find the same aftermarket styli for the 3400 series P-mounts. They are the same shibata, vivid line etc, except say 3472_. Look in the section for LpGear replacement styli. Gear also has orig AT styli like 3472LC or ML. These also should be on a thinner cantilever with compliance of 10cu or less @ 100Hz. I was going to try the 3472ML, but at $150 though better of it. Although I got no answer from Gear, I'm told that these are bonded tips. Even if the cantilever is thinner, it's still straight. If I can get a nude ML on a tapered cantilever (440) for $125.....
I'm not sure what's going on with the compliance screws. The plug I sent you ( w/screw) was from a Jico 95SA from TTNeedles. AFAIK, no orig AT3400 series stylus has a screw. The only black 3400 series plastic I know of, is from a 95B limited production, and the CA carts. I don't think any of these have the screw. I suspect Lederman can remove the metal fitting. Look at one closely and you'll see a small section on the top where there's an opening. If this can be used to extract the fitting, then only a tiny threaded insert is needed to use a screw.
As we discussed on Agon, you were probably given an AT95 stylus on the Virtuoso, either by the retailer or the US distributor. No mfg is going to paint the bottom of a plug. It was probably the retailer, but you would have to look at their shipping logs to be sure. Tell you the truth, I wouldn't put it past CA, but they should have a good supply of plugs and wouldn't want to hurt their reputation if someone found out. The retailer probably pocketed at least $535 for a CA re-tip that's a rip off to start out with.
In general, a shorter cantilever is better. It will have a higher resonant freq for a given construction, less mass, and tend to sound more exact. My question for Peter is about the viability of reducing the total length of the cantilever. I plan on getting a level 3 for my Virtuoso, but I'm not sure when.
neo
-
Looking forward to hearing the report of the conversation with Peter about cantilever length....
-
I bought an AT92HE stylus only for $30 +- from an ebay listing affiliated with Needle Daddy.(but a different name)
It has brown plastic wings which have to be trimmed to a 3400 series body. I definitely see a screw head in the plug
hole which is not covered over. It was listed as an AT95E but the description mentioned the Hyper-elliptical diamond.
I also have a regular AT92E with the filled plastic hole so some of the Needle Daddy replacements obviously have a screw....Currently mounted on an AT3003 body which looks the same as an AT92 except black. Haven't played recently
but recall more upper end detail. Strangely, the HE diamond in comparison to the E, looks somewhat larger....Could
easily be transplanted to my AT120E but I've already transplanted another stylus. Also have an new AT125LC which
would work in a transplant to the HE plug if I had a CA body to mount it in but the AT125LC already sounds pretty good
on its own and is actually pretty rare-the diamond is very small as is the shaft. I assume it is bonded but I see a dab on
the back side of the shaft so am not so sure.I can see the screw slot through the white filler....its on a 125LC body.
-
I bought an AT92HE stylus only for $30 +- from an ebay listing affiliated with Needle Daddy.(but a different name)
It has brown plastic wings which have to be trimmed to a 3400 series body. I definitely see a screw head in the plug
hole which is not covered over. It was listed as an AT95E but the description mentioned the Hyper-elliptical diamond.
I also have a regular AT92E with the filled plastic hole so some of the Needle Daddy replacements obviously have a screw....Currently mounted on an AT3003 body which looks the same as an AT92 except black. Haven't played recently
but recall more upper end detail. Strangely, the HE diamond in comparison to the E, looks somewhat larger....Could
easily be transplanted to my AT120E but I've already transplanted another stylus. Also have an new AT125LC which
would work in a transplant to the HE plug if I had a CA body to mount it in but the AT125LC already sounds pretty good
on its own and is actually pretty rare-the diamond is very small as is the shaft. I assume it is bonded but I see a dab on
the back side of the shaft so am not so sure.I can see the screw slot through the white filler....its on a 125LC body.
Hi GL,
I think your ATN92HE is an aftermarket (prob Jico) stylus. All the AT 3400 P-mount styli seem to be without a screw. Good find. It seems the screw is being phased out even in the aftermarket ones, prob due to demand for replacement styli for both the AT95, which has become quite popular as a budget cart, and CA replacements. I don't know what the generator differences are in all the P-mount bodies, but my impression is that the price goes beyond their actual worth, just like the bonded styli on a straight cantilever, with a more advanced profile.
The ATN125LC is a titanium bonded tip on a tapered? cantilever. I think it sells for $70 at Stereoneedles. I have a ATN140LC I bought to try on my 440 body. It's the same except has a nude square shank tip. I only put a couple of hrs on it, but it seemed to sound similar to the 440ML stylus. I guess it would be a good candidate for transplant, I'm just not into it at this time.
I'm not sure if I reported it here, but a bunch of us bough out the PCN550ML from LpGear for $200 a pop. There are photos of it back a page or two on this thread - the blue stylus holder. Even though the stylus guard says Precept, it's a fake. The cantilever looks like straight aluminum. It's supposed to be beryllium. Not sure exactly what kind of tip is bonded on there, but it's definitely not a TOTL nude ML on beryllium as advertised.
LpGear offered to refund Raul. He seems to be the only one who can get an answer from them. I (and others) asked them questions before, and got no reply. Even though I chopped up the plastic to try on the 15, maybe I'll put in for a refund. It has a lively sound on the 15, but got tiring after awhile, similar to a 440ML @ 47K. I even changed the load to 32K, but figured WTF and moved on. I remember the sound of the ATN152ML on a 440 body on the Sonus arm. It was about as good as a MM gets.
neo
-
Neo, I'm a little confused. I thought Raul was raving about that stylus. This was, of course, before my self-imposed exile.
Don
-
Hi Neobop,
I have also bought a slightly used AT 440MLa($130). I liked what I have been hearing with my transplant and wanted not only an extra cantilever/stylus assembly (with the way it just sticks out there, I just know this thing is going to get bent some day), but because it was a complete cartridge. I wanted to try your 152 LP/440 combination. What you described sounds like something I would like to own. The only part I had missing was a 440 cartridge body. Two birds with one stone as they say!
I am wondering if I send my Maestro to Sound Smith, without a stylus plug, if Peter would supply one for a Level 3 upgrade? The only plug I am willing to give up easily is the green one that was painted black which I got during a dealer replacement (cartridge swap). It of course has the damn insert ring!
Thank you GLrickaby for the AT92HE information. I will be looking for one of those for future use.
Regards,
Don
-
Depending on the arm you have - the ATN155 is also worth considering - identical to the ATN152, but with slightly higher compliance...
-
Hi Griff,
The stylus I used was a 152ML not LC, but it should be really good. I did have to load it down a hair, around 42K. On the Sonus arm it was really quite something. Wish I still had the stylus.
If it has been sitting I imagine it might take some time to break in that body again. Longest break in I've experienced was with the 440.
The plug that comes with the CA carts are press fit - no stylus screw. So it should be all right to send Peter whatever you've got. Maybe if you put a note in there asking if the cantilever length can be shortened a mm or 2 without screwing up SRA, you'll get a call from Peter. He's a great guy to talk to.
The concern is that the stylus is at a fixed angle and changing length might make getting correct SRA/VTA impossible. Even if you keep original length I'm sure it will be great. Maybe it wouldn't be a good idea to ask for it to be shorter w/o talking to Peter first!! LOL
May the farce be with you Darth Griff,
neo
-
Neo, I'm a little confused. I thought Raul was raving about that stylus. This was, of course, before my self-imposed exile.
Don
Hi Don GRB,
In the immortal words of Kurt Vonnegut, "Welcome to the monkey house".
The fake PCN550ML? No, Raul said from the get-go he didn't like it as much as the PCN440 that came with his cart. He said that he would try it again and wasn't sure about returning it. I think that's the last we heard.
The photos on Asylum prove it's not beryllium. Look at the end of the cantilever and it's obviously aluminum and straight alum at that. It might be hard to tell on those photos, but I have one and it's definitely bonded. I don't have enough magnification to tell the cut of the diamond, but it looks to be of near identical construction as a AT bottom of the line stylus. The only difference I see the top side of the cantilever opposite the tip is sealed with some kind of black stuff.
Someone on Agon won a PC550 on fleabey. The plastic is dark blue (not light blue) and apparently it's real. We haven't heard much else about it.
Another audiofool rip off. LpGear claims they bought the batch from a reputable source and sold it in good faith. Bullshit. Even if the source was not reputable, styli is their business and they didn't even look at it? They not only resold the bogus styli, they sold it for $200 a pop.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=76875)
The audio biz, especially high end, has always been rife with fraud, rip offs and false claims. Back in the day subjective reviewers were bribed to give glowing reviews. This is fact, not an opinion. If the manufacturer makes a gift of the review sample it seems like a good incentive. If money changed hands it certainly wouldn't be reported. Now that objective magazines like Audio are gone, it's subjective reviews that make or break. Sad.
Look at CA charging $600 for an cheap AT replacement stylus (Virtuoso). The stock Virtuoso stylus is a straight alum cantilever w/bonded elliptical. They act like it's a MC stylus and charge accordingly. LpGear is small potatoes compared to CA. They've always been an overpriced company.
neo
-
Hi Dlaloum and Neobop,
My arm is the Graham 2.2. Fully and easily adjustable (left/right, up/down), so the shorter length cantilever is something to consider from Peter. I have always preferred the 152 over the 155 only because of the removable stylus guard that is on the 152. Yes, I could also remove the guard on the 155 during play but I like to store my cartridges with guard on and replacing the 155 guard every time could become a disaster. Neobop, I also have a 152 MLP with body. I bought from a dealer on eBay as NOS. One slight problem though. Even though it all came packaged up correctly (AT packaging), the stylus does not have the AT insignia. The cantilever is very small in diameter and tapered, but without the insignia, well, I'm thinking perhaps a Jico. Anyone ever see a AT stylus without the AT insignia? Stop laughing you guys!
Regards,
Don
-
Griff,
I've blocked my memory of the 152MLP. I think the plastic was dk brown, like a 160ML and the beryllium cantilever was thin and straight, I think.
Not having the logo is a bad sign, but I honestly don't remember.
http://www.stereoneedles.com/audio-technica.html
Easy enough to check with your 60X scope. Look at the end of the cantilever to see if it's aluminum or beryllium. Aluminum will be folded over like in the photos on Asylum. That's enough magnification to see if it's bonded or what it should be - a square shank nudie.
The 152LC and ML are interesting carts - P-mounts with universal adaptors. Specs are identical to the orig 440ML with 5mV output. That means you already have the stronger magnets if one of these is real. Maybe that's why I liked it so much, never realized that before.
I assume from your post that the 152LC is beryllium - wasn't positive about that.
If your thinking of transplant it might be tough. Timeltel went from a 100 series (155LC) to a round plug. This is a 100 series to a 3400 series. That's how I broke the 152ML, but maybe I just blew it. Good luck if you're trying that.
Let us know what you come up with.
neo
Edit: I forgot to mention, there might be a difference between Soundsmith stylus angle relative to the cantilever, and an AT. Even if there isn't, changing the length of the cantilever could mean that you would have little or no leeway to adjust SRA/VTA. It could even mean that couldn't achieve optimal arm height. I would strongly advise not doing this without discussing it first, although if you request it, you'd probably get a call from Peter.
-
Hi Neobop,
I will check the cantilever end when I get home. I'm currently on a camping trip up at the lake. Payette lake in McCall Idaho. My known AT152LP is beryllium. I bought it from the site you posted (stereoneedles.com). I did not know that the 152 had the same output as the 440ML! Learn something everyday. Thanks.
Regards,
Don
-
I have a Clearaudio Aurum Beta (not the S model), with a broken cantilever, and would like to replace with an equivalent AT95 stylus. Can anyone give me a link for the best replacement?
Also, it seems that the replacement will snap in without timing the outer plastic, correct? Is there a definite improvement in trimming (other than cosmetic)?
-
Hi Trackball,
I think the best ready made replacement is the Vivid line. I've had the shibata and the hyper elliptical - they're okay, the shibata is a little better of those two, but maybe a little too sweet. Griff says the vivid line is faster and clearer sounding than any of them. That's the one I would buy. If you want to save a little money and still get original performance, the SE model is a .3 x .7 elliptical. That's a little sharper than the 95E needle and I believe the same as the CA.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/LPGATN95VL.html
I think the whole plastic assembly will fit, but I never tried it. I'm not sure if the gold front piece will get in the way. Consensus is that it sounds better without it, but I'm not sure of that either. I know it will look a whole lot better - like the original. You just have to be careful not to snip or bang into the cantilever. I use a wire cutter - hold onto one side and carefully snip the other. Then hold on to the plug when you snip the other side. You don't want it to go flying. You have to cut behind the plug, but by that time the sides are gone and it's easy. Put the flat side of the cutter up against the plug and you wind up with a small lip just like the CA plug.
I think I made it sound harder than it is. LOL it's really not that hard. You just have to be careful.
neo
-
neo, You are an incredible wealth of information! Thanks.
I'll order the stylus from LPgear, and will let you know how it goes.
The recommended Clearaudio VTF is 2.2 grams. Will it change with the new replacement?
-
Trackball,
Thanks for the kind words.
The stylus is made as a 95 replacement stylus, which happens to be identical compliance and manufacture as the CA. Recommended VTF is something like 1.75 to 2.5g, so use it where it sounds/tracks best. Compliance is 6.5cu @100Hz = 15cu @10Hz (standard).
I don't know if you've been following this thread, it's rather long. But ALL the CA MM have the same generator. The only difference between your Aurum Beta and a Virtuoso is the tolerances. The electrical specs are identical but the difference between channels is more closely matched. The Maestro is the same too, but with a top AT boron/ML stylus and more body wood. IMO this is one of the best motors AT ever made.
neo
-
Does anyone know if the Sonus Gold/ Blue cartridges also take these AT replacement cartridges? My Sonus needs a new stylus. Sorry if OT.
-
Does anyone know if the Sonus Gold/ Blue cartridges also take these AT replacement cartridges? My Sonus needs a new stylus. Sorry if OT.
Hi Ray, no problem
I don't think so. Not an easy stylus to find. Try one of these.
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Sonus-Bronze_p_4087.html
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Sonus-Silver-Plate-P-needle_p_3922.html
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Sonus-Dimension-5_p_4118.html
neo
-
Hi Ray, no problem
I don't think so. Not an easy stylus to find. Try one of these.
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Sonus-Bronze_p_4087.html
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Sonus-Silver-Plate-P-needle_p_3922.html
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Sonus-Dimension-5_p_4118.html
neo
Thanks. I installed it on my Technics and was greatly disappointed. It appears it is well and truly worn out. At $169 I think I will wait and maybe someday I'll get a Black Widow arm to maximize it. The suspension for the cantilever is in the replaceable section correct?
Found this, but worried about the rubber durability sitting unsued for so long.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sonus-GOLD-BLUE-Audiophile-Cartridge-NEW-FREE-WW-SHIPPING-/221233594842?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item33828cc1da
-
Hello raysracing,
Most cartridges, if stored properly, will not be affected by time. It would appear that the one you listed has been stored correctly. I don't know nor do I want to know your finances, but that is a great cartridge and one worth spending the money to have a re tipper rebuild if that is what was required. I sent a M/C cartridge (Blue Oasis by Saul Winn of Winn strain gauge fame), to a re tipper and for $60, he rebuilt/replace the suspension. That purchase price and if required, $60 for rebuild, would give you a brand new Sonus. To me, that would be a no brainer!
Regards,
Don
-
Thanks. I installed it on my Technics and was greatly disappointed. It appears it is well and truly worn out. At $169 I think I will wait and maybe someday I'll get a Black Widow arm to maximize it. The suspension for the cantilever is in the replaceable section correct?
Found this, but worried about the rubber durability sitting unsued for so long.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sonus-GOLD-BLUE-Audiophile-Cartridge-NEW-FREE-WW-SHIPPING-/221233594842?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item33828cc1da
The fleabey item makes no sense to me. You already have this cart and for $10 less than a bran new stylus, the one on fleabey looks used, not NOS. Zoom in on the pins in photo #2.
Yes most of the suspension is in the replaceable part, but I don't know the rest of the internal design. Did the suspension bottom out or did it just sound bad?
All that said, I wouldn't mind taking a chance on the fleabey cart myself. I want to downsize, but having a hard time doing it. LOL
neo
-
I looked at that Sonus again on fleabey. Interesting ad, apparently this guy sold a lot of these carts from Sweden no less.
Wonder if those marks on the pin could be from testing or dirt? They say gold doesn't tarnish but you get wear marks from use.
Anyway, the interesting thing about the ad, is future sales of the SPM (P-mount) models which he claims are superior. I don't believe this guy on face value. He says the Gold-Blue is TOTL and no mention of the Dimension 5 and what about those pin marks?. I wonder if he's just trying to goose up those future sales or they really are better.
neo
-
The Sonus strangely enough does not elicit many memories for me considering I am the original owner and probably played hundreds and more on it over the years. But for certain now it is quiet and veiled. It sounds like it is muffled or more like distant in sound. It also has sibilance and other non nice things.
Thanks for the info on the old/new stock. Good to know if I do find a NOS Sonus someday (or buy a NOS Stylus) it will last me for awhile or not be defective before I install it.
Ray
-
neobop, just a follow up. I received the VIVID stylus from LP Gear. It was not that difficult to cut of the wings with a small diagonal wire cutters. Just took a steady hand and magnifying glasses.Once trimmed, it just dropped right in as a perfect fit. I'm running at 2.0 grams on my Dual 1019. I'm not sure if it is the best match for the Dual tonearm, but it really sounds great. Nothing like the sound of a fresh stylus! Thanks.
-
Trackball,
Glad it's working out. The lowest mass Dual arm is 8.5g eff mass (I think). Even if that's the one you have, it shouldn't be a problem. Cu of the replacement stylus should be 15. You're prob resonating at 11Hz - no problem. The cart/stylus should also work out well on higher mass arms.
The part that fits into the body of the cart and holds the cantilever, that squarish part, we call the plug. On the top of the plug there is either a painted over screw, or a fitting like on the CA plug. Does your vivid line plug have the screw?
neo
-
neo, As I recall, there was a recessed screw that was painted over. I really did not pay attention to it. What is it for? Can you tell me more about the VIVID stylus. What is its shape? Hypereliptical?
-
The cantilever bends near the magnets at the rubber damper. It goes into a sleeve in the body of the plug which is held in place by the screw, called the compliance screw. AT styli all seem to have this screw except the 3400 series (AT95, CA, and others). The AT 3400 styli have a fitting. We use the screw to transplant a stylus from one series plug into another. The ones with the fittings are almost impossible to work.
All the aftermarket styli have this screw, but there was some concern that some of them were starting to use fittings. The styli manufacturers might get the plastic part from one source so there was concern about suitable transplant plug availability. BTW, the CA styli have the fitting.
I don't have a vivid line, but it's described as a line contact or fine line type. The shibata and hyper elliptical, and probably the SE (.3 x .7) are manufactured by Jico. LpGear says the Vivid is from another unnamed source. They seem to be the only ones with this stylus.
neo
-
Thanks for the info about the Vivid stylus, I found this link about the different stylus shapes:
http://www.sowka.pl/szlif/
Interesting read.
So far, the new stylus is very clear and fast. My set up includes a 3 foot bluejeans cable (12.2 pf/ft) between the Dual and a Nova Phonomena phono preamp set at the lowest capacitance 200 pf. The recommended capacitance is for this cartridge is 100 pf. Is there an audible difference when running at a higher capacitance?
-
Thanks for the info about the Vivid stylus, I found this link about the different stylus shapes:
http://www.sowka.pl/szlif/
Interesting read.
So far, the new stylus is very clear and fast. My set up includes a 3 foot bluejeans cable (12.2 pf/ft) between the Dual and a Nova Phonomena phono preamp set at the lowest capacitance 200 pf. The recommended capacitance is for this cartridge is 100 pf. Is there an audible difference when running at a higher capacitance?
Recommended capacitance for ATs is 100 to 200pF, so you're not as far off as it may appear. Blue Jeans really helps in this respect. Rather ill thought out options in your Phonomena for MM capacitance. Most all modern MM carts recommend < 300pF total.
Additional capacitance has the affect of lowering the high frequency resonance which reinforces the treble and rolls off the extreme high end. You have about 37pF additional + internal arm wire, so about 80 or 90pF additional. You'd probably be able to hear the difference if you reduced it by 100 to 150pF. Not sure how big a difference. If you wanted to do this I'd recommend changing the higher preamp setting to 50pF. The higher setting is useless unless you have a couple of vintage Ortofon carts or if it's recommended for MCs.
You can get silver mica caps at Parts connection or maybe a company like Mouser. If it's sounding really good you might want to think about it.
neo
-
Hi Neobop,
I can not get over just how right this 440MLa stylus/cantilever mounted in the Maestro sounds. Smooth yet dynamic. Clean and extended at both ends for the frequency spectrum. I just can not find anything to criticise. It has become a cartridge that I am finding very hard to place into a rotational mode but would rather just leave it mounted on the table. I have other cartridges mounted on several Graham arm wands, but when they are in rotation, after just a few songs I begin to think, I wonder how that song would have sounded with the 440MLa/ Maestro! I can not put my finger on just what it is exactly other than" it just sounds right"! Sort of like a 20SS on a low dosage of steroids!
The 440ML I won on eBay should arrive any day now. I don't want to remove the MLa from its housing plug so I think I will disassemble the Jico Shibata and use its plug instead for the 440ML (stronger magnet), CA test/audition. I already have a RA# from Sound Smith to send the 440ML/Maestro to Peter for his Level#3 upgrade using the ML magnet plug. I hope the ML arrives today. The wait is killing me.
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Neobop,
I can not get over just how right this 440MLa stylus/cantilever mounted in the Maestro sounds. Smooth yet dynamic. Clean and extended at both ends for the frequency spectrum. I just can not find anything to criticise. It has become a cartridge that I am finding very hard to place into a rotational mode but would rather just leave it mounted on the table. I have other cartridges mounted on several Graham arm wands, but when they are in rotation, after just a few songs I begin to think, I wonder how that song would have sounded with the 440MLa/ Maestro! I can not put my finger on just what it is exactly other than" it just sounds right"! Sort of like a 20SS on a low dosage of steroids!
The 440ML I won on eBay should arrive any day now. I don't want to remove the MLa from its housing plug so I think I will disassemble the Jico Shibata and use its plug instead for the 440ML (stronger magnet), CA test/audition. I already have a RA# from Sound Smith to send the 440ML/Maestro to Peter for his Level#3 upgrade using the ML magnet plug. I hope the ML arrives today. The wait is killing me.
Regards,
Don
Hold the phone Darth Griff, we're changing the channel. Command tells me you're being promoted and your title is now Captain Quirk. Your mission (if you choose to accept it) is to explore new(?) galaxies and go where no man has gone before. Ta ta ta te taaa, tat da daaaa.
440ML magnets on a level 3 - you should have around .4mV more output than V2 Maestro. Make sure you get the ML stylus assembly back. There's no need for him to remove it from the plug. The plug won't fit the CA. I suggest sending him one of the orig CA plugs w/busted stylus. Matter of fact, you should ask for everything back. The old CA magnets could be used on the ML and you'd have a perfectly good MLa. Get Peter to do that for you if you want. How's that for conservation of matter?
Good luck on your mission Captain Quirk. We'll expect your report in about 3 months time.
neo
-
Neobop,
Considering I have the original Maestro (not The V2), output should be perhaps even greater than .4mV.
Neobop, do you think it will it be Peters intentions to 1st remove the 440ML stylus/cantilever assembly from the 440ML housing, then remove everything forward of the magnets (the Cantilever/stylus) on the 440ML and replace that portion with his lever 3 cantilever/stylus. That would mean everything from the magnets back (including the section that the compliance screw holds in place), would be original 440ML. If this is how he would perform this rebuild, then he will need to provide a new housing (to fit the CA), weather it has the screw or not to install the new frankenstein into. If he uses one of my old (green one that was painted black) housings, he will have to remove the stupid compression ring (and removing the old back half of the stylus assembly that's inside of the housing), and replace the ring with either a new compression ring or a screw. I have not heard anyone comment on what he uses for his CA M/M cartridges. Or will he just remove the "magnets" from the 440ML and install them on the old green housing that was painted black. Then install his lever 3 cantilever/stylus onto the green housing with the stupid compression ring not touched?
Yea, read it all again. Maybe the 2nd time it will make more sense!
I ask this because I was not aware that the magnets could be moved from one assembly to another!
Regards,
Don
-
Griff,
When people send him a CA with a busted cantilever, what does he use for a plug? The CA plug has the fitting, so I think we can assume, either he grafts the new cantilever on in front of the magnets or he can open the fitting. Either way, in order to use the ML magnets he will have to transplant them or transplant the ML cantilever stub into a suitable plug. I assume the magnets are glued in place in/on that little V shaped structure. I've never done this so I can't say from experience, but it might be easier than a cantilever transplant, which leaves you in a quandary. Exactly what do you send him.
If you call you'll eventually get through to someone and maybe you can ask Peter or ask for him to call you back. Now that you have a RA #, it shouldn't delay the operation and it would be better if you know what to expect. In the event you can't talk to Peter maybe you should send him everything including an empty plug with a screw and the green one w/black bottom. You'd have to include a detailed note saying exactly what you want (level 3 w/ML magnets and all the leftovers). Bet you'll get a call when he opens your box.
The Maestro V2 has .6mV greater output due to stronger magnets. The ML has 1mV greater output than the MLa. The CA has less output to start out with, smaller coils - lower inductance. Maybe the increase will be less than 1mV. It could be the same as V2. Perhaps we shouldn't count the chickens just yet, don't even know if it's feasible.
neo
-
Neobop,
I received my 440ML today from the eBay auction. The stylus does not have the guard so appearance wise, it looks no different than a
" MLa" or for that matter, no different than a "140ML". I was hoping I would be able to confirm that it is a true ML with the stronger magnets but I have not been able to hear any difference in output. I'm starting to think this is a "MLa" stylus assembly on a ML body.
I have a lead on a "140ML" (that's 140 not 440), stylus assembly in need of a new cantilever. It would seem to me that the "140ML" magnets would be the same as the "440ML" magnets. Can you confirm that this is true? If so, I think I would rather sent it to Peter for our Frankenstein. I know the owner and I am sure it is what it is claimed to be. An actual "140ML". Magnet strength is my only concern in using this for our experiment! My memory tell me that the 140ML had a bonded tip were as the 440ML had the same diamond but was nude. I can't remember anything pertaining to the magnets or their strengths. All searches lead only to information on the "440MLa" so I hope you can fill me in.
Regards,
Don
-
Cheese and crackers! Enough trouble the way it is, but this is like pulling teeth. I guess you tried to get in touch with the fleabey seller to confirm identity.
I have a NOS ATN140LC - specs for the generator are identical to the 440ML; 3200 ohms, 490mH, 5mV. Only thing different is cu = 15 @ 100Hz, so a low mass arm is indicated. [CA cu = 6.5, 440 cu = 10] I can't confirm the specs for the 140ML, but it's a pretty safe bet they're the same as a 140LC. BTW, the 140LC has a nude sq shank tip. I'd guess the 140ML also. 60X should be enough to confirm that.
It would be nice if you could get in touch with Peter to find out if this is even doable, and if so what the procedure would be. I'm guessing normal modus operandi would be to graft a new cantilever in front of the rubber donut and magnets using existing plug. You might have to choose which stylus becomes the stub, orig CA w/magnet transplant, or 140/440 w/higher cu. Did you call and leave a message? Once I called on a Saturday and he answered the phone.
Thinking about this a bit, it might be good to have a 440ML ready to go in a 3400 plug. That way you'd have more reasonable cu and he can just lop off the cantilever and replace it, if that's the procedure.
neo
PS. Scuttlebutt has it, if you can pull this off you're in for another promotion. They're already calling you Major Tom.
-
Neobop,
The plan is++++++++Remove Jico Shibata from plug with screw. Insert 140ML cantilever/stylus into (now empty plug). Install plug into Maestro. Send to Peter for Level 3 cantilever/stylus replacement.++++++++End of plan.
Now what would you call a 140ML with a Jico Shibata installed? (grin) Perhaps an underachiever?
Regards,
Wrong way Goldfarb
-
Neobop,
The plan is++++++++Remove Jico Shibata from plug with screw. Insert 140ML cantilever/stylus into (now empty plug). Install plug into Maestro. Send to Peter for Level 3 cantilever/stylus replacement.++++++++End of plan.
Now what would you call a 140ML with a Jico Shibata installed? (grin) Perhaps an underachiever?
Regards,
Wrong way Goldfarb
That should do it. I was thinking about compliance. The ruby/OCL will be about the same as a 155LC. Maybe that could be changed by swapping rubber dampers?
I was thinking about the price of Jico styli and lack of value. That bonded shibata on a straight aluminum cantilever is more expensive than a MLa stylus - nude ML on a tapered cantilever. Guess it's a bargain compared to the price of a CA trade-in.
neo
-
Neo,
Quote:
"Guess it's a bargain compared to the price of a CA trade-in."
We are doing this in the name of "science". (grin) If I was thinking cost, I would have used the LPGear's VL plug. I am thinking about buying another one of the VL's just to have a readily available plug for future use. Still far cheaper than giving a CA cartridge and $600 to a dealer so he can replace the plug/cantilever/stylus with a AT95E assembly!
Neo, I have on order, a AT150MLX stylus (gold coated boron cantilever/ML stylus), replacement bought for the sum of $159. If you add $80 for the LPGear VL plug, then this would give me one hell of a nice addition for a CA cartridge for only $239. That's less than 1/3 the cost of a CA exchange!
I do have a call into Peter, but I was hoping to get your concurrence (thanks BTW), about the magnet strength with the 140ML first.
I am going to ask him about compliance. My Graham 2.2 is considered a light medium to medium mass arm. Your statement about the 140ML being a low mass arm requirement cartridge kind of surprised me. I thought low mass arm type cartridges usually tracked at 1 gram or less. Its tracking force is stated at 1.4 grams as ideal. I would think my Graham arm would be perfect for this requirement? Anyway, I will let Peter know what arm I am going to use it with and let him decide if he needs to adjust anything, compliance wise.
Regards,
Lab technician #2
-
Griff,
I think the ATN150MLX went up to $300. Are you sure that's new AT? It should come with an AT cardboard outer box, not a generic plastic box. As long as it's real and not counterfeit - killer deal.
Arm/cart matching is generally considered a function of low frequency resonance determined by test record or estimated with resonance calculator. Low tracking force usually goes with high cu carts, but other factors like stylus type, tip mass, also effect VTF.
1g VTF? Maybe, but it depends on the cart. The Sonus Blue/Gold discussed previously has cu of 50 @ 10Hz! VTF is 1.0 to 1.5.
I think compatibility depends on the cart and resultant sound. Some carts sound sluggish (to me) with an arm of high mass. Have you ever used a 155LC stylus on the Graham? Results should be similar. The guys on "Who needs a MM" thread all seem to use high mass arms. I can only call them as I hear them. I have a modified Sonus arm with eff mass around 5.25 to 5.5g. All the MM sound better on that arm except the AT95, CA. There's a 3472 vivid line that will fit the CA. Cu is a little higher, but the cantilever should be a little lighter (not extreme) and tracks 1.25 to 1.5. Probably better for a moderate mass arm. I have a .3 x .7 from a 92E - P-mount and it sounds pretty good.
neo
-
Neo,
Have you given up your search?
Don
-
Don Grb,
This thread started around 2 1/2 years ago. GL first introduced us to CA MM parentage and stylus replacement a short time before that. Not much more to say on that score, or is there? Not long ago I added "and beyond" to the title. That can include just about any cart related discussion and we've strayed from AT on numerous occasions.
This thread has been dormant for months at a time, and I rescue it from obscurity with some new aspect. Feel free to talk about carts. Do you have experience with something other than what's been discussed? It really doesn't matter what was said x number of pages ago, what's on your mind?
There are all kinds of carts I haven't heard. I'm all ears.
neo
-
It's all about learning. I'm more interested in your evaluation process. I'd like to know about the cartridges you've evaluated and how you came to the conclusion that they were not worthy. I'm also interested in your current reference. I'm relatively new to the mm world and I have a lot to learn. I know you're interested in the carts inductance, but inductance alone doesn't explain a cart's performance. I'd prefer not to waste my time and money trying to figure out what you already know. I know it's unlikely, but if there was anything I could do to help, I'd surely be open to it.
Sincerely,
Don
-
It's all about learning. I'm more interested in your evaluation process. I'd like to know about the cartridges you've evaluated and how you came to the conclusion that they were not worthy. I'm also interested in your current reference. I'm relatively new to the mm world and I have a lot to learn. I know you're interested in the carts inductance, but inductance alone doesn't explain a cart's performance. I'd prefer not to waste my time and money trying to figure out what you already know. I know it's unlikely, but if there was anything I could do to help, I'd surely be open to it.
Sincerely,
Don
Don Grb,
I'm not sure where to begin. Having a background playing, and exposure to live music really helps. The learning process of playing, forms the basis of evaluation for me. After all, our stereo systems are a miniaturization of a live musical event, whether that event is a live performance or a studio session.
For example, playing out of tune and learning what it sounds like, and how the harmonics interact is a learning process that not only teaches you how to play in tune, but the abilities and attributes of your playback system to reproduce that aspect of music.
For most of my career in audio my preference was for MC carts and I don't think MM/MI are superior. By the same token I think some MM/MI carts are capable of equal or even better performance depending on the individual cart. It seems to me that MC and MM have a basically different presentation and preference depends on taste, and mostly synergy.
Inductance is the Achilles heel of HO carts. As a property of the output it combines with shunt capacitance and lowers the high frequency resonance. This (capacitance) can be used to augment drooping treble performance, but will also roll off the extreme high end. Carts like a 681 or an M97 might sound nice in a particular system, but are incapable of "ultimate" performance. Perhaps a M97 with SAS overcomes most of this limitation.
MM tend to use more damping to control frequency response. The consequence of this is worse phase performance and imaging capability. MMs with extended response are normally low inductance types with extended contact tips. The most highly sought after MM carts exhibit these traits.
I have to wind this up for now. Maybe you could start reading this thread. Glrickaby and Daloum have made major contributions here and I think you might find it interesting.
neo
-
Ok, Neobop. I've had several moving coils, and I find the extreme soundstage to be unnatural.
Thanks for your time.
-
Ok, Neobop. I've had several moving coils, and I find the extreme soundstage to be unnatural.
I think it's the fault of the recording and not the cart. The cart can only present what's there as far as separation, location, and other spatial clues. If another cart isn't as "extreme" in soundstage capabilities that might make sound more natural in that instance, but is it a better, more resolving cart?
There's an old thread here on phase nonlinearities you might find of interest. The highlight is discussion of an old Ortofon paper from 1982. In it, they explained the correlation between phase linearity and imaging capability.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=92138.0
That's not to say that your preference is wrong, or all MCs are superior in this respect, but they tend to be. The best MM (IMO) have extended response, even to 40 or 50K and low inductance means the high freq resonance won't be lowered much. Bottom line is, it's damping of cantilever movements that causes phase nonlinearities and MM tend to be more heavily damped. Phase anomalies start at high freq resonance where there's a 180 degree reversal, so you can see the importance of extended response.
I like the presentation of a good MM. It seems more immediate.
I had to run out this morning so I wound up my post. Please feel free to ask or comment about anything.
neo
-
Neobop,
That $169 AT150MLX stylus replacement came in a blue sealed Audio Technica box. This is no fake! Hell of a deal when you compare what a retipper would charge for this stylus.
I'm working up the courage to transplant into the Maestro!
Regards,
Don
-
Ok, Neobop. I've had several moving coils, and I find the extreme soundstage to be unnatural.
Thanks for your time.
Have you checked what the Frequency-Amplitude response of those cartridges is?
I ask because many MC's have a rising top end - which lends itself to an extreme soundstage...
The rise is often beyond the brightness frequencies (lower high end) so they don't necessarily sound too bright.
On MM's this top end is often tamed by the higher inductance of the cartridge.... on MC's it can only be tamed by using a much more sophisticated cantilever construction (eg: special materials, very short cantilever) - to move the resonance that causes the rise out of harms way.... which requires the cantilever resonance to be up above 30Khz and preferably above 50khz.
Very very few MC's actually achieve this.
bye for now
David
-
David,
I've not checked the f/r on those carts, but that certainly explains it!
Thanks for the lesson,
Don
-
It is an interesting observation on audiophile society....
Audiophiles were always looking for better imaging & soundstaging - when some hand made MC's out of Japan started showing stunning soundstaging it started a trend towards "big staging"...
Along the way more prosaic details like a flat frequency response started getting pushed back in the priority list, MC's ended up dominating audiophilia and here we are....
Which is not to say there aren't MC's that get it all right (or close to!) - just that they are more difficult / expensive to make, and that they don't necessarily sell a lot due to perceived flaws (such as narrow soundstage).
Interestingly the Dynavector Karat is a prime example - in theoretical terms it is close to perfect, reviews consistently talk about its narrow soundstage (narrow compared to what?).
Dynavector later fixed the marketing issue by bringing to market more audiophile oriented models (quite a few of which are more expensive).
Without having heard them myself - I do wonder whether the other models are aimed more at "romantic" sound and soundstaging, where the Karat was aimed at purist reproduction of the recording.... which leads one to ask - which one is the correct approach? - and I guess that depends on what you want out of it!
bye for now
David
-
Have you checked what the Frequency-Amplitude response of those cartridges is?
I ask because many MC's have a rising top end - which lends itself to an extreme soundstage...
The rise is often beyond the brightness frequencies (lower high end) so they don't necessarily sound too bright.
On MM's this top end is often tamed by the higher inductance of the cartridge.... on MC's it can only be tamed by using a much more sophisticated cantilever construction (eg: special materials, very short cantilever) - to move the resonance that causes the rise out of harms way.... which requires the cantilever resonance to be up above 30Khz and preferably above 50khz.
Very very few MC's actually achieve this.
bye for now
David
David,
Interesting correlation between amplitude response (rising high end) and extreme soundstage, rather than superior imaging of MCs due to better phase performance especially in the lower treble region. I guess one man's superior imaging is another's exaggerated soundstage.
Although we're talking in generalities, I don't buy the explanation, not entirely anyway. I'm not trying to make a case for MCs, but you mush admit that lower treble region is often much more phase coherent in MCs than MMs. MC also tend to have flatter response in that region with less treble droop, so which would likely be more technically correct? Also, I don't think inductance has that much to do with lower treble. Very high inductance could reinforce the mid/low treble by lowering the high freq resonance and rolling off the extreme high end.
Still, the correlation between rising high end and imaging is interesting and perhaps it is a factor. Combined with inferior (usually) MM phase performance, the MC would be exaggerated and the MM would be deficient. :duh:
neo
-
Hi Neo
what I am saying is
1) low inductance designs tend to expose cantilever resonance (as it is not balanced by LCR loading..)
2) basic aluminium cantilevers have resonances causing a boost at anywhere from 11Hz to 16Hz (examples Ed Saunders V15V stylus - 11Hz, Shure & Jico standard elipticals circa 16Hz), high quality aluminiums will place the resonance at 18Hz to 21Hz (examples Pickering Z7500s, Ortofon OM20/30/40) - exotic cantilevers can place the resonance higher (Jico SAS - circa 28kHz, Dynavector Karat 50Khz to 70kHz depending on model)
3) Audio perception is a beast! - amplitude boosts in the very directional higher frequencies can be perceived as broadened soundstage
4) Brightness is not a reflection of a linear boost across the high end - but a reflection of a boost between around 5kHz and 10kHz - boosts above 10kHz don't tend to be perceived as "brightness"
5) a cantilever with a resonance in the lower highs eg: 11kHz - is very likely to sound "Bright" even if the high end above 16kHz drops off dramatically - counter intuitive I know... - So a basic relatively heavy aluminium cantilever in an MC can be a bad thing (assuming you don't like "brightness")
6) A cantilever with a resonance around 16kHz will boost frequencies from around 8kHz (within the brightness range) up to around 32KHz - resulting in both brightness and strong soundstage perception.... the cues for both are boosted.
7) A cantilever with a resonance around 19kHz (eg Pickering 7500) will boost frequencies starting from around 9.5kHz.... so negligible impact on the brightness zone - but substantial impact in the soundstage cues - this is common for many high quality MC's
The very best MM/MI designs are mid inductance - not as low as true low inductance designs - so it does not expose cantilever resonance quite as harshly, but does not depress the high end as much as high inductance designs do. Fit a traditional 6mm or 7mm high quality cantilever to one of these - adjust with the right loading, and you can achieve theoretically very very good results without resorting to technological or engineering extremes....
eg: CA Maestro, V15VMR, Technics EPC100/205, many others
But these are just my ruminations.... and maybe I ate just one hash brownie too many....
bye for now
David
-
Hi David,
That was a mouthful.
I think you might be right about boosted very high frequency response (10 to 20K) enhancing imaging, but I wonder about the relevance of supporting hash brownies arguments. :wink:
You're very knowledgeable about cantilever resonance, but what's that have to do with the price of chickens? I don't think amplitude response is the driving force behind imaging or soundstage. Your correlations about soundstage perception and amplitude response is interesting, but I still don't buy it.
Remember the Ortofon paper? It showed a direct correlation, imaging with phase linearity regardless of MM amplitude response. What do you think the situation would be if the MC had a resonance of 60K instead of 27K ?
With damping the MC showed phase implications down to 8K. If high freq resonance is now 60K, phase nonlinearities could be entirely out of band.
Imaging and soundstage might be reproduced perfectly. Admittedly, this is conjecture to a certain extent, but it's conjecture based on the only known (to me) measurement of phase vs amplitude response.
Those brownies must be fun. :drool: Think I'll find me some maui wowie, we call it luau.
neo
-
Hi Neo
what I am saying is
1) low inductance designs tend to expose cantilever resonance (as it is not balanced by LCR loading..)
2) basic aluminium cantilevers have resonances causing a boost at anywhere from 11Hz to 16Hz (examples Ed Saunders V15V stylus - 11Hz, Shure & Jico standard elipticals circa 16Hz), high quality aluminiums will place the resonance at 18Hz to 21Hz (examples Pickering Z7500s, Ortofon OM20/30/40) - exotic cantilevers can place the resonance higher (Jico SAS - circa 28kHz, Dynavector Karat 50Khz to 70kHz depending on model)
3) Audio perception is a beast! - amplitude boosts in the very directional higher frequencies can be perceived as broadened soundstage
4) Brightness is not a reflection of a linear boost across the high end - but a reflection of a boost between around 5kHz and 10kHz - boosts above 10kHz don't tend to be perceived as "brightness"
5) a cantilever with a resonance in the lower highs eg: 11kHz - is very likely to sound "Bright" even if the high end above 16kHz drops off dramatically - counter intuitive I know... - So a basic relatively heavy aluminium cantilever in an MC can be a bad thing (assuming you don't like "brightness")
6) A cantilever with a resonance around 16kHz will boost frequencies from around 8kHz (within the brightness range) up to around 32KHz - resulting in both brightness and strong soundstage perception.... the cues for both are boosted.
7) A cantilever with a resonance around 19kHz (eg Pickering 7500) will boost frequencies starting from around 9.5kHz.... so negligible impact on the brightness zone - but substantial impact in the soundstage cues - this is common for many high quality MC's
The very best MM/MI designs are mid inductance - not as low as true low inductance designs - so it does not expose cantilever resonance quite as harshly, but does not depress the high end as much as high inductance designs do. Fit a traditional 6mm or 7mm high quality cantilever to one of these - adjust with the right loading, and you can achieve theoretically very very good results without resorting to technological or engineering extremes....
eg: CA Maestro, V15VMR, Technics EPC100/205, many others
But these are just my ruminations.... and maybe I ate just one hash brownie too many....
bye for now
David
Thanks David,
I'm quoting David's post because this information is invaluable, especially for those considering cantilever substitutions. The stylus type has an influence on the frequency extension and detail, but cantilever resonance is a crucial factor in voicing or re-voicing a cart.
This was brought home to me just the other day. I jury-rigged the Sonus arm (I thought I repaired it, but the best laid plans of mice and men..) and mounted an AT-440/140LC. After things settled down I changed the load to 32K just like as with the original stylus. The 140LC stylus is similar to the 440 except the tip is a nude LC instead of an ML. At one point I had a 152ML on there. That's a beryllium ML and it positively transformed the cart. It doesn't sound bad now, much like the original, but with the 152 it was absolutely first rate. Optimal load changed to around 42K or slightly higher. The 440 may not be considered a world class cart, but with the right stylus and load it really is.
To be honest, I don't know first hand of any cantilever changes other than to exotic types, that make such a dramatic change. With the Virtuoso I got a nice improvement using a AT7V stylus. That's a .2 x .7 nude tip on a tapered cantilever. Griff said, going to a 440MLa stylus was substantial so I guess the tip made a big difference over and above the cantilever. The Maestro stylus is boron/ML so there's little doubt where to go with this.
Any further comments, David?
neo
-
When I get the combination of 1) Time, and 2) my gear back where I can get at it (!) - I have been wanting to do comparisons and measurements where first a single body is used with various styli, and then a single stylus is used while varying body types....
The trouble is finding a "family" of styli and cartridge bodies where the single variable can be changed without something else changing!
I started by focusing on the V15V for which I now have an OEM stylus (loaned by Empirelvr), and SAS stylus, (no ordinary aluminium), I also have various other "ordinary" Shure bodies including the V15RS (identical to the V15VxMR) -
For the V15RS I have the oem beryllium HE stylus, and the SAS - but no ordinary aluminium
In the AT family I have the 440MLa, and the 152LP along with various bodies (440MLa, TK6, 150e, RX1500, etc...) and at least one aftermarket conical stylus for the family.... which I don't believe to be a valid comparison point.... I really should get a shibata or HE on a standard aftermarket stylus (Jico, or perhaps LPGear vividline...)
So far my measurements and comparisons have indicated that the cantilever is the #1 biggest cause of variance - and keep in mind that suspension and compliance go with the stylus as well - (unless you have the skills to do very delicate transfer work - after the sacrifice of a perfectly good ATN15ss stylus I have put that particular approach aside).
Much as I would like to identify the impact of pole laminations - at this point I do not know what to look for, or what to try to measure.... Nothing so far jumps out...
Perhaps I should bite the bullet and spend the $30 on the IEEE paper from JVC about pulse-train measurements of cartridge phase performance.... (this was the first major published work on the topic, before the Ortofon Ortophase papers)
On a related topic... I was re-reading the Stereophile review of the Ortofon MC3000....
In this review it mentions that after "Golden Ear" sessions run by Ortofon determined that the "Golde Ear" fraternity preferred a slight rise of around 2db at 20kHz, they started incorporating this into their cartridge designs.
The earlier MC2000 (not the MC2000mkII) was purported to be perfectly flat (in F/R) - and a wonderfully neutral transducer.
It seems to me that the MC2000, MC200, and MC100 all came out around the same time, (early 80's) before the Ortophase papers, and were aimed at the engineering goal of perfect neutrality - flat frequency response.
After the Ortophase tests (which were based on the MC200 in various modified forms) - things seem to change - I have a strong suspicion that the "Golden Ears" tests which led to the chosen 2db top end rise, and the Ortophase tests (and associated articles) are one and the same.
One thing that was never clarified in those tests was whether Ortofon found a means to seperate phase/frequency effects from amplitude/frequency - my hunch is that they didn't (it would require linear phase filters, and prior to the true digital era this was non-viable). And that therefore the tests conflated phase and amplitude - in the end they concluded that audiophiles preferred a slight top end rise - and started tilting their new models in that direction.
It is interesting that they chose "golden ears" and not experienced recording engineers.... the chosen preferences might have been quite different? (ie: would those with regular access to Master tapes, perhaps choose the more neutral alternative?)
I do keep an eye out on the usual auction site for a stylusless CA body to add to my collection... and to try out with various stylus options based on the ongoing rave reviews - but so far the bidding has always beaten my willingness to spend....
bye for now
David
-
On a related topic... I was re-reading the Stereophile review of the Ortofon MC3000....
In this review it mentions that after "Golden Ear" sessions run by Ortofon determined that the "Golde Ear" fraternity preferred a slight rise of around 2db at 20kHz, they started incorporating this into their cartridge designs.
The earlier MC2000 (not the MC2000mkII) was purported to be perfectly flat (in F/R) - and a wonderfully neutral transducer.
It seems to me that the MC2000, MC200, and MC100 all came out around the same time, (early 80's) before the Ortophase papers, and were aimed at the engineering goal of perfect neutrality - flat frequency response.
After the Ortophase tests (which were based on the MC200 in various modified forms) - things seem to change - I have a strong suspicion that the "Golden Ears" tests which led to the chosen 2db top end rise, and the Ortophase tests (and associated articles) are one and the same.
One thing that was never clarified in those tests was whether Ortofon found a means to seperate phase/frequency effects from amplitude/frequency - my hunch is that they didn't (it would require linear phase filters, and prior to the true digital era this was non-viable). And that therefore the tests conflated phase and amplitude - in the end they concluded that audiophiles preferred a slight top end rise - and started tilting their new models in that direction.
It is interesting that they chose "golden ears" and not experienced recording engineers.... the chosen preferences might have been quite different? (ie: would those with regular access to Master tapes, perhaps choose the more neutral alternative?)
I do keep an eye out on the usual auction site for a stylusless CA body to add to my collection... and to try out with various stylus options based on the ongoing rave reviews - but so far the bidding has always beaten my willingness to spend....
bye for now
David
It's always fascinating to read you opinions or findings on these subjects. Interesting take on Ortofon. They seemed to make it quite clear that all carts have a naturally rising high end (mechanical). Although it might be limited by cantilever/tip performance, or in the case of a HO, inductance, it was the spread of phase nonlinearity to lower octaves that screwed up imaging. Their measurements are convincing and they also assert that it's damping specifically that causes phase problems and HO carts are more heavily damped. Their icing on the cake so to speak was the assertion that the MC200 when damped to flat amplitude response on the high end, didn't image nearly as well due to increased phase discrepancies spreading to lower octaves.
Guess you can't have your cake and eat it too. Maybe if high end resonance is extended out enough, phase errors stay out of band and damping wouldn't be such a problem. I think you'd probably end up with a cart with a very short or nonexistent cantilever, although the Genesis 1000 has response > 100K, but I don't know where HF resonance is.
neo
-
It's all about learning. I'm more interested in your evaluation process. I'd like to know about the cartridges you've evaluated and how you came to the conclusion that they were not worthy. I'm also interested in your current reference. I'm relatively new to the mm world and I have a lot to learn. I know you're interested in the carts inductance, but inductance alone doesn't explain a cart's performance. I'd prefer not to waste my time and money trying to figure out what you already know. I know it's unlikely, but if there was anything I could do to help, I'd surely be open to it.
Sincerely,
Don
I've been thinking about this and your previous question, have I given up the search? That one implies a holy grail cart or some undiscovered "best".
The holy grail doesn't exist or it's numerous carts that many individuals get best results with. If you read over the MM thread you'll have a list of those carts, but it's not entirely definitive. The problem is twofold. First, Raul's conclusions might be right for him, but they are by no means universal. His methodology is so wacked out that it's a wonder he has any credibility. Second, because it's his thread, possibilities could be excluded and erroneous conclusions reached. Because it's basically a selection of many TOTL carts you're bound to get most of the "best".
Examples: The Stanton 981 is highly regarded, but what about the 881? The 881 is higher inductance and might be more forgiving but is a very listenable cart. To some degree it depends on what your looking for.
I had a B & O cart years ago. It was good, but I never owned a MMC-1 or 2. I think there are similarities with a Grace F-9 Ruby with which I'm more familiar?
I'm not in a position now to buy them and find out. That goes for numerous others. The only results that matter are yours.
The AT made carts I've owned and think are best are AT-15/20SS, TK-10ML II, Virtuoso. I think you can get similar results with some vintage AT carts with a stylus substitution. Example, AT-12S and Sa. But many of them are very nice with the right stylus.
We can discuss methodology if you wish.
neo
-
Sounds good. I actually stumbled into the AT-13 series cartridge. I simply tired of chasing Raul's cartridge of the month, and was unwilling to pay the "Raul Premium". I somehow, mistakenly or not, came up with the notion that some of the older AT carts would perform better than their newer models. I found your thread and thought you might be on to the scent. I'd be willing to invest a bit to help complete your work. My current favorite is the LS500, and I know this cartridge has more to offer than my system will be capable of revealing. If it's possible that you haven't already evaluated this one, I'd be willing to lend this one for evaluation.
Don_grb
-
Sounds good. I actually stumbled into the AT-13 series cartridge. I simply tired of chasing Raul's cartridge of the month, and was unwilling to pay the "Raul Premium". I somehow, mistakenly or not, came up with the notion that some of the older AT carts would perform better than their newer models. I found your thread and thought you might be on to the scent. I'd be willing to invest a bit to help complete your work. My current favorite is the LS500, and I know this cartridge has more to offer than my system will be capable of revealing. If it's possible that you haven't already evaluated this one, I'd be willing to lend this one for evaluation.
Don_grb
LS500? Fascinating! Don't sell yourself short. I think you might have something big to contribute.
I think you're right about some of the older AT models, but it depends on priorities. In general, IMO some degree of listenability was sacrificed for higher output. Carts like the AT-12, 13E(a) and those early ones with 1200 ohm impedance and 4.2mV out, seem easier to take in their orig form and like Timeltel said in his review of the 13Ea/155LC, much to offer. His description made me want to try a 15/20SS stylus on an old 12E I picked up, although I haven't tried that yet.
The current TOTL, the 150MLX - This has good potential but might require careful loading. I suspect the high impedance could be problematic. Some users measure a rise from 5K up as if capacitance loading was much too high. The cart has admirably low inductance so I figure impedance must be the problem. Set- up and loaded properly it seems to be very detailed and dynamic. BTW, the budget AT-100E has the identical generator in a plastic body, and costs around $80. The stock stylus is similar to a reg CA or 95E except it's a 100 series and the ATN150MLX or a 155LC etc, will fit.
Do you have the spec sheet or any specific info on the LS500? Plug type? Not a whole lot is known about the LS series. I've never heard one. All I know is the LS300 has 4.2mV (same as Precept 440), response to 26K with a .4 x .7 tip and max VTF is 2g. Maybe you've found the Precept counterpart.
If it's your current favorite you might want to think about it before you loan it out. Please tell us about the LS500.
neo
-
No worries, I've got three bodies. I'm not so adept at figuring out the property loading, and the compliance is a little off for at least one of my arms. I have a slightly lighter arm that I'm going to try it on. I don't have much in the way of specifications, but I'll see what I can dig up! That's part of the reason for asking for your help. If I can figure out if it's worth it, I'd be willing to attempt some sort of upgrade for the stylus/cantilever.
Best wishes,
Don
-
Okay, we can figure it out together, or separately depending how you look at it.
I looked up the LpGear replacement stylus and it's an ATN13Ex substitution. So that means it's a round plug and came with an aluminum cantilever?
With 4.2mV it's probably either the same motor as the AT-12,13 etc. or the Precept. You could determine that with a digital volt meter (presumably). If you have one, put it on the 2000 ohm resistance scale and measure the resistance between the + and - pins on either channel. If it reads 700 ohms or more, it's probably the same as the 13E. If it reads less than 500 ohms it could be the same as Precept. You can't go wrong either way. If it's a 13E type, you could fit it with an exotic stylus and get results similar to Timeltel with his 13Ea/155LC. It might not be the ultimate, but it sounds eminently listenable to me. On the other hand, all the old time top AT generators have impedance of around 500 ohms - AT-12S, Sa, 14S, Sa, 15/20 series, and low inductance. What's surprising about Precept is higher output like the 12,13, and low inductance/resistance. BTW, the only round plug exotic stylus available is the 20SS - beryllium nude square shank shibata. Timeltel transplanted the 155LC into a round plug. For most med mass arms the 152LC might be a better choice.
With the original stylus VTF should probably be between 1.5 and 1.8g. I imagine it sounds pretty good at 47K. All ATs should load at < 200pF. That's arm wire + cables + preamp.
Thanks for the generous offer. I'll send you a PM.
neo
-
Neo,
Two of the samples measured out at about 1200 ohms.
Sorry,
Don
-
Don Grb,
Still a nice motor with good potential I think, if not the ultimate. You might want to measure the channel to channel resistance between the samples and use the one that matches closest. If that is a round plug (sometimes AT reused model numbers) you could look for one of the other models mentioned above and use the 20SS stylus on either or both. You might have to trim some plastic on the sides - the wings, for it to fit. Maybe you can find an old 12S body and do some comparisons. An exotic (beryllium in this case) stylus is the key to top performance on any AT.
I don't know what other carts you have but you said that the LS500 is your current favorite. If you can pick up an ATN20SS (tip) or do a transplant like Timeltel, you can tell us the results. You might want to look for one of those 500 ohm bodies. I don't know if you have any inclination to embrace the dark side and join the ISTT (Intergalactic Stylus Transplant Team), but it's loads of fun and can get quite expensive if you break an exotic stylus. Our slogan is: Have your cart be all that it can be. Explore unknown generators and go where no stylus has gone before. Join the ISTT !!
neo
-
The question of what makes a great (MM/MI) generator still remains to be answered...
we know that sophisticated innards (laminations or Hot Pressed Ferrite) apparently reduce high frequency losses...
I do not claim to understand the physics behind this reduction in HF losses.... I would love to get a decent comprehensible explanation...
The construction techniques are:
1) Lamination of the poles - apparently the more sheets are laminated and the thinner they are the better the effect - Nagaoka have detailed some of this in their catalogues.... their TOTL MP50/500 has more and thinner laminations than the 30/300, and the 10/11/100/110 have the fewest laminations of the thickest material.
So not all laminated pole cartridges are equal! (presumably different AT models will have similar variations? - how do we find out?)
2) Hot Pressed Ferrite - Technics advertised this construction method for its TOTL EPC100's and EPC250's - in the lower end EPC202/23/etc... they used laminated cores.
So is HPF better than laminations? or is HPF better than top end laminations but not lower end laminations?
What would the difference be?
3) Slit / Split Poles, introduced by Ortofon with the SuperOM series and used ever since in their upper cartridges, it is claimed to have a similar effect within their VMS type systems as laminations and HPF are claimed to have in the MM setups...
Might be worth chasing down matched pairs of cartridges with and without laminations to see what the influence of the laminations are - are there such beasts?
bye for now
David
-
David,
As an end user there's much of this construction we don't know, or don't know much about, but is this necessary knowledge to distinguish a Maestro from an AT-95 or a TK10ML from a TK1? We might be influenced by our preconceived notions (A can't be as good as B), but in the end the truth of the difference in presentation reveals itself. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic in saying that. Each individual has system related parameters and personal priorities that are preferred. But there is also common agreement about the better performers, if not the best.
I'm not saying this to make a case for ignorance of these construction techniques, just trying to get some perspective. There are parameters of AT construction I know little about, and in trying to correlate specs to performance there seems to be gaps of knowledge. I assumed that lack of PCC wire accounted for AT-95 higher impedance over CA, but could laminations be a factor? I suspect all the coils are wound in a similar fashion regardless of wire and magnets are standardized within a series, in this case 3400. I also have no doubt that AT makes the entire CA cart, except maybe the wood) and V2 was ordered with stronger magnets.
I don't know that much about Nagaoka. The specs tend to put me off, but is the MP-50/500 lower impedance because of laminations? Impedance vs DC resistance seems to be a factor with AT. I wonder if this is a factor in general with all HO carts?
neo
-
I don't think laminations affect impedance (or inductance)... I think that is coil driven...
But I have been thinking about output levels magnet sizes and the magnetic "circuit" involved in a cartridge....
Seems to me that the laminations and such are intended to provide a higher level of "headroom" - with large or powerful magnets, the magnetic circuit can perhaps get saturated, in which case you start seeing a loss of HF.. (or rather the HF signal comes in at a lower amplitude.
Most TOTL MM designs have historically been lower output... (and their very closely related mid range cousins - with interchangeable styli between the two - had higher output...) - and perhaps this was done intentionally to keep the magnetic circuit from saturating and entering its non-linear zone - thereby ensuring HF extension, and reduced harmonic distortion, etc...
Smaller magnets do have lower mass - but that reduction of mass near the pivot point is not major - perhaps the really important thing is the saturation level of the core, and keeping well below it?
Just another set of musings
bye for now
David
-
Seems to me this started with 4-ch carts with intentionally small coils (inductance) for extended response. I would guess that the same magnets would result in 2.7mV for the AT12S and 4.2mV for the 13Ea.
It seems that as the years rolled by more priority was given to high output. This also seems true of other companies like Ortofon.
neo
-
David,
I forgot to mention - magnet strength effects impedance. Check out Maestro V2.
http://www.clearaudio.de/_de/tan_Maestro%20V2.php
neo
-
Hi Folks,
do we know for a fact that the V2 is different electrically to the AT95?
With the V1 people measured the DC resistance and found the V1 to be substantially lower resistance than the AT95, has one of you folks actually measured the DC resistance of the V2 to compare to the V1 and AT95.... the DC resistance was the giveaway that the V1 was different to the AT95.... the impedance at 1kHz was the same... as were the other body specs...
I know that Neo for one experimented with potting and modding the AT95 - and found that it could not match the V1.
bye for now
David
-
David,
I forgot to mention - magnet strength effects impedance. Check out Maestro V2.
http://www.clearaudio.de/_de/tan_Maestro%20V2.php
I am not convinced by the marketing blurb...
An article here on permanent magnet generators http://www.windstreampower.com/documents/EFFICIENCY.doc
It talks about generator efficiency (for power generation) - in our case we want an ultra efficient generator to get the purest possible signal...
Relevant sections from the document:
Magnetic gap - the smaller the clearance between armature poles and magnets, the better the magnetic flux path and the higher the efficiency.
(Note that the Shure V15VMR had the "narrow shank" stylus mounting to allow smaller clearance between poles and magnets... the later unlaminated and more economically built V15VxMR had the wider shank...)
Winding resistance - the lower the internal electrical resistance of the winding, the less energy is dissipated as heat that results from current flow through the winding resistance. Accordingly, the larger the magnet wire diameter in the armature windings, the lower the resistance and the higher the electrical efficiency, but the larger the generator (the same number of turns of the larger wire gauge are required to generate the same output voltage).
(Note: - this is the area of interest and difference between an AT95 and a CA-V1... the V1 has lower resistance and therefore reduced losses, these may well be level related - still researching this)
Some more raw data:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_circuit
I need to read through this reference... and get my mind around the magnetic relationships... but an item of interest:
Most importantly, magnetic circuits are nonlinear; the reluctance in a magnetic circuit is not constant, as resistance is, but varies depending on the magnetic field. At high magnetic fluxes the ferromagnetic materials used for the cores of magnetic circuits saturate, limiting the magnetic flux, so above this level the reluctance increases rapidly. The reluctance also increases at low fluxes. In addition, ferromagnetic materials suffer from hysteresis so the flux in them depends not just on the instantaneous MMF but also on the history of MMF. After the source of the magnetic flux is turned off, remanent magnetism is left in ferromagnetic circuits, creating a flux with no MMF.
I need to get my mind around the physics in there to work out whether in fact as you claim, increased magnet strength impacts DC resistance (my initial instinct is it does not...)
Also what impact DC resistance has on the signal / the magnetic circuit / generator....
bye for now
David
-
David,
I'll look over your info when I get a chance. It's great that you have some time now to explore these matters.
I tried to link to the specifications page for Maestro V2. If you go back to that link and click on specs, you'll see that output was raised to 4.2mV and impedance is now 700 ohms. My assertion is based on the assumption that CA changed nothing but magnet strength and increased the wood on the outside. If you look at the rest of the specs and those of the rest of the line, I think that's a safe bet.
I don't think gap could be changed, but I really don't know for sure. I guess AT optimized this years ago and for CA to reduce the gap would require AT retooling the production line for CA generators? Makes it seem unlikely in a true moving magnet design.
The difference between DC resistance and impedance might shed some light on this subject. AT95 has slightly smaller coils than CA - inductance is 400mH as opposed to 420, yet output is the same as V1 and impedance is 2800 ohms. AT95 doesn't have PCOCC wire - the only difference I'm aware of.
Think it's possible CA doesn't list impedance, only a value within 10% of DC ? Seeing how they changed the specs from top to bottom on V1 (within normal tolerances), I wouldn't doubt it. But I really can't make such assertions, I'm at my level of understanding here. I don't even know how those two carts could have the same output, share the same magnets, and 95 have less inductance. Maybe they're so close that output is virtually the same.
neo
-
I think I've figured out, in a cursory way, some of what's going on with AT spec parameters.
From Phase thread:
"Think I've found the answer, at least to the basic question relating to phase.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/imped.html
From the bottom of the page:
"The units for all quantities are ohms. A negative phase angle implies that the impedance is capacitive, and a positive phase angle implies net inductive behavior."
To take that a step further, the greater the inductance, the larger the difference between DC resistance and impedance. It seems that with AT MMs, the amount of that difference defines an "ultimate" performance parameter. Favorite old generators had 2.7mV out, 350mH, and approx. 500 ohm resistance and impedance. When output is boosted either the inductance and/or impedance is increased. I don't understand how the 150MLX has 350mH and 2.3K impedance, except for it's output - 4mV, as opposed to 2.7mV for the 20SS. CA increased inductance (420mH) about the maximum that allows both slightly higher output and close values for DC and impedance.
Why can the V2 Maestro have 4.2mV and 700 ohm impedance and the 150 have 4mV and 2.3Kohm ? I suggest that there's a maximum output for a given size coil to maintain that desirable relationship between DC and impedance. For 350mH that output is around 3mV or slightly less. For 420mH it maxes out around 4.2mV.
neo
-
Over and above theoretical ideas, is there an inference that the AT150MLX is really the quality equal to the CA Virtuoso/Maestro
and at half the price or less, really a much better buy? What other units would approach this quality level?
-
Over and above theoretical ideas, is there an inference that the AT150MLX is really the quality equal to the CA Virtuoso/Maestro
and at half the price or less, really a much better buy? What other units would approach this quality level?
Hi GL,
No, not at this level, assuming the CA has a comparable stylus. That's not to say the 150 isn't an excellent cart, but it's generally agreed (at least by the MM thread fanatics) that the "ultimate" performers are the ones with approx. 500 ohm DC/impedance. The ones I previously listed, AT-12S, 14S, 15/20SS. Add to that AT-23 to 25 and some Signet models TK-10ML, TK 9, and TK7LCa?
Don't expect to buy an old 12S with an aluminum cantilever and a bonded shibata, and get these results, but it should be really nice. The only round plug stylus with an exotic cantilever still available is the 20SS and it's at least $200. I recently saw a 15SLa on fleabey and it wasn't all that expensive. Add around $200 for the stylus and you've got a great cart.
I don't know of any modern AT that has impedance close to DC figure. The 150 might be the best in that respect with 2.3Kohm. The 440 has 3.2Kohm.
In spite of all this the 150 is a venerable performer. It might require more careful loading. All ATs need less than 200pF total capacitance load, but the 150 like the 440 might benefit from loading down, especially if shunt capacitance is high. Usually a value between 32K (440) and 42K will do the job. But it depends on your system and taste. LpGear sells the 100E - around $80. Its generator is identical to the 150 except it has a plastic body and a bonded (.4 x .7 ?) on a straight alum cantilever. Get a 150 stylus and you have a light weight 150MLX. Add to that a Vista phono stage for custom loading or get some 400K resistors parallel to net 42K.
I think those old 12E, 13E etc carts with 1200 ohm impedance have good potential, but still the same problem with replacement styli for round plugs. There's no getting around an exotic cantilever/stylus for top performance.
neo
-
Perfect timing Neo, I'm considering the transplant for my LS500. How much work would be required to make the 20SS fit. The LS500 uses the "round plug". Or, what advice would you give to someone attempting to transplant a Beryllium cantilever?
Don
-
Hi Don GRB,
No transplant required. The ATN20SS is a round plug. You might have to trim the plastic, but it's less risky than a transplant. I expect you'll get nice results like Timeltel and his 13Ea with a 155LC stylus. The 155LC and 152LC are modern 100 series. They would require a transplant.
neo
-
I referred to my measurements database....
here are some interesting specs of the relationship between DC Resistance and Inductance in mH
(based on multiple measurements of different exemplars of some of these, assume +/-0.2 due to manufacturing variation)
Grado GF3 10.5 ohm/mH
Grado Gold1 9.2
Technics EPC205mk3 2.9
AT Signet TK10 2.8
Shure V15V 2.6
Shure ML140HE 2.6
Shure 1000e 2.6
Shure V15Vx 2.4
Shure Me75P 2.4
Pickering XSP3003 2.2
Ortofon 530 1.9
AT440MLa 1.6
Ortofon OM 1.6
ADC XLM 1.6
AT Signet MR5 1.4
AT Signet TK6 1.4
AT142LP 1.4
Stanton 500 1.4
AT150ea 1.4
AT14S 1.3
AT13ea 1.2
AT Precept 110 1.1
AT12sa 1.1
AT Signet TK7su 1.1
AT20SLa 1.1
Grace F8 1.0
AT92/95 0.9
Shure M70B 0.9
I should have a V1 CA body in the next few weeks - then I will measure and add it to the database...
I am not seeing a quality trend I this ratio...
I don't have the tools to measure impedance as opposed to DC R.
But thinking about it, impedance is a reactive parameter, as the frequency rises the resistance increases...
this will subtly reduce the high end (possibly balancing out cantilever resonance rise)... so higher impedance = increased reduction in high end (very subtle though!)
What may be of greater relevance is the increased output - if the base generator core construction (pole thickness, laminations, etc..) remains the same, then increased output level (voltage) implies an increased likelihood of saturation.... as the signal approaches saturation, one would expect the high frequencies to get depressed more and more the closer it gets to saturation - so with increased V there would also be a compression of the high end, where the lower level subtle details would have increased level (due to increased output V) - and the HF peaks would be increased to a lesser degree as saturation of the core starts to kick in.
This would have the serendipitous effect of subtly bringing forward the HF details, without obviously increasing volume (improved soundstage? ) - it is I would suggest, a conscious departure from true neutrality, and also a little underhanded, as it is all done by sleight of hand under the covers, while the main Frequency response still appears linear...
Lots of recording engineers do selective compression of particular frequency bands to subtly highlight certain aspects of a recording (an audiophile no-no!) - are CA doing the same electro-magnetically by upping V out?
A larger (heavier) core, with more laminations would remove this non-linearity, especially if combined with lower strength magnets... (it would also be lower impedance, although DC R is still set by the coils and the wire diameter)
The AT21/22/23/24/25 and TK9/10 are relatively heavy cartridges which also have low inductance and low DC R - these are generally considered to be the all time best MM's made by AT.... DC R is 240ohm (measured), Impedance is 550ohm (spec)
I am still looking at these specs and seeking to understand the interactions/relationships...
bye for now
David
-
David,
I suspect that it's the relationship between all three, inductance, DC, and impedance that matters.
Isn't impedance calculated? Resistance at 1KHz combined with inductance and capacitance? This link has the formulas (same as above):
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/imped.html
This is just my observation based on AT models/performance. If the impedance is high, then there's possibly too much inductance for a given resistance.
High impedance tends to sound brighter, an increase in high end, not reduction. Example: AT440 - 3200 ohm impedance. I wonder if phase angle has something to do with this.
Interesting speculation about output and coil saturation. I don't know if that's a factor but in general, the race for higher output is where the performance level started going downhill. Except for CA, all the best ATs were < 3mV. Like Goldfinger II - .9mV, higher output is often perceived as better. I guess the increased hysteresis distortion/higher output sounds more like digital?
neo
-
Yes but the AT440 sounds bright because of its stylus - not its generator - fit it with a ATN150MLx and it doesn't sound bright....
There are a couple of resonances in the ATN440MLa that tend to make it "bright" - these are not present in the ATN152LP - I sometimes run the 440 body with the ATN152LP stylus - and it is greatly improved .... no longer requires loading down to tame the brightness....
Phase on the other hand may be a factor as phase changes at the resonance points - and there are two resonances with the first being around 13kHz (from memory) and the second around 16kHz - both well within the audible range - and the first influencing/boosting output from as low as 6kHz.
But I agree that high output should be looked on with substantial suspicion - the very best MM's of all brands have tended towards lower output, and sometimes much much lower output (XLZ7500...)
-
There are so many factors it's hard to know exactly what's doing what. I have a 440, and with an ATN152ML it was still slightly bright, but nowhere near as with the ATN440ML. I think cantilever resonances is only part of the story, maybe the greater part.
Phase anomalies at secondary cantilever resonances seems like uncharted territory. No doubt something is happening but nothing like 180o phase reversal at primary high frequency resonance.
Take away 440 cantilever resonance and the generator still isn't a "super" AT. Either is the 150MLX. High impedance is indicative of too much inductance for a given generator. I guess there's no going back (in production) to a lower output cart like a TK10ML or 20SS. AT should make a generator similar to the CA but with slightly less inductance, more like the AT95 (400mH) but with PCOCC wire. Put that in a 100 series body and slap a ATN150MLX on, and it should better CA, that is if impedance is low.
neo
-
For those contemplating a transplant, I think this description might be helpful.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&openflup&10200&4#10200
Regards Griffithds: As I've found the reports about the Precept intriguing, a modest amount of research indicates the AT-13Ea at 4.2mV output/1200 ohm output impedance is comparable. An exception is the 13Ea's metal mounting shroud rather than the Precept's plastic.
Purchased a 13Ea with a broken cantilever, mounted on a low mass AT waffle-pierced style headshell. An ATN-155LC cantilever transplanted to the original AT-13Ea grip results in the appropriate VTA/SRA, self-resonance of the cartridge is minimal.
Exceptionally solid center image, pleasing layering, depth & channel balance. Soundstage is in front of the speakers. Depth develops from well forward to a front center stage, an unusually lively hall effect ambience results, speaker location is removed as a source of distraction. Piano strings resonate & background vocals/subtle nuance emerge. Response is smoothly developed, there are no noticeable peaks.
Bass notes retain individual identity, presented with conviction. Speed in rise time and decay is gratifying. Midrange/hf grain is minimal.
Don, in attempting the cantilever exchange begin by removing as much of the compliance screw sealant as possible. Be sure to use a correctly sized screwdriver and use it to clear sealant from the screw slot, Turn the screw slightly & reverse repeatedly until the screw travels the necessary amount. One to one & one-half turns should release the cantilever. Pushing from the back with a pin rather than trying to pull it out is recommended.
Insert the cantilever and with the compliance screw turned upwards, view and align the V-magnets from the rear to confirm azimuth relative to a horizontal surface of the grip. Holding the grip between thumb and middle finger, apply pressure with fore-finger directly in line with the cantilever axis. Double check azimuth and tighten the compliance screw. This may require more pressure than anticipated on the first effort. Too little will result in the magnets contacting the poles when VTF is applied. It may be best on the initial trial to apply a small amount of pressure, test and then gradually increase until distortion at the desired VTF is eliminated.
Initial concerns are that VTA/SRA are correct, confirming azimuth after tightening the compliance screw is obviously important. I can't speak for the Precept but the 13Ea Frankencart impressed me enough (especially soundstage) that the initial example was sent to Halcro for confirmation, Henry wrote that he was pleased with the cart. Good luck &
Peace,
The 155 is of the 100 series (modern), going into a round plug 13Ea. I don't know if anyone successfully transplanted an exotic 100 series into a 3400 series (CA) plug.
Don Griff,
You said you're sending one to Soundsmith. Did you attempt an exotic transplant into a CA plug?
neo
-
From the same thread as the previous post, here's something about cantilevers from J Carr:
From the perspective of a cartridge designer, the most commonly used figure-of-merit for a given material is propagation velocity - how rapidly it transmits sound. And this is determined by the material's specific gravity (lower is better), and Young's modulus (higher is better).
With this target in mind, the best material is diamond. Although its specific gravity is a bit high at 3.52, it is so stiff that its 16,770m/s propagation velocity is the greatest among known materials.
Second best is boron. Its 2.3 specific gravity is lower than aluminum, and it is quite stiff as well, giving a propagation velocity of 13,500m/s.
Third is beryllium. Although a specific gravity of 1.8 makes it the lightest among typical cantilever materials, it is also considerably less stiff than boron, which brings its propagation velocity to 12,300m/s.
Fourth is ruby / sapphire. Its 4.0 specific gravity is high, but it is saved by having a Young's modulus which is higher than beryllium but poorer than boron. Its propagation velocity drops down to 9400m/s.
5th is aluminum. A 2.7 specific gravity is reasonably low, but its Young's modulus is also low, resulting in a propagation velocity of 5200m/s.
6th is titanium. Specific gravity of 4.5 is very high, and Young's modulus is not so high, which in concert reduce the propagation velocity to 5160m/s.
However, the last two materials are ductile and not brittle, which means that the joint between stylus and cantilever is less reliant on glue. Any glue that I am aware of has a slower propagation velocity than even hardened aluminum, so to be able to have a thinner layer of glue between the stylus and cantilever, or no layer, is a distinct advantage which partially counteracts the other limitations of aluminum and titanium.
Also, I am reasonably sure that beryllium production in Japan has either stopped or at best is much smaller than it was in the 1970s and 80s. Since beryllium is poisonous and producing it results in environmentally hazardous wastes; regulations have become more strict, and public opposition more vocal. Various cartridge designers including myself have avoided beryllium because of the environmetal impact.
neo
-
As I recall, that posting led to various people asking for retips with the needle press mounted in Aluminium - with very positive results...
What JCarr did not discuss in that posting, was the impact of shape and mass - that is to say, in tube form, there is increased rigidity, and decreased mass - so aluminium in tube form gets a leg up the scale vs others in rod form.
Furthermore if it is tapered tube then there is a further improvement.
In the 80's there were diamond and sapphire tubes as well as boron and berillium tubes...
Now everything except aluminium is in rod form.
Audio Technica never used exotic tubes, their TOTL were always exotic rods, and the next notch down tapered aluminium.
The speed of propagation in the material vs rigidity (reduction in flex = reduction in distortion) vs effective mass - with little or no idea of which has the greatest impact on sound and in what way...
-
Actually, this is a more recent post from J Carr - a few weeks ago.
I think I like beryllium with AT carts, maybe because it's the lightest.
neo
-
Neo,
"Don Griff,
You said you're sending one to Soundsmith. Did you attempt an exotic transplant into a CA plug?"
I have installed the AT 150MLX stylus and find it not as big an improvement as I though I would when it is compared with the AT 440MLa stylus. There are things about each of them that is better than the other. The MLa has a more relaxed presentation where as the MLX has a presentation that is more in your face. I think the better buy for transplanting into this CA is the MLa stylus. When the MLa is in the Virtuoso, it sounds like the MLX in the Maestro. The MLX in the Virtuoso sounds a little bright. I am beginning to think that the extra wood that is on the Maestro sort of over damps what is being presented to it by the stylus.
I haven't got around to sending anything off to SS yet. Other priorities at the moment. New TT and arm. (New to me)
Regards,
Don
-
Neo,
"Don Griff,
You said you're sending one to Soundsmith. Did you attempt an exotic transplant into a CA plug?"
I have installed the AT 150MLX stylus and find it not as big an improvement as I though I would when it is compared with the AT 440MLa stylus. There are things about each of them that is better than the other. The MLa has a more relaxed presentation where as the MLX has a presentation that is more in your face. I think the better buy for transplanting into this CA is the MLa stylus. When the MLa is in the Virtuoso, it sounds like the MLX in the Maestro. The MLX in the Virtuoso sounds a little bright. I am beginning to think that the extra wood that is on the Maestro sort of over damps what is being presented to it by the stylus.
I haven't got around to sending anything off to SS yet. Other priorities at the moment. New TT and arm. (New to me)
Regards,
Don
Thanks Don,
This is very interesting. Over-damped is how Raul described the sound of Maestro (V1) compared to Virtuoso, although he wound up with boron/micro on the Virtuoso. The thing about beryllium is that it's more flexible than boron, but more controlled than aluminum. With it's low mass it would have the best transient response (?), and apparently the near perfect comprise between warmth and resolution. Too bad beryllium/ML is now virtually unobtainium.
Now all the top CA V2 have more extensive wood like V1 Maestro. I wonder if this damping is more compatible with the higher output. I suspect David is right about higher output and the possibility of compression causing some to perceive "formerly hidden detail".
Well, you've once again broken new ground Darth Griff. You've successfully transplanted an exotic cantilevered stylus into a 3400 plug, from a 100 series.
This is the transplant where both David and I broke beryllium cantilevers. You get the Captain Quirk Award for going where no man has gone before!!
Kudos for Darth Griff. :rock: :thumb:
neo
-
Whereas I am permanently scarred by the experience - snapping an intact beryllium cantilever in half :duh: :cry: :evil:
-
Dlaloum, Neobop,
I went very slowly and did not in anyway, try to change the angle of the cantilever. I remembering Timeltel mentioning the same thing when he did his AT13Ea Frankenstein. Just making adjustments in VTA using arm height. I'm beginning to think that the cantilever material is just a very small part of the overall design. I have always thought beryllium or borron cantilevered cartridges were the best, but I am now beginning to understand that perhaps it's not just the material, but how it is executed in the design. A short, thin, tapered aluminum cantilever with a quality ML tip, can be better than either a beryllium or boron cantilever. Perhaps it's the care and execution of the design that matters most.
Just my 2 cents!
Best regards to both of you,
Don
-
Always comes down to "all things being equal"....
Tapered beryllium foil.would.be.nice....
Just realised this evening that I can fit my Shure m97xe SAS to my grave f8 body.... R= 550 Z=500, I also have Shure bodies where z=500 but r=1550..... An interesting comparison.... Measurements should be identical, but how will the s pound differ?
-
Dlaloum, Neobop,
I went very slowly and did not in anyway, try to change the angle of the cantilever. I remembering Timeltel mentioning the same thing when he did his AT13Ea Frankenstein. Just making adjustments in VTA using arm height. I'm beginning to think that the cantilever material is just a very small part of the overall design. I have always thought beryllium or borron cantilevered cartridges were the best, but I am now beginning to understand that perhaps it's not just the material, but how it is executed in the design. A short, thin, tapered aluminum cantilever with a quality ML tip, can be better than either a beryllium or boron cantilever. Perhaps it's the care and execution of the design that matters most.
Just my 2 cents!
Best regards to both of you,
Don
Funny how that works out. The ATN150MLX sounds much better in the 440 or 150 (I presume), and the ATN440MLa is better in the CA. David always talked about cantilever resonances and interaction with frequency response and electrical parameters, but voicing a cart is even more complex. I think cantilever design is a big part. Mass, rigidity, and flexibility determine much of what we perceive to be the "character" of the sound. A tapered alum cantilever will generally react more to groove modulations and might sound more robust rather than controlled. The orig Agon review of the Virtuoso had a Soundsmith level 1 / tapered alum-nude elliptical.
Ironically, my first transplant was a 440MLa into a 95 plug. It looked perfect. I had the cart mounted in a removable headshell. I was headed for the turntable when the phone rang. It slipped out of my hand and landed wrong side down. :duh:
Glad you got it together Griff. Makes it a little easier for me.
Regards,
neo
-
Neo, Dlaloum,
A few posts back, I mentioned that I was going to use the new AT150MLX stylus and install in its original body, thereby allowing me to use the AT160ML stylus I had in that body (the AT150MLX body), for transplanting purposes. After careful comparison between the AT160ML styli and the AT150MLX styli, I decided not to risk damaging the AT160ML stylus. It is a better styli than the AT150MLX. The highest frequency are more extended and a little cleaner. Noticeable is the best way to define the difference. This surprised me. I had thought that they were probably the same cantilever/stylus. Gold coated cantilever and all!
Regards,
Don
-
Curious - just checked the specs - they are even the same compliance...
You may simply have lucked onto a better exemplar?
I have 3 Jico SAS styli which I have measure frequency response for up to 50kHz...
Jico claims them to be identical - the F/R plot says otherwise, with one stylus in particular being an "outlier"
But the better two styli are similar enough that short of detail measurement with the right tools, telling them apart would be well nigh impossible.
-
Here is the type of battery I am talking about:
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Hotsale-6800mAh-DC-12V-Super-Rechargeable-Lithium-ion-Battery-Pack-/130909767214?pt=AU_Electronics_Batteries_Chargers&hash=item1e7ad4862e&_uhb=1
-
I thought the 160 was beryllium and the 150 boron.
That would explain the preference.
neo
-
Neobop,
I had not noticed but you are correct. One is Beryllium and the other Boron. My preference has always been Beryllium. The fact that Axel (the German re tipper), does a Beryllium cantilever is sort of the reason I hesitate sending something to SS.
I must admit that this 160Ml is my all time favorite cantilever/stylus. Even better ( to me), than the AT155/152MLa! I wish I had the extra funds to buy and store up a few before their gone forever.
Thanks Neo, for clearing that up.
Best regards,
Don
-
Griff,
Did you try the ATN160 on the 150 (or 100) body? Seems to me that's the best 100 series body made today. The 160 motor is the same as the 440.
It would also fit later Signets, TK7LCa etc.
neo
-
Midst this isoteric conversation, I removed the Garrottstein from my 1228 and remounted my AT95HE, Blue with the
black dot on the shaft (Jico?) and am playing some Dvorak, quite impressed with the top to bottom sound including
obscure details and signal to noise ratio (perhaps the recording and not the stylus). I really can't tell my 3400 and 95
bodies apart but from where the volume knob is, think I have the lower output 95....Having sold my Virtuoso body(s),
I can only go from memory rather than a direct comparison. Guess I wouldn't have sold them if they had sounded
better. Honestly, the Shibata stylus I transplanted on one may have had a hair more detail, but this unit now playing
is way above its class and perhaps the reason Stereophile has listed it in the past on the class 4 list, even with the
oem (green) stylus. My AT7V may have slightly more bottom but again is a notch or two up in the food chain......
Incidently, talking about shaft material boron etc., I notice my Goldring 2200-2300s have a "coated" or "plated"
shaft which is apparently done to assume more exotic qualities? The Vendor ads show this, but nothing in the
brochure furnished with the unit... Back to the AT95, it would be interesting if someone could duplicate the 3 piece
wooden CA block and sell it as a kit for the 95. AT might have to put on another line of production!
-
Neo,
Are you sure about that AT160 generator being the same as the 440? I ask because I have been looking for a AT160 body!
They're just not out there. I have both of the 440 bodies, the ML and the MLa. I have only ran the AT160 ML stylus on the AT 150MLX body. so when you say, "have I tried it on the 150", I must reply that I have "only" ran it on the 150. I bought the AT160 (to replace the 90 degree bent original 150MLX stylus), when I accidently caught the edge of the record while cueing up. I do have a Signet TK 7CLa with original stylus and Neo, I like it just the way it is! (grin)
Regards,
Don
-
Going to jump in now as I have some history with the AT95e Linn Sondek modified. It was
said that they used to use super glue on the internals or some such. I copied a thread from one
of the Linn forums that states exactly what they did. Anyway, I can say that mounted on a
Rega Planar 2 that was mounted on a weight bearing wall it sounded the best I've ever heard.
It sounded like live music to me. I've never been able to duplicate it even with better
equipment. I was only able to enjoy my audio nirvana for a few weeks as I got married and
had children. I'm still searching for that nirvana. What amazes me is the equipment I had
was cheap. A Hafler DH101 pre, DH220 amp, the above mentioned Rega TT, Audioquest
speaker cable ~30ft. and some cheapo interconnects. Oh yea Cervin Vega speakers. Now
there was nothing "HiFi" about any of those pieces yet I was in audio nirvana. To this day I
can't figure out what was so special about any of those pieces or the set up. I still think
it has to do with isolating the Rega TT on the load bearing wall and the fact that all I did was
swap the direction of one speaker cable for everything to come together and create this nirvana
I once enjoyed. Hence I believe that cable direction matters and Linn did have a finger on the
pulse of what it takes to make music. To even further affirm my belief I remember that I was
only able to turn up the volume to 12:00 with listener fatigue soon setting in. After I turned
one speaker cable around I knew it immediately and was able to turn the volume up to 3:00
or more and even stepping outside live music seemed to be eminating from my living room.
Sorry for the ramble. Just trying to duplicate the nirvana I had before and maybe hopefully
learn something to pass along to others on how it can be done for cheap. :thumb:
-
Hi GL,
Remind me please, what stylus in your Garrottstein, a Shure?
I have my modified 95/Jico HE set up and it sounds really nice. I know exactly what you mean.
I've never been partial to Goldring carts, but I'm not really that familiar with most of them. The 2200/2300 are the current models?
I did hear the old top of the MM line (1042?) once and it had a nice sound in that set-up. The 2300 has a tapered alum cantilever w/coating? What color is the coating, silver?
The AT tops are one piece and ebony is the wood of choice. It would be a ton of work to make tops for them. I suspect you would need a mini CNC type machine to do it right. It would be a nice project, but without the right tools it might be easier to just by a used Marantz/CA.
neo
-
Neo,
Are you sure about that AT160 generator being the same as the 440? I ask because I have been looking for a AT160 body!
They're just not out there. I have both of the 440 bodies, the ML and the MLa. I have only ran the AT160 ML stylus on the AT 150MLX body. so when you say, "have I tried it on the 150", I must reply that I have "only" ran it on the 150. I bought the AT160 (to replace the 90 degree bent original 150MLX stylus), when I accidently caught the edge of the record while cueing up. I do have a Signet TK 7CLa with original stylus and Neo, I like it just the way it is! (grin)
Regards,
Don
Griff,
Yep, 5.0mV, 490mH, 3.2Kohm. Don't waste your time and money. The following carts (and more), have identical specs:
440, 120E, 125LC, 130E, 132EP, 140LC, 142LP, 152LP (ML), 155LC, 160ML, 450. This was the go-to HO motor for many moons at AT.
The carts with ML preceding the number, ML150, ML170 are different - closer to the 150MLX body - 4mV, 2.5Kohm. The 150MLX is slightly better with 2.3Kohm, 350mH, methinks. Admittedly, there's almost no difference, except the cantilever. I think you probably already have the best generators AT ever made which includes CA and the older 500/550 ohm models.
neo
-
Going to jump in now as I have some history with the AT95e Linn Sondek modified. It was
said that they used to use super glue on the internals or some such. I copied a thread from one
of the Linn forums that states exactly what they did. Anyway, I can say that mounted on a
Rega Planar 2 that was mounted on a weight bearing wall it sounded the best I've ever heard.
It sounded like live music to me. I've never been able to duplicate it even with better
equipment. I was only able to enjoy my audio nirvana for a few weeks as I got married and
had children. I'm still searching for that nirvana. What amazes me is the equipment I had
was cheap. A Hafler DH101 pre, DH220 amp, the above mentioned Rega TT, Audioquest
speaker cable ~30ft. and some cheapo interconnects. Oh yea Cervin Vega speakers. Now
there was nothing "HiFi" about any of those pieces yet I was in audio nirvana. To this day I
can't figure out what was so special about any of those pieces or the set up. I still think
it has to do with isolating the Rega TT on the load bearing wall and the fact that all I did was
swap the direction of one speaker cable for everything to come together and create this nirvana
I once enjoyed. Hence I believe that cable direction matters and Linn did have a finger on the
pulse of what it takes to make music. To even further affirm my belief I remember that I was
only able to turn up the volume to 12:00 with listener fatigue soon setting in. After I turned
one speaker cable around I knew it immediately and was able to turn the volume up to 3:00
or more and even stepping outside live music seemed to be eminating from my living room.
Sorry for the ramble. Just trying to duplicate the nirvana I had before and maybe hopefully
learn something to pass along to others on how it can be done for cheap. :thumb:
Hi Apollo P,
Interesting recollection. I don't know all that much about Linn MM carts, except we used to give away K9 to sell a table. I'd be interested in the info on that thread. My 95 is partially potted with epoxy - seemed to help.
Most of the Linn MMs are not the same as a 95. The K5, K18 have 4.5mV out. The 95 is 3.5mV. I don't know the complete specs of the Linn carts so I can't run down theoretical differences. AT uses the 3400 (95) body as their OEM vehicle, but generators are custom made to order, like CA.
Welcome to the thread. Looking forward to hearing about Linn mods.
neo
-
Here are the inductances and DC resistances I have measured from a range of AT bodies:
Model Resist Induct (mH)
Signet TK9E 227.75 87.6
AT25 238.5 87.625
Signet TK10 239.75 84.675
Signet TK9E 244.75 87.9
DR250 395 456.5
AT3472PS 402.5 435.05
AT3482P 403 428
DR200E 408.5 421
AT101P 408.5 427.7
Unlabelled Black 411 464.5
Akai PC-35 412 464.5
AT71e 421.75 448.5
Sanyo MG-44J 424 442
PT800 425.25 420
AT14Sa 453.75 458
AT14S 464.75 363
AT4030LC 467.5 457
AT12Sa 472.25 420
AT-VM8hi 473.75 433
AT20SLa 475.5 453.05
AT20SLa (2nd) 476 450.5
AT12Sa (AT777) 480 445.5
Signet TK7su 486.5 447.5
MG35V 486.5 490.5
AT150ea 487.5 358
AT105 515.5 575.5
AT110e 516.5 603
RX1500 631 511
AT216EP 640.05 594
AT216EP 649.75 559.5
AT216EP 653.5 590
AT190EP 656.5 548
Realistic RX1500 657 513.5
AT201P 659 542
AT99sx 659.5 527.5
AT212ep 665.5 528
SLT96E 672 521.5
Signet TK4Ep 681.5 521.5
AKAI PC-7 683 559
Realistic RX1500 692.5 543.75
AT440MLa 772.5 479.5
AT142LP 780.25 569.25
Signet TK6EP 794 566
AT13ea 1171.5 1060
AT13ea 1213.5 1005.75
AT960X 1219.5 1035
-
Dlaloum,
Damn, you have been a busy man! (grin)
At first it appears to me that the lower Risist/Induct cartridges are the better (higher performance),models, but there are a few that jump out and surprise me. The AT 13ea which is rather highly though of as well as the 440MLa. There must be other factors involved that prevents the previous statement from being a hard and set rule of design?
-
Neo- The Goldring 2300 has a silver color shaft coating. My Garrottstein is a Garrott K-2 body which except for minor trim,
is identical to the Excel body. The Excel S700ER .2 x .8 fits either body=hence a Garrottstein. I also have an Excel body
and really cannot tell any difference with the Garrott. Apparently the Garrott Bros. (or successors) wanted a more modest
priced line so the K 1-2-3 series was developed i.e. purchased from Excel. Don't know about the Garrott styli. I broke a
K-2 stylus and didn't want to spend $165 for a replacement from Australia so then figured out the Excel connection. Also
some Shure styli will fit the Excel/Garrott bodies......Regarding the previous comment about the Linn K-9, believe it has
the shorter AT body like the CA's but on output, would be the same as the AT3400 which is 4.5 instead of the 3.5 AT95.
Also the AT95 stylus will fit the K-9 but ends up with a little "shelf" on front unless the plastic is trimmed.
-
NeoBop,
Here is the thread I found from the Linn forum
VERY interesting info on the K9, Colin. I had not realised how 'special' it was. Presumably the Basik cartridge was a rebadged AT95e? What about the K5 - had that been turbo charged too?
CJ
[/quote]
Hi
The Linn Basik cartridge that was originally free with the old S shape Linn LVV arm was an Audio Technica below the AT95E.It only had a conical and not eliptical stylus so was a little bit "rough and ready".The Basik cartridge was designed as a throwaway and was made to get an LP12 up and running as cheaply as possible.Swapping the yellow stylus over to the green AT95E stylus was a good move it the day and gave better sound.Both used a plastic body which could only be lightly tightened before deformation.A way of boosting performance was to fill the AT95's coil can with superglue and also superglue on the housing and the stylus.This made a big difference as it made for a much more rigid assembly allowing more detail and greater dynamic range.When the stylus wore out you threw the whole thing away as it was cheap anyway.I seem to recall that a Linn Basik cartridge was around £10.00 and an AT95E was around £20.00.The K9 was more like £50.00 when first launched in the early 80's.
The K5 came out some years later at around half the price of the K9 and had a plastic moulded housing for the coil "can" rather than the solid metal block the K9 used.It also had a cheaper "rondel" mount elliptical stylus.At some point the solid K9 housing became unavailable and so late K9's used the K5 body.The later K18 was a much more expensive cartridge than the 9 and had a tapered cantilever and a small allen bolt to give greater mechanical coupling and rigidity.Unfortunately the K18 was a very inconsistent cartridge and many sounded out of tune and lacking involvement.This was down to the long cantilever and the compliance of the suspension and Linn later addressed the problem with the K18 mk2 red stylus which had a laminated suspension with different rubber.
Unfortunately Audio Technica stopped making cartridges for Linn in around 1996.Don't know why but it was not good news as we were very happy with them. To find a replacement we listened to many cartridges at that time.Some did not play the tune and were uninvolving.Some would not fit and could not be aligned or were too light or heavy to balance out .Several were not shielded enough and so hum could be present near the centre of an LP as the magnetic field from the motor induced a signal in the cartridge coils.Several sounded dull or too bright because the compliance was unsuited .Many were pliable and not rigid with "bendysnap" construction and so did not have the clarity ,detail and dynamic range we required as all of the tonearms concept of rigidity was effectively neutered.Together with many retailers we settled on the Dynavector 20X which has rigid construction and works well in Linn arms.John Burns ,who distributes Dynavector in the UK actually worked at Linn for many years and the DV20 came about as he saw the opportunity to help develop a cartridge suited for the vacancy left by the K9.The Adikt was released some years after the K9 was discontinued and now that the DV20 £450.00, the Adikt is nearer to the price many are prepared for if changing from a K9.
Regards.
Colin Macey. WYSAH Beaconsfield.
www.whatyouseeandhear.com
www.wysah.com
I find it interesting they thought of doing that. I've heard that the Adikt is a Goldring modified for Linn's specifications.
Hope that help.
Regards Mike
-
Dlaloum,
Damn, you have been a busy man! (grin)
At first it appears to me that the lower Risist/Induct cartridges are the better (higher performance),models, but there are a few that jump out and surprise me. The AT 13ea which is rather highly though of as well as the 440MLa. There must be other factors involved that prevents the previous statement from being a hard and set rule of design?
Griff,
Yes it's interesting, especially the inductance figures. It seems that the relationship between resistance and impedance is more important than just resistance. For example, the 13Ea has impedance of 1200 ohms. The 440ML is 3.2K. Also, impedance is calculated at standard 1KHz frequency. I imagine a frequency/resistance chart could be made like one for a speaker driver.
To be honest, I don't fully understand it. With the high inductance of the 13Ea why isn't impedance higher? Impedance factors in reactance - inductance and capacitance. :dunno:
neo
-
NeoBop,
Here is the thread I found from the Linn forum
VERY interesting info on the K9, Colin. I had not realised how 'special' it was. Presumably the Basik cartridge was a rebadged AT95e? What about the K5 - had that been turbo charged too?
CJ
Hi
The Linn Basik cartridge that was originally free with the old S shape Linn LVV arm was an Audio Technica below the AT95E.It only had a conical and not eliptical stylus so was a little bit "rough and ready".The Basik cartridge was designed as a throwaway and was made to get an LP12 up and running as cheaply as possible.Swapping the yellow stylus over to the green AT95E stylus was a good move it the day and gave better sound.Both used a plastic body which could only be lightly tightened before deformation.A way of boosting performance was to fill the AT95's coil can with superglue and also superglue on the housing and the stylus.This made a big difference as it made for a much more rigid assembly allowing more detail and greater dynamic range.When the stylus wore out you threw the whole thing away as it was cheap anyway.I seem to recall that a Linn Basik cartridge was around £10.00 and an AT95E was around £20.00.The K9 was more like £50.00 when first launched in the early 80's.
The K5 came out some years later at around half the price of the K9 and had a plastic moulded housing for the coil "can" rather than the solid metal block the K9 used.It also had a cheaper "rondel" mount elliptical stylus.At some point the solid K9 housing became unavailable and so late K9's used the K5 body.The later K18 was a much more expensive cartridge than the 9 and had a tapered cantilever and a small allen bolt to give greater mechanical coupling and rigidity.Unfortunately the K18 was a very inconsistent cartridge and many sounded out of tune and lacking involvement.This was down to the long cantilever and the compliance of the suspension and Linn later addressed the problem with the K18 mk2 red stylus which had a laminated suspension with different rubber.
Unfortunately Audio Technica stopped making cartridges for Linn in around 1996.Don't know why but it was not good news as we were very happy with them. To find a replacement we listened to many cartridges at that time.Some did not play the tune and were uninvolving.Some would not fit and could not be aligned or were too light or heavy to balance out .Several were not shielded enough and so hum could be present near the centre of an LP as the magnetic field from the motor induced a signal in the cartridge coils.Several sounded dull or too bright because the compliance was unsuited .Many were pliable and not rigid with "bendysnap" construction and so did not have the clarity ,detail and dynamic range we required as all of the tonearms concept of rigidity was effectively neutered.Together with many retailers we settled on the Dynavector 20X which has rigid construction and works well in Linn arms.John Burns ,who distributes Dynavector in the UK actually worked at Linn for many years and the DV20 came about as he saw the opportunity to help develop a cartridge suited for the vacancy left by the K9.The Adikt was released some years after the K9 was discontinued and now that the DV20 £450.00, the Adikt is nearer to the price many are prepared for if changing from a K9.
Regards.
Colin Macey. WYSAH Beaconsfield.
www.whatyouseeandhear.com
www.wysah.com
I find it interesting they thought of doing that. I've heard that the Adikt is a Goldring modified for Linn's specifications.
Hope that help.
Regards Mike
Mike, thanks for posting that.
Before the post it was alluded, there was something "special" about the K9. Is this super glue treatment the turbocharge?
neo
-
Though my main TT is a Rega P3/2000 with upgrades, I've developed a special fondness for a Dual 1228 on which the platter spins
a while after shutoff. Being a changer, I can play a few records without having to get up and change etc., plus it shuts itself off.
I was never a believer that cables made much difference in sound and copper is copper. I just received an Audioquest Evergreen
1 meter RCA/RCA to try and see if there really was any difference? This is the bottom feeder of the line @$35 free shipping from
that giant of the internet....Much to my surprise, I do notice a difference. There is more definition and "presence" to the sound!
The current mount is a DL110 but I'm sure this difference will carry forward to my AT95HE,Goldrings,Shures,Garrotts and Grados.
Either I've learned something here or the Evergreen Cable changed impedance-resistance etc., In any case, I'm enjoying this
tweek in sound and hope my cartridge swapping (easy if you have enough Dual carriers) will continue to enhance the experience.
As good as a Boron shaft what?
-
Griff,
Yep, 5.0mV, 490mH, 3.2Kohm. Don't waste your time and money. The following carts (and more), have identical specs:
440, 120E, 125LC, 130E, 132EP, 140LC, 142LP, 152LP (ML), 155LC, 160ML, 450. This was the go-to HO motor for many moons at AT.
The carts with ML preceding the number, ML150, ML170 are different - closer to the 150MLX body - 4mV, 2.5Kohm. The 150MLX is slightly better with 2.3Kohm, 350mH, methinks. Admittedly, there's almost no difference, except the cantilever. I think you probably already have the best generators AT ever made which includes CA and the older 500/550 ohm models.
neo
There are a couple of things here...
1) mV output is also dependent on magnet material and size/weight (so not meaningful given each of these has different stylus...)
2) Some of these bodies are in fact identical eg: 120/440, but others have differing construction and/or materials, this means they will handle some of the more subtle vibrations differently... there is a logical reason for the current AT150ANV being titanium with internal damping - I assume that means Titanium body with potted interior - I wonder what they pot it with?
3) The differing compliances and differing body masses lead to quite different optimum matchings with different arms.
Following on with regards to inductance / impedance - have been doing some research on the physics and maths behind inductance and impedance - the relationship for a "perfect" inductor is relatively simple between impedance and inductance - I'll post it later.
But the point is we can calculate the theoretical impedance from the spec or measured inductance for any given frequency - when I did this I started seeing figures of 60kOhm + for impedance at 10kHz - which clearly shows why high inductance rolls off high frequencies!
Also eddy currents increase the resistance - these are "imperfections" - ie: aspects that differ from the theoretical perfect inductor...
With regards to the theoretically "best" MM body AT have made, might I suggest that the AT21/22/23/24/25 TK9/10 family are clearly a notch above anything except perhaps the AT150ANV.... that series had magnesium bodies with damping, and steel sylus holders which were screwed in. Full toroidal coils - which implies hand winding, and inductance of around 80mH.
Toroidal coils would be more efficient (lower losses) - and may add another factor into things - each of these factors is likely to be subtle of course - but in combination?
bye for now
David
-
David,
From a Frankencart point of view, if you consider the generators independently from other aspects such as stylus, body, etc, I don't think there's any difference between a 140LC, 155LC, and a 440ML. Isn't it curious that the 440ML/MLa have identical specs with 1mV less output for MLa ?
I also don't think AT varied the mass of the magnets. The 440ML magnets seem identical to the MLa (although I didn't weigh them), I think only the magnet type was changed. Admittedly, this could result in a small change in mass.
Thanks for pointing out my oversight of the TK10ML, TK9_, AT22 through 25. These carts and their styli are mostly unobtainium, so I didn't consider them. 550 ohm, 2.2mV, and 80mH !! They don't make em like that any more.
Looking forward to your analysis of perfect inductance value. My guess would be a value where impedance remains closest to resistance value with increasing frequency.
neo
-
Came across a spec sheet for the AT95 "family"
Interestingly there are variations in body generator specs within the family! - there are two specs for the bodies (according to this spec sheet)
AT95/93
Impedance 2800ohm
resistance 410 ohm
Inductance 400mH
AT94/91/90
Impedance 2800ohm
Resistance 410 ohm
Inductance 480ohm
Note that although Impedance and Resistance are the same, inductance varies...
Formulae for the relationship between impedance, resistance, inductance in a "perfect theoretical" inductor coil...
Reactance (in ohm) = 2*pie*freq*Inductance (in H)
IMPEDANCE = SQRT(reactance*reactance + Resistance*resistance)
The "theoretical" impedance for the two body types is:
400mH - 2550ohm
480mH - 3050ohm
So one is doing better than theoretical and one is doing worse?!
In any case, based on the maths, low inductance = low impedance - which seems a positive thing in most cases.
Further reading on transformer cores provides information on various core/pole structures and materials which behave more efficiently with reduced losses (and/or as a result of reduced eddy currents)
1) Lamination (reduces eddy currents)
2) Ferrite (hybrid metal alloy/ceramic) - reduces losses - used in Technics TOTL MM's and many MC's
3) Air core (reduces output, but improves linearity - used in some of the better MC's)
Interesting further reading shows that there are now manufacturers creating laminated transformers using ferrite materials - combining the benefits of both methods - in the past it was not possible to make laminations using ferrite - so it was an either/or compromise.
I have not heard of any cartridge manufacturer leveraging the new tech to produce a sophisticated laminated ferrite core MM/MI
Further understanding will require purchasing an impedance meter with variable frequency....
bye for now
David
-
Reactance (in ohm) = 2*pie*freq*Inductance (in H)
IMPEDANCE = SQRT(reactance*reactance + Resistance*resistance)
The "theoretical" impedance for the two body types is:
400mH - 2550ohm
480mH - 3050ohm
So one is doing better than theoretical and one is doing worse?!
In any case, based on the maths, low inductance = low impedance - which seems a positive thing in most cases.
David
My AT-95 spec sheet is in total agreement. What I don't understand is how the impedance numbers could be the same.
How about carts like the AT12, 13, with very high inductance. It seems like impedance should be much higher than 1200 ohms. Think that's actually resistance and not impedance?
Also, how does the formula work if there is capacitance?
Thanks David,
neo
-
Strictly speaking the impedance formula is :
IMPEDANCE = SQRT(reactance(capacitive)*reactance(Capacitive)+reactance(inductive)*reactance(inductive) + Resistance*resistance)
But for an inductor (which is what a MM cartridge is of course!) - capacitance is usually negligible... so the previous formula is a good approximation.
The site where I got those also provided the formulae for calculating capacitive reactance - so I guess I should probably check to see whether it is in fact negligible! (I'll get around to it...)
With regards to the AT12 - my AT12Sa has R=448ohm, My AT13ea R=1214
So yes 1200ohm is the spec for DC resistance on the high inductance bodies
I just measured my Aurum Beta body, and the specs I can measure (R & Inductance) - come up as identical to the typical AT92 p-mount bodies 420ohm / 420mH (actually 414ohm, 426mH) - but I cannot measure impedance @ 1kHz....
Still assuming a perfect inductor the impedance should be circa 2700ohm... the 600ohm spec makes no sense! (I would expect imperfect reality to show higher resistance than theoretical perfection, not lower! - I remain in the "emperor has no clothes" camp at this point)
Looking at the AT150MLx, R=530ohm, L=450mH Impedance=2300ohm@1kHz - the calculated theoretical impedance would be 2876ohm - so the specs are lower than the theoretical, although in the right ballpark (but this is not 1/4 the expected impedance!)
An interesting often forgotten AT body is the early AT14S - 363mH / 465ohm - same body measurements as the AT150ea....
-
I'm not sure if this is of any interest..
http://sound.westhost.com/articles/cartridge-loading.html
I may have a few sacrificial lambs that I might be willing to experiment with, in the interest of science.
Dongrb
-
David,
AT-150MLX is 350mH, not 450.
An interesting assertion in Elliott Sound Products link provided by DonGrb:
"Using an inductance meter to measure the cartridge's inductance won't work! The DC resistance is high compared to the inductive reactance, so the meter will lie, and indicate that inductance is much higher than it really is. In addition, the test frequency is determined by the meter, and is unlikely to be appropriate for the task. Most meters don't even tell you what frequency is in use, so you don't get the opportunity to decide if it's appropriate or not (most will satisfy the 'not' criterion). A pickup I measured showed 1.55H (1550mH), which is silly - no cartridge will have that much inductance, however, the actual inductance calculated to be 1.15H, which is still silly and makes the cartridge pretty much unusable for anything other than very casual listening."
While the final assertion itself may be a little silly, the info about a meter measuring inductance is not. BTW, Elliott makes a phono stage kit or design, said to be nice:
http://sound.westhost.com/project06.htm
I fear we'll lose some of our audience with this discussion, but excellence comes with a price.
neo
-
Over the past couple of years we've briefly discussed carts other than AT/Clearaudio.
A couple of favorites from the Agon thread are the Acutex M320III STR and the Astatic MF-2500. I have no experience whatsoever with either of these and if anyone out there does, please feel free to discuss or just say what you think. Others which I'm a little more familiar include Empire (4000) and Grace F9 Ruby, Shure V15V.
David and I have Stanton 980, and Pickering 7500 (same) LOMM. This is an interesting cart and quite different from the 881. Beside the LO, the 980 seems neutral, uncolored, and the 881 is slightly warm. The 681 is a high inductance cart and sounds hopelessly compromised to me. It has a loyal following though, and I would think these people have an overly bright system or maybe just like a "mellow" sound.
The cart of the month is the Talisman Alchemist III HOMC. This is a nice cart with good resolution and a slight rise on the extreme high end, if I remember correctly. Back then (mid '80s) many preferred the Talisman S LOMC. I think the S was very listenable. It had a big following, bigger than the Alchemist III, methinks. I never owned either, but my impression is that the III was slightly faster, believe it or not, but this impression could be due to a more aggressive sound. The III had a sapphire tube cantilever. I think the S was a sapphire pipe.
What do you like, or not?
neo
-
I have never heard the Talisman Alchemists, however there was an interesting comment in one of the period reviews... apparently the LOMC Alchemist (S I think?) is capacitance sensitive - the article did not explain why but did show measurements of differences with differing capacitances as I recall....
My personal stable of operational favourites (as opposed to the many many stylusless bodies I have!) include:
Audio Technica families:
Signet TK9 With ATN22
Audio Technica AT20ss (actually SLa body with SS stylus)
AT440MLa
Signet TK6 with ATN152LP
AT12Sa
AT14S
AT150ea with ATN152LP (I think I prefer the TK6 with this needle)
Shure
V15V-SAS
V15RS (V15VxHE) (unlistened to)
V15RS-SAS (V15VxSAS)
1000E-SAS
Ultra400 (preliminary listening only)
V15HRP
Dynavector Karat 23RS
Empire / Benz MC1 (HOMC)
Sony XL-MC104P
Pickering
XLZ7500
XSP3000 with D7500
Ortofon
OM with 300SE stylus
OM20
VMS30
X5-MC (unlistened to)
540 (unlistened to)
530 (unlistened to)
ADC
Various bodies & SuperXLM stylus
(Integra 420 & 490mH, 1/2" 230 / 260 / 350 / 500 / 600 mH)
I have been using the SXLM with 260mH body, but am due to experiment with the different bodies to determine what the optimum for the stylus is...
Panasonic
EPC451 (strain gauge - but the SG preamp is playing up - needs some TLC)
Exceptional cartridges that stand out in the above:
AT20ss
TK9
TK6-ATN152LP (effectively an AT152LP)
Shure SAS "family" (I still need to give the RS and the Ultra a fair go)
ADC SuperXLM
Dynavector Karat 23RS (dynamic, clean, wow)
EPC451 Strain Gauge (yes quite special - similar in some ways to the Karat)
Sony XL-104P (very sweet sound - far from the best but very appealing sound - this one with a top notch cantilever might be a killer cartridge.... they used to have an exotic XL9MC but it goes for silly money)
bye for now
David
-
Hi Neo,
Maybe 15 +/- years ago, I had a SOTA Sapphire turntable with a Alphason HR100S arm. They are both items that I have stupidly sold over the years. I ran a Talisman Virtuoso S and absolutely loved it. I woke up one morning and went downstairs to play some records only to discover the cantilever had snapped off. No ideal how it happened. VHd wanted $400 to replace it and Sumiko recommended I buy the piece of s**t Blue Point Special. Instead I bought a Sigma Genesis 2000, which was another one of my stupid mistakes in selling. The Sigma was head and shoulders above that well loved Talisman S.
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Neo,
Maybe 15 +/- years ago, I had a SOTA Sapphire turntable with a Alphason HR100S arm. They are both items that I have stupidly sold over the years. I ran a Talisman Virtuoso S and absolutely loved it. I woke up one morning and went downstairs to play some records only to discover the cantilever had snapped off. No ideal how it happened. VHd wanted $400 to replace it and Sumiko recommended I buy the piece of s**t Blue Point Special. Instead I bought a Sigma Genesis 2000, which was another one of my stupid mistakes in selling. The Sigma was head and shoulders above that well loved Talisman S.
Regards,
Don
Hi Griff,
The one I regret selling was a Signet TK-10ML II.
15 + years ago I had a Goldmund Studietto with a Zeta arm and Alpha Genesis 1000. I had a bit of bad luck and needed cash so I traded the Goldmund for a Sota Sapphire, Alphason 100S, Genesis 1000 and some cash. I knew I'd regret selling the table. It was my all-time favorite. I still have the Sota. It's in pieces to make a custom table, but still functional if assembled. The Versus rim drive motor that I want to use costs $1800. I'm reluctant to spend the money. I'm thinking of selling the Sota and keeping the arm - nice arm.
The Genesis 1000 now has a Soundsmith micro tip on the original boron tube cantilever. Back in the '80s, first I had a Genesis 500, then the 1000 when that came out. The 1000 was changed slightly in '88 - response extended past 100K (was 80K), but I couldn't tell the difference. The 2000 came out in '89. It has gold coils but was otherwise identical to the 1000. I liked the 1000 because it was faster. The 2000 was smoother/sweeter. Those names were from Monster Cable and the number was the price. A brief encounter with a ZYX _100 didn't seem any better than the 1000 maybe not as good. Now they have one with a diamond cantilever for $6K.
My ex partner had a Goldmund Reference with a VDH Grasshopper. The VDH was a nice cart, just a touch more romantic than a Genesis but not like a Koetsu or Kisiki. I heard the VDH a lot. I used to help set VTA/SRA. Best belt drive I ever heard.
That Dynavector 23RS David has is a great cart too. I also liked the Miyabi although not quite as exact, but I didn't own either one. Regarding the Agon thread, I think Raul is losing credibility. He never had it as far as I'm concerned. How hard is it to go through every old TOTL cart and pick favorites? He has tried a lot of them though and you have to give him credit for that.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I still have my Signet TK-10ML MK II. I consider it an equal to my AT ML180 occ.
You've had and still have some mighty fine equipment. Reading you various post, I have come to realise that your knowledge is rather extensive when it comes to all things related to Audio. Your discussions with Dlaloum is like class room discussions in College.
Flieb's comments to Raul (on his forum), put a smile on my face.
Have you noticed that Raul bumps up the cap. to go along with his 100K setting. Sort of like a dog that
is chasing his own tail if you ask me!
Sometimes when I think back at some of the things that I have sold, I wonder 'WHY'? I'm beginning to think that perhaps it was
because of all that 'B/S' reading I was doing with all the Audio magazines. What a waste of money. :duh:
Your mention of the Mayabi also made me smile. I am looking for one of them. After spending some time listening to what it can
do, you kind of find it hard to forget it and spend your time mentally comparing it to everything else you hear. A must have in my opinion.
Man, a Goldmund Reference! Your partner had expensive taste! The problem with being around that level of equipment, it makes it hard to come back to your own!
In regards to our SOTA table and Alphson arms. There was just something special going on when you mounted a Alphson on a SOTA. They were a great match and I miss then both, but I don't miss the pain in the ass cartridge mounting method you had to use with it. Your SOTA project sounds rather interesting. Do you have a time frame as to when it will be complete. I would appreciate you keeping us/me posted as to how it progresses. Sounds like it could be a major upgrade to an already great table.
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Griff,
What kind of table(s) are you using now?
"I still have my Signet TK-10ML MK II. I consider it an equal to my AT ML180 occ." That's interesting. Seems like you have AT nailed. I never had a ML180, but I would have guessed the 10ML would edge it out. Too close to call, or one does some things better than the other, and visa versa?
Still using the ATN440MLa on the CA? How does that fit in?
Yes, David adds an invaluable dimension to this Circle. We couldn't have made the progress we have, without his input. There's another long thread about phase you might find interesting. Ever hear about using a dummy cart to cancel inductance? Discussion also gets into hearing perception, imaging, reverberation time of concert halls etc, etc. A fun time was had by all.
Wild story about Dan Fanny and his Reference. Maybe next time. I just want to say, it was no problem going home and listening to my Studietto after hanging out at his house. Different system, another context - we listen within the framework of our system and it wasn't good or bad, more like good and better.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
Currently I have 2 turntables. One is the VPI Extended Aries with the outboard flywheel and a Graham 2.2 arm. The other is a Victor (JVC) TT-81 with a JVC 7045 arm. Both are run from a BAT VK10SE with the (what is referred to as ), 'depth charges'. I'm a little embarrassed to say but I'm pushing 60 cartridges.
The TK10 and the AT180 sound so similar, that I would could consider them twins. Another one that is also so similar that perhaps what I have is triplets, it the Technics U205C MK4. The CA Maestro/440MLa is a great sounding cartridge, but (isn't there always a 'but'), it just is not at that level. There is a delicate refinement with the previous mentioned 3 that just doesn't present itself with the FrankenMaestro. Still, it does stick its head above the crowd of many of the cartridge of the month also rans. I sure you do know which forum I referring too! (grin)
I have not heard about using a cartridge as a dummy load? Where can I find this thread about phase and this dummy load? Sounds like something I definitely would be interested in.
BTW: I like your 'more like good and better' comment. I need to remember that!
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Neo,
Currently I have 2 turntables. One is the VPI Extended Aries with the outboard flywheel and a Graham 2.2 arm. The other is a Victor (JVC) TT-81 with a JVC 7045 arm. Both are run from a BAT VK10SE with the (what is referred to as ), 'depth charges'. I'm a little embarrassed to say but I'm pushing 60 cartridges.
The TK10 and the AT180 sound so similar, that I would could consider them twins. Another one that is also so similar that perhaps what I have is triplets, it the Technics U205C MK4. The CA Maestro/440MLa is a great sounding cartridge, but (isn't there always a 'but'), it just is not at that level. There is a delicate refinement with the previous mentioned 3 that just doesn't present itself with the FrankenMaestro. Still, it does stick its head above the crowd of many of the cartridge of the month also rans. I sure you do know which forum I referring too! (grin)
I have not heard about using a cartridge as a dummy load? Where can I find this thread about phase and this dummy load? Sounds like something I definitely would be interested in.
BTW: I like your 'more like good and better' comment. I need to remember that!
Regards,
Don
Dang Griff, you got it going on man. Not too shabby, no indeed. I wonder how that Maestro or Virtuoso would sound with a beryllium/ML. You know, the Virtuoso might outperform the Maestro with an exotic stylus. Might be a hair overdamped on Maestro. My guess is that beryllium would be better on both, but boron would be better on the Virtuoso. I think you're in pretty good shape the way it is though.
That thread is another long one: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=92138.0
So, I was a turntable guy in a high end supermarket in the late '80s, and I met Dan Fanny there. He used to bring in customers and be a sort of consultant for them. Danny was a tube god and modified high end preamps mostly. Things like ARC, Levinson etc. He also built stuff from scratch, the best stuff you ever heard. I was familiar with most of the best components at that time. What we didn't have, we took in trade and I used to take preamps home to try, but that's another story.
Before I met Dan he had a Goldmund Studio. He designed a set-up jig for the linear arm. He had a customer with a Reference. Dan heard his Reference and bet him that he could get his Studio to sound better. The bet was for the table.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=84795)
neo
-
Yep that picture reminds me of that turntable....
At Kostas Metaxas' Melbourne audio Salon - played through his own electronics and esl speakers....
It think the Aussie market was too small for him, he moved to Europe where most of his business is in Greece and Germany I believe....
I presume that he won the bet and got to keep the TT?
-
Don,
the "Capacifier" (capacitance pacifier) thread is on VE at http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=33929
The method works very well for those situations where reducing capacitance to the desirable range is well nigh impossible (due to constraints of TT, cables and/or phono stage).
Still a low capacitance setup is simpler and to be preferred, but if like many of us you have lots of spare cartridge bodies lying around, and are not afraid of soldering and putting together a circuit - this can be a good alternative.
bye for now
David
-
Don,
you mention the U205mk4 - I have the MK3 body, and have been seeking a stylus for it for a couple of years now (broken would be OK so I can retip, but without the stylus holder the body is just a piece of metal junk!!)
You wouldn't happen to have a worn out or broken stylus with your U205?
Interesting that you find it so close to the ML180 and TK10 - theoretically the closer to objective perfection (neutrality) a cartridge get the more it sounds like other cartridges that get close to the ideal!
I have several AT22/23/24/25/TK9/10 bodies, but only 1 working stylus (ATN22) at the moment - I have a plan of at some stage getting a retip/recantilever for some of the others....
I have considered mounting the TK9E on the Revox - but cartridge mounting is a pain on that TT, and I now have it set up with a p-mount adapter fully aligned and adjusted.... if I could get the U205 working that would be perfect.... (currently running Shure V15V-SAS)
I also recently paid too much for a broken (transformer blown) Sony PSX600 Biotracer table - a complement for my JVC Ql-Y5F, the JVC being solidly mid mass arm, the Sony low mass - now I need to source the parts to fix it - that should be a perfect platform for the TK9E....
(I am also inherently inclined to the high compliance school of thought, as I believe low damping and high compliance are theoretically better..... )
bye for now
David
-
David,
Yes, that's how Danny got his Reference.
I think you said your PS-X600 is 120V ? I have a PS-X50 parts table with a good transformer. If it will work in your 600, you're welcome to it. It's a pretty big transformer (for a table), but I don't have a service manual and don't know the secondary voltage. I can copy the numbers on the tranny if that would help figure it out.
Thanks for the link to the Capacifier. I saw it mentioned on the loading thread.
neo
-
Don,
Interesting that you find it so close to the ML180 and TK10 - theoretically the closer to objective perfection (neutrality) a cartridge get the more it sounds like other cartridges that get close to the ideal!
I have several AT22/23/24/25/TK9/10 bodies, but only 1 working stylus (ATN22) at the moment - I have a plan of at some stage getting a retip/recantilever for some of the others....
bye for now
David
Hi David - I'm interested in the fact that you chose to install your ATN-22 on a TK9 body rather than a TK10. I have a NOS ATN-22 mounted to one of my TK10 bodies and it sounds great (though not quite as nice as the SS LC retipped boron TK10 I have). Was there something special about the TK9?
Jack
-
Hi Dlaloum,
I wish I could help you with a stylus for your MK3. What I have is the MK3 body with a MK4 stylus. I understand that the two bodies were the same. I do have a spare MK4 stylus which I bought from Foxtan. I saw rather recently a MK3 stylus for sale (by him), on eBay. They do pop up from time to time but they are not cheap. But then neither is a retipper! (grin) The MK4 is even more rare but when I asked him, he delivered! I could ask him if you would be interested. I think the MK4 replacement stylus cost me $450. I am quite sure he could find you one(3 or 4). I have also heard that the Jico replacement is quite good. I have not had the pleasure of hearing it myself, but I have corresponded with others that own this rather rare cartridge and they all speak of it rather highly. Had I/Foxtan not found a spare MK4, I probably would own one one of the Jico's right now. If you would be interested in the Jico one, let me know. They do not list it on their website, but I do have the catalog number of it for ordering purposes. I would have to look for it, but I'm sure I have it somewhere.
The 3 (triplets), that I mentioned have not been beat in my system. I own (and have heard others in my system) several expensive M/C's that are at this level. The only difference is that they are far more expensive. I justify the cost of that MK4 stylus with that thought.
I recently picked up a Sony XL-55. It was NOS. I'm a little hesitant to add it to the above mentioned 3, but............
That's quite a stack of impressive AT bodies you own. I recently received a Glantz stylus housing cantilever/ML stylus replacement by Andy of Needle Clinic located in Washington. I am rather impressed with his offering. He would not say exactly what this cantilever is made of but would say it was a mix of materials. No alum. It has a rather high shine (like polished aluminum),and it also has the extrusion lines that you get when material is squeeze thru a die. Looking at it from its tip, it appears to be a solid rod! All this doesn't matter because what it sounds like is what counts the most. Best way to answer that is to say this. I am looking through all my stash for candidates to send to him for this cantilever. I did not get an itemized list but what I sent him was 2 Glantz stylus housings. One needed to have the suspension replaced, and the other had a broken cantilever. Total for both was only $120. Turnaround time was 2 weeks.
I feel that I had better ""mine" this gold mine before it's to late.
Regards,
Don
-
Hi David - I'm interested in the fact that you chose to install your ATN-22 on a TK9 body rather than a TK10. I have a NOS ATN-22 mounted to one of my TK10 bodies and it sounds great (though not quite as nice as the SS LC retipped boron TK10 I have). Was there something special about the TK9?
Jack
Hi Jack,
the TK9 AT22, AT24 and TK10 are all identical bodies, theoretically the higher spec item had the body cherry picked from the production line, so the TK10's have more consistently better specs (that is to say their channels are better matched on average).
Bu in reality all of these are high spec models - I measured both inductance and resistance for all the bodies I have of this family, and in my case the TK9 proved to be the best of the batch.... so that's where the needle goes.
Unlike the other Audio Technica designs these had to be hand made, much like an MC, due to the torroidal coils - the step down designs like the TK7 and AT20 and all the later AT MM's used (use!) para-toroidal setups, which would allow them to be more cheaply and easily wound - presumably by machine...
So none of them are any less than high end!
bye for now
David
-
David,
Yes, that's how Danny got his Reference.
I think you said your PS-X600 is 120V ? I have a PS-X50 parts table with a good transformer. If it will work in your 600, you're welcome to it. It's a pretty big transformer (for a table), but I don't have a service manual and don't know the secondary voltage. I can copy the numbers on the tranny if that would help figure it out.
Thanks for the link to the Capacifier. I saw it mentioned on the loading thread.
neo
Hi Neo,
I've found suppliers for the original Sony 240V transformer (for the UK version of the table) - at present my issue is that both suppliers I have found are North America, and I need to organise a trans-shipping service to get the parts to Australia.
Will keep you guys posted on how this all goes....
bye for now
David
-
Hi Don,
I have dealt with Foxtan a number of times - mostly when I was seeking low mass standard headshells.
$450 is a bit rich for me for a stylus for the 205... although I may end up changing my mind.
I would be willing to order a SAS for it though if I could confirm its availability !
I checked on both the japanese and export Jico websites and found not U205 (EPCP205) styli - only the 1/2" mount versions...
If you have a reference I could use to order one that would be hugely appreciated!
I have a number of candidate cartridges for new styli/cantilever/retip....
TK10
Grace F8
EPCP205mk3
Both the Grace and the EPCP205 have no stylus holders - I have to find a complete stylus or a broken one for retipping...
Keep us up to date on how the new cantilever type performs....
thanks
David
-
Hi Dlaloum (David),
The first web page below is interesting reading on the Technics, the second listing is the Jico SAS replacement stylus/with housing for the same Technics.
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=vinyl&m=958571
http://stylus.export-japan.com/product_info.php?cPath=10&products_id=1528
Best regards,
Don
-
Ok Neo,
I've decided to try the transplant. I have a 140lc stylus lying around that I'll transplant onto the ls500 grip. I'm too chicken to try the Beryllium first. If that goes well, I'll try the Beryllium.
Don
-
Just relax and take your time, you'll get it. It usually takes at least a few tries to get the magnets aligned perfectly. Remember not to bear down and over tighten that compliance screw.
I have the same stylus sitting around. Tried it on the 440 and it sounds much like the original, which probably means it would be nice on a CA. Can't seem to find the other 95 plug though. Maybe I'll try it on 12E. Let us know how it sounds.
I've been listening to a 980LZS lately. That's with a Jico shibata. Very good, but I can't help but think it could be better. I also have a Pickering D3001 - .2 elliptical for it, but it's starting to ride a little low. Wonder how it would sound with a micro tip. Jico ought to make a D81 SAS. Bet they'd sell enough to make a nice profit. They could put it in a Pickering holder and it would fit those 3000 - 5000 and the 7500 too. The 980LZ is an interesting cart. Even though it's LO, it sounds like a MM.
neo
-
Success! Thanks for the hints. It will probably take some time to dial this one in. The ls500 was designed for the line contact stylus. The only stylus available has been the shibata. My initial impression is that the line contact is slightly less romantic than the shibata, but still fairly easy on the ears. I'm starting to second guess this cartridge with the Beryllium cantilever, as I'm not sure the cartridge will be able to take full advantage.
Dongrb
-
Neo, I've heard nothing but good things about the 980LZS, it makes you wonder why Jico limits themselves the way they do. I've recently picked up a 681eee, but I know it's not in the same class as the 980.
Don grb
-
Not going back to the shibata.
-
There is a reason that Jico do not have SAS for Stanton/Pickering or Audio Technica bodies....
The SAS design simply doesn't suit those cartridge types...
Keep in mind that the SAS is not just needle and cantilever but also the aluminium telescoped first section kept under tension with the magnet section at the back.
This works perfectly with the Shure style MM design and all of its close relatives (most MM's) - but the AT VM design with the two magnets in V is simply not SAS-able, I think the shorter cantilevers on the Stanton's may also cause issues....
Jico identified that 80% of the MM market has a stylus desing in common and produced the SAS to cater to that - smart move ! - I believe expert stylus in the UK are reputed to do a very good rebuild job on Stanton/Pickering designs....
-
Dl,
Thanks for the clarification. I have no experience with the SAS stylus.
Don grb
-
Hi Dlaloum (David),
The first web page below is interesting reading on the Technics, the second listing is the Jico SAS replacement stylus/with housing for the same Technics.
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=vinyl&m=958571
http://stylus.export-japan.com/product_info.php?cPath=10&products_id=1528
Best regards,
Don
Hi Don,
thanks for that, unfortunately that is still the 1/2" mount stylus and not the T4P version...
I think the T4P version was superior as it used the same type of screw in mounting as used for the EPC100 series, although the cartridge body was still the 205....
I think I recall reading that Audio Asylum review a while back, during one of my periodical web searches for 205 stylus....
I wonder whether the 1/2" mount version would fit the T4P body? - No screw tight option (that is a minus) but if it still fits, an assuming it is used on an adjustable VTF arm, it might work - I will have to dig up my 206, which if I recall correctly, has a stylus on it, and see whether that stylus fits the EPCP205... (also known as the U205 - universal, it came with the SH90S T4P SME mount adapter...)
bye for now
David
-
There is a reason that Jico do not have SAS for Stanton/Pickering or Audio Technica bodies....
The SAS design simply doesn't suit those cartridge types...
Keep in mind that the SAS is not just needle and cantilever but also the aluminium telescoped first section kept under tension with the magnet section at the back.
This works perfectly with the Shure style MM design and all of its close relatives (most MM's) - but the AT VM design with the two magnets in V is simply not SAS-able, I think the shorter cantilevers on the Stanton's may also cause issues....
Jico identified that 80% of the MM market has a stylus desing in common and produced the SAS to cater to that - smart move ! - I believe expert stylus in the UK are reputed to do a very good rebuild job on Stanton/Pickering designs....
Even if the SAS design isn't applicable for AT, Stanton and others, they certainly have the technology to offer something better than a straight alum cantilever and a bonded tip that maxes out at shibata. And what's up with the prices? Some SAS are $139 and an alum/shibata is $150.
http://stylus.export-japan.com/product_info.php?cPath=91&products_id=1354
http://www.lpgear.com/product/e007429SAS.html (Looks rather short as well)
Gear seems to be replacing the Jico shibata with a vivid line. Their D5000 is out of stock. Looks like "regular" Jico stylus sales are used to subsidize SAS.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/PICSD4500Q.html
neo
-
Yeah, what Neo said!
-
Success! Thanks for the hints. It will probably take some time to dial this one in. The ls500 was designed for the line contact stylus. The only stylus available has been the shibata. My initial impression is that the line contact is slightly less romantic than the shibata, but still fairly easy on the ears. I'm starting to second guess this cartridge with the Beryllium cantilever, as I'm not sure the cartridge will be able to take full advantage.
Dongrb
I had to refresh my memory. Back on page 12 of this thread you measured the resistance of this cart around 1200 ohms (2 samples). With an output of 4.2mV this looks like a 12E, 13E type motor. This is a higher resistance/inductance generator, higher than the 12S, 14S, and 15/20 generators which are around 500 ohms and lower output - 2.7mV, and I would think the line contact would be a little better suited (in this case) than shibata.
You previously considered using a 20SS stylus which is beryllium/shibata. Have you tried this?
Not going back to the shibata.
Was this the shibata you tried, or another, or shibata in general? I think shibata is particularly well suited for some of the more aggressive models, a group to which the LS500 doesn't belong. The interesting aspect is your impression of aluminum/LC vs beryllium/_? Previous experiments were with beryllium/LC.
Maybe I'll get going and remount the 12E and try some of these. So far I've only listened to it with the fake Precept 550 stylus - straight aluminum w/bonded elliptical. That's why it's on the shelf.
neo
-
You're right Neo, I probably just bought the marketing hype about the ls500 being an improved version of the 14sa. If you know where I can pick up a 15ss/20ss, let me know.
Don
-
You're right Neo, I probably just bought the marketing hype about the ls500 being an improved version of the 14sa. If you know where I can pick up a 15ss/20ss, let me know.
Don
Improved version of 14Sa is impossible here. 4.2mV/1200 ohms vs 2.7mV/500 ohms. Still, I think the cart is a decent one and I suspect much better than some infamous high inductance carts. My 12E seems to have good extension and not rolled off like some. I think it's important that you keep the capacitance load to a minimum. All ATs use < 200pF total.
The 20SS is still available at Gear for $250 now. Stereoneedles still shows it for $200, but you'd have to check. They're out of the 155LC and maybe all of the 100 series beryllium types, but still show them for sale.
You might be right about matching up the shibata with the LS500. I suspect a LC might be a better match for the motor, but I don't really know that.
How does it sound with the 140LC? Have you listened to it enough to get an idea of performance? Mine isn't even broken in and I haven't transplanted the 140 stylus. Your answer to that question should determine whether an exotic stylus might be worth it.
neo
-
I'll give it a few hours to break-in and I'll report back. I now know that the shibata is unsuitable for this cartridge. I don't really speak the language, but I'll do my best. Initially, both male and female vocals are more up front. The harmonics are there, but I can't say that it is harmonically complete, because I'm not sure that I'm qualified to make that statement. I will say there is a lot more "wood" to the viola, although the cello remains somewhat missing in action. I'm not sure why I have so much trouble with the cello. I'll give it a good listen and will report back.
Don
-
Neo,
My system is slightly rolled off on top, so I'm not sure what to expect from the Beryllium cantilever. In your experience, what are the benefits that you have been able to realize from such an upgrade? Is the benefit mostly in the top end or do the benefits show throughout the spectrum?
Don grb
-
I was a little confused by your feelings about the shibata, but I think I now get it.
Beryllium is more rigid than aluminum and it's also the lightest cantilever material so it's more detailed and faster, but not necessarily brighter. It would tend to be more extended and less bright, but that might depend on the voicing, resonances, of a particular cart motor/stylus combination.
The shibata was the first extended contact tip developed for 4-ch playback which requires decoding info embedded in the groove at 30KHz. Most 4-ch carts are low inductance/shibata to insure this requirement is met. A couple were .2 x .7 (sharp) elliptical, but that tip is really less suited for 4-ch.
The thing about shibata is the front and rear facets are cut at different angles. Because contact with the groove is made while a record is spinning the contact patch is curved rather than a straight line. I believe this is what gives shibata a soft/sweet character - extended but not aggressive. I also think this is due to phase and not frequency response. Still, maybe not the best choice for your requirements.
You might have maxed out matching this cart to your system. An aluminum/ML would be another obvious choice. If the bass is too "big" irrespective of the treble, then maybe a boron cantilever would be better. Boron is a little heavier than beryllium, but more rigid. It is even more exact and less warm. In general, ruby/sapphire would tend to sound more like boron.
I think the Stanton 680 you picked up will be much worse. IMO you're wasting your time/money with this one. It might work out better for someone with a bright system. Likewise the Shure M97.
If after evaluation of the LS500 you feel you need something brighter, there are other models that should do it for you. The 440 or 150MLX come to mind. There's also loading options, but it's usually difficult to change up to a higher value.
I suggest checking out the LS500 as-is, and we can figure it out from there.
neo
Neo,
My system is slightly rolled off on top, so I'm not sure what to expect from the Beryllium cantilever. In your experience, what are the benefits that you have been able to realize from such an upgrade? Is the benefit mostly in the top end or do the benefits show throughout the spectrum?
Don grb
-
The benefits of berillium cantilevers are:
1) Increased rigidity
This means it flexes less and transmits more of the signal to the generator.... The flex is noticeable as the standard drop in signal around the 2kHz to 8kHz region - the lost energy is emitted as harmonic distortion at various related frequencies, and although there is a drop in those frequencies, the increase in harmonics may in fact provide additional richness /romance... ( a bit of that "tube" effect?)
So a more rigid cantilever should be more neutral, and slightly "faster", possibly a bit dryer...
2) Decreesed effective tip mass
The ETM has impacts all over the place...
First of all decreased inertia means it can track better, so reduced inner groove distortion, and associated sibilants, ability to track dynamics (like that extreme example the 1812...).
Second the resonance is raised higher - and along with that resonance the phase change that accompanies it - as the phase change is moved outside the audible band - or to a higher less objectionable frequency within the audible band, the imaging / soundstage should improve along with it, as the ear uses phase to decipher positioning cues.
Third - moving the resonance higher also means that the raw performance of the cantilever remains more linear to a higher frequency (extreme examples like the Technics EPC100 and the Karat series move the resonance to well over 50kHz) - the end result being a cartridge that sounds a lot like digital in terms of its neutrality and pureness while being totally analogue....
I probably should dig up some of my cantilever measurements to show things graphically, but that would take me some hours to put together..... maybe later.
bye for now
David
-
Don grb,
Last night I got ready to transplant the 140 into a round plug. The only round plugs I have are on a 15SS, 20SS, and the fake Precept. These all have a stylus and I'm not messing with the beryllium ones. I started to scrape the paint off the PC550 compliance screw. It was kind of weird because the screw appeared to be recessed further down than usual. Turns out it wasn't paint, just some white glue-like powdery substance and there is no compliance screw, not even a press fit collar. I would venture to say this not only isn't a PC550, it isn't even an AT. I should have sent it back when I first saw it. The cantilever looked too fat and shiny.
I was going to join you in this Frankencart adventure, but .....
neo
-
I totally understand. It's not worth the risk.
Don grb
-
Hi guys,
I just remembered the AT110 (going through some other threads) - pretty much a higher quality AT95...
Neo have you done the AT95 stylus transfer into an AT105/110/115 body?
I have a feeling they are the same fitting...
bye for now
David
-
Hi guys,
I just remembered the AT110 (going through some other threads) - pretty much a higher quality AT95...
Neo have you done the AT95 stylus transfer into an AT105/110/115 body?
I have a feeling they are the same fitting...
bye for now
David
Did we discuss this before? I seem to remember some conjecture. No, I've never played with a 110, the current offering.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATC110E.html
LC-OFC wire no less. But it doesn't look like a 95/CA (V1) with 4.5mV. It does look like a 3400 series body - prob the same plug. They both come with a bonded .4 x .7 and cu is a little higher, but that would depend on the stylus anyway.
This might be a winner with the right stylus, hard to say. Do you know the rest of the electrical specs? I would guess the sound would be a little more mellow assuming higher inductance, and bass/dynamics more prominent. Any more info?
neo
-
AT110e
R= 516ohm
Z= 603mH
As an aside, I was looking through my database of cartridge stats....
here is what I have for the AT180ML- one of AT's cost no object efforts:
R= 310ohm
Imp= 1400ohm
Z= 240mH
In the Audio technical 1/2" body families this is an odd generator!
I have the AT160ML recorded as 490mH/790ohm , and the AT170ML I have no data for...
Still without turntable at the temporary lodgings.... (while renovation is happening at home... for as many months as it takes) - and nowhere to put the Sota RCM... not to mention that the RCM is so loud that I cannot use it when others are home (and I usually wear Noise Reduction headphones when I use it....)
A nice compact ultrasound unit would be nice.... :roll:
-
AT110e
R= 516ohm
Z= 603mH
As an aside, I was looking through my database of cartridge stats....
here is what I have for the AT180ML- one of AT's cost no object efforts:
R= 310ohm
Imp= 1400ohm
Z= 240mH
In the Audio technical 1/2" body families this is an odd generator!
I have the AT160ML recorded as 490mH/790ohm , and the AT170ML I have no data for...
Still without turntable at the temporary lodgings.... (while renovation is happening at home... for as many months as it takes) - and nowhere to put the Sota RCM... not to mention that the RCM is so loud that I cannot use it when others are home (and I usually wear Noise Reduction headphones when I use it....)
A nice compact ultrasound unit would be nice.... :roll:
Good one!
The 110 looks like a nice inexpensive cart. Assuming that's a 3400 series body, has lots of stylus upgrade options like the 95.
I don't think I've seen that 180 info before. The 170 and 180 have the same output - 4mV.
The 160 is the same generator as 440ML, 155LC and others. Looks like it was a go-to 1st or 2nd tier motor for a long while and largely responsible for AT overly bright house sound gestalt. With a beryllium cantilever it sounds pretty damn good to me. With an alum cantilever I have to load it at 30K.
Not exactly sure when the 440 was introduced, but in the '80s it was used to compete with CD. Looks like they mimicked the wrong character of early digital. Why in the world would they do that?
Wow, I never heard a Sota RCM and hope I never do. If it's like a VPI - in a box, the sound probably reverberates inside. Maybe you could put it inside another acoustically treated box? You'd probably have to vent the box. Maybe against a wall w/acoustic treatment.
The ultrasound unit sounds like a better idea.
Hope they finish your house soon. Good luck with all that.
neo
-
Hi All,
I have a 13EA on hand, but I haven't been able to land a 12 series cart. What are the major differences in sound between the two cartridges?
Don grb
-
You mean a 12S or Sa?
The shibata ones were made for 4-ch and are low inductance and lower output. Specs are more like the 15/20. Generally more extended as 4-ch info was encoded at 30KHz. The 12E variants are the same motor as the 13Ea.
neo
-
Yes Neo,
I should have been more specific. I'm speaking of the low inductance 12 series. I'm trying to get a handle on the differences mostly because the specs for the LS500 are 5 hz- 45 khz.
Something isn't quite adding up here.
-
The 12S, Sa are the low inductance 12 series. The 12E, 13Ea is higher inductance.
I no almost nothing about the LS500 except for what you told me and other LS models having 4.2mV out.
Didn't you measure resistance at 1200 ohms? If the cart came with a beryllium cantilever and LC tip, 45K could be possible (I think).
Have any more specs for the cart? It's starting to sound like Precept 440, except that's supposed to have around 500 ohm resistance.
The Precept 110 has higher resistance/inductance, but I don't think response goes to 45K.
neo
-
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/audio-technica/ls500.shtml
This is all the info I've found.
Don
-
I can't access anything in the VE library, so what does it say?
-
LS500
5hz - 45khz
4.2 mV
.75 - 1.75g
Within 1.0 db
31db @ 1 khz
21db @ 10 khz
47 k Ohms
100 - 200pf
Linear contact
-
LS500
5hz - 45khz
4.2 mV
.75 - 1.75g
Within 1.0 db
31db @ 1 khz
21db @ 10 khz
47 k Ohms
100 - 200pf
Linear contact
That's it? Nothing about the cantilever? Is this the owners manual?
The 13Ea has response to 30K w/alum cantilever. This doesn't shed much light. You said you picked up a 13Ea. Have you listened to it yet?
Output is the same and this vintage seemed to come in 2 flavors - high and low inductance. The resistance of the 13 should be around the same as the 500, maybe you could double check. Could a beryllium LC change the 13Ea enough to get 5 - 45K?
This looks suspiciously like Precept. Why don't you send me one and I'll check it out? :thumb:
Just kidding. By most accounts the higher model Precept has less resistance. This is an AT mysterycart. Seems like a high end 13, but the only round plug models with that response were low output (2.7) and Precept.
neo
-
Both exemplars that I have of what I am assuming are the original styli are hollow Aluminum cantilevers. One shows signs of oxidation, the other does not. Both are tapered.
Don
-
The resistance will tell us what family it falls into...
From the pics in the manual, it looks like a rebranded AT12e
They used to play fast and loose with specs.... note that it does not claim +/-3db - so 45khz may well be +5db and -10db - probably measured at 100pf.
Whereas most neutral setup might achieve +/-3db 50-15khz.... probably at 150pf
The tapered Al styli tend to have resonance peak at around 16 to 19khz -standalone that peak tends to be circa 8 to 10db - but with the right highish inductance to pull that down, response becomes almost flat up to the resonance before starting to drop off.
For the quad cartridges, 100k R load would boost the resonance further pulling the HF response up in the process - and the resonance was often "placed" at 16khz - the main stereo bands were low pass filtered at 15khz and the FM encoded rear channels started at 18khz..... so the resonance at 17khz would be perfect and of little concern...
So similarly engineered styli would work for stereo in high inductance bodies and for quad in low inductance ones.....
-
I don't know. Even if the spec isn't flat, AT didn't list them like that. Recently they spec everything 20 to 20K. Before they started doing that, carts like the 150MLX is to 30K with 350mH. 440ML is to 32K and 490mH.
It's mostly only the 4-ch that were between 10 or 15 to 45K and they had 500 ohm with either an alum or beryllium. Even carts like the 170 and 22 -25 didn't spec to 45K. Maybe the resistance is out of spec and it's a 4-ch type.
There was a DR500LC and a VS240LC with the same fr resp. Most parameters unknown - one had 500 ohms and the other was beryllium, I think.
neo
-
Most of those specced to 45k sound like Quad cartridges - they are all line contact... the 45kHz is the required bandwidth for Quad CD4...
I wonder whether those 45kHz bandwidth specs are all measured at 100pf/100kOhm (the Quad CD4 loading standard)?
The LS500 looks like an AT12 - and perhaps it is in fact a rebadged AT12sa with an LC rather than Shibata stylus?
-
Most of those specced to 45k sound like Quad cartridges - they are all line contact... the 45kHz is the required bandwidth for Quad CD4...
I wonder whether those 45kHz bandwidth specs are all measured at 100pf/100kOhm (the Quad CD4 loading standard)?
The LS500 looks like an AT12 - and perhaps it is in fact a rebadged AT12sa with an LC rather than Shibata stylus?
The LC was developed after shibata and a few carts were still spec to 45K or beyond with recommended 47K load. Although quad never became the norm, there were quite of number of units sold and people didn't just throw them away. It faded out gradually and AT kept making extended band carts for awhile.
Yes, specs look like a 12S, 14S, but where does 1200 ohm R come from? There are a couple of factors unknown to me besides inductance. Where do these VE library specs come from, the owners manual? If so, it would say beryllium if it was. I know there are mistakes in the data base and this info doesn't add up. There were a couple of carts that exceeded 45K - the 15/20 - beryllium/shibata (also low R) and 1 or 2 others, later I think.
Is this the Sarah Palin maverick cart? What does LS stand for, inductance suppression? Maybe it has an inductance cancellation device, a coil to ground on each ch, but my 8 Ball says, "Highly Unlikely".
Where does this leave us?
Don grb,
Maybe when David is up and running again, you could send one to the Dlaloum Inner Space Testing Laboratory in New Zealand?
At this time I have to say, "Unknown, insufficient evidence". It looks like a 12E? :roll:
neo
-
Neo,
From my understanding the LS stands for lab series. I'll measure the inductance this am.
The info from vinyl engine appears to be from an owners manual.
Don grb
-
I'm in OZ... as in Oztralia.... the Kiwis are across a bit of sea and a wee bit south.... and the relationship is a bit like Canadians and US-ians.... (Americans is such an imprecise term!)
Yes the specs are from the VE copy of the manual
LS stands for Lab-Series.... and the manual includes the LS100/200/300/400/500
With regards to the LS500 and 1200ohm
I looked back at the AT11/12/13/14/15/20 manual
the following cartridges all have 1200ohm:
AT11E
AT12E
AT12XE
AT13ea
They are also all 670ohm
Based on my calculations that would make their impedance circa 6800ohm @ 1Khz
Also the diagrams in the manual showing the LS500 body look exactly like the AT11's and AT12's that I have in my spares box....
I would need to see photos of the LS500 to confirm, but honestly every spec we have on this thing is consistently saying it is the same body as the AT11/12/13 high inductance models. (the AT12Sa was the lowest model of the low inductance ones, which included the AT14Sa, AT15XE, AT15Sa, AT20Sla)
No mystery here - and if fitted with the respective needles I expect it would perform as per the other relatives of the 1200ohm/670mH AT family....
bye for now
David
-
Yes the specs are from the VE copy of the manual
LS stands for Lab-Series.... and the manual includes the LS100/200/300/400/500
With regards to the LS500 and 1200ohm
I looked back at the AT11/12/13/14/15/20 manual
the following cartridges all have 1200ohm:
AT11E
AT12E
AT12XE
AT13ea
They are also all 670ohm
I would need to see photos of the LS500 to confirm, but honestly every spec we have on this thing is consistently saying it is the same body as the AT11/12/13 high inductance models. (the AT12Sa was the lowest model of the low inductance ones, which included the AT14Sa, AT15XE, AT15Sa, AT20Sla)
No mystery here - and if fitted with the respective needles I expect it would perform as per the other relatives of the 1200ohm/670mH AT family....
bye for now
David
None of those high R/L models approach 45K. You assume AT fudged the spec or mistakenly put 12S bandwidth on the spec. Why then would they change the lower range from either 10 or 15Hz (12S/Sa) to 5Hz ?
I'm not assuming anything, including the reliability of inductance measurements taken with a meter. If the bandwidth spec is wrong, what about the others? You may be right - a 12_ LC, and it may be most likely, but why is R 1200 instead of 670? Still makes no sense.
neo
-
FYI,
I measured the inductance of one body at 970 mH. It seems even higher than the 13EA based on the reports. I've not measured the 13EA.
Don grb
-
Oh, I almost forgot, it seems if I understood the conversation correctly, that adding a Beryllium cantilever to the cartridge would almost be a detriment. It sounds as if the performance of this cartridge is dependent on the cantilever resonance. Agreed?
Don grb
-
FYI,
I measured the inductance of one body at 970 mH. It seems even higher than the 13EA based on the reports. I've not measured the 13EA.
Don grb
Okay, it's probably like the 13. According to your link on p 15 - Elliott Sound Products, meter inductance readings tend to read high because of the meter's resistance. I also wonder about resistance readings, could they be off too? 1200 ohms seems a far cry from 670. To add icing on the cake, are those 670 figures, meter readings also?
Oh, I almost forgot, it seems if I understood the conversation correctly, that adding a Beryllium cantilever to the cartridge would almost be a detriment. It sounds as if the performance of this cartridge is dependent on the cantilever resonance. Agreed?
Don grb
No, it's just a factor but one that contributes to the end result. The 12S, 14S have alum cantilevers and response to 45K. That's the thing, all this stuff overlaps and it gets confusing, especially if some info is wrong or missing.
Given your system priorities, I would guess this isn't the right cart. The 140LC is a nude LC on a tapered cant, any different, too mellow?
If so, can you change the loading to a higher value? Have you messed with shunt capacitance? Going above recommended < 200pF should make it brighter. Why is system mellow, speakers? amplification? both? That could be important.
neo
-
I think it is a combination of both, the amp and speakers. When I started out with this system, I did no research whatsoever. I didn't have a turntable, just a cd player. It was only when couldn't tolerate more than fifteen minutes or so of the cd, that I started looking at vinyl again. This cartridge actually sounds pretty good, but you know how we are, even if something isn't broke, fix it anyway. I'm not actually sure how far down this road I want to travel, because I haven't experienced listening fatigue in a long time. I'm mostly just trying to learn.
Don
-
I have a feeling that you should leave the cart as-is. With any MM/MI you can tweak the sound by changing the load. In general, changing resistance to a higher value like 60K will make it brighter. Lowering the value, to like 30K, will make it less bright. With most phono stages in order to raise the value you have to replace the load resistors. To lower you can use other resistors in parallel - loading plugs or soldered across the input. A parallel resistance calculator can be used to figure out what R value to use.
Adding capacitance will lower the high frequency resonance. How much depends on the inductance. This lower resonance combines with the response of the cart and augments the treble and rolls of the extreme high end (usually). Unlike resistors, capacitors can be added directly. Capacitance load is capacitance of arm wire + cables + preamp. Check out this article written by an EE:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/load_the_magnets_e.html
I'm not sure of your knowledge with playing with this stuff. Please don't hesitate with questions. If you're looking for a better cart we can talk about that too. If your system is evolving, your priorities might change also.
neo
-
Ok Neo,
I've spent a fair bit of time with the "LS540lc" Frankencombo, and I just can't resist further experimentation. There is a retailer that lists the 155lc beryllium, so I thought is do a "test purchase for an AT-140LC (I could use a backup). Sure enough, the guy sends me a stylus which was chipped (probably didn't think I'd notice). So my question is, have you compared the Boron cantilever to the Beryllium? The 155lc was my first choice because of a better compliance match. I might have to settle for the 150mlx and resort to replacing the rubber compliance washer. I was never trying to experiment for "tone controls", but rather exploring the potential of the cartridge. So, if you have any thoughts on the Beryllium vs Boron, I'd love to hear them!
Best wishes,
Don
-
Hi DonGrb,
You've been running an LS500/140LC ?
No longer trying to achieve a brighter sound, looking for ultimate performance.
Beryllium is lighter than boron and it's also more flexible, so in that respect it's more like aluminum - dynamic swings, warmth. Because boron is more rigid and less flexible, it's more exact.
If I can make a suggestion, I think you should consider a low inductance/impedance body like the ones listed above - 12S, 14S, 15/20. The inexpensive AT-100E has a low inductance body, the same as a 150MLX. Have you tried a 150?
You're using a low mass arm? The 155LC has a cu of 16 @ 100Hz. Max VTF is 1.6g. The 150MLX is 10 cu @100Hz. I think max VTF is .2g higher?
neo
-
Thanks Neo,
I'll try the 150mlx, as it's really the cantilever/stylus that I'm after.
I'll try the alternatives as soon as I see where this road leads. If I'm sure the 150 isn't better, I'll transplant stylus into a grip suitable for the ls500. Regardless, this was just the info that I was after.
Best wishes,
Don grb
-
Ok, Frankencart pt. II.
I've just completed my second transplant. I've transplanted the 440MLa onto the grip for the LS500 and I'll have to say I'm pleasantly surprised. There's a lot more detail with the 440 as compared to the ATN140LC. Next up the 150MLx. I've done some research and it appears there is quite a bit of difference between the 150 and the 440. Stay tuned...
Don
-
I would expect the 150MLx to be smoother and more even - right across the frequency range (based on the behaviour of my 15ss....)
Looking forward to hearing how it goes!
-
Interesting stuff DonGrb,
All of this is going on the LS500 body? Do you have other AT bodies?
I tried the ATN140LC on a 440 body and it seemed similar, maybe without quite as much detail. The 140 is a higher cu stylus - 16 cu I think. Could that have been a factor? I was using a low mass arm.
Any changes in the system?
neo
-
Neo and Dl,
The only other unrelated AT body would be the Clearaudio Maestro. Lol!
Compliance could be a factor. Compliance was part of the reason that I wanted to try the 155LC.
I'll have to run the resonance checks to be sure. I'm not quite sure exactly what happens to compliance once you start transplanting styli. There really is no before and after with this sort of thing. Based on what I've read and what you guys have said, I'm expecting way more from the 150mlx.
As an aside, 200 power isn't really good enough for the microline styli. I can examine the tip easily enough, but I don't think I'll be able to discern the wear facets.
Don grb
-
I was posting from work yesterday and completely forgot about the the Signet TK5ea and the Signet MR 5.0 me.
Don
-
Also the precept series....
-
Dl,
The Maestro and the two Signets are the other sorta Audio Technica bodies that I own.
I haven't picked up any Precepts (yet) ;)
Also, the 440mla combo is extremely sensitive to VTA. This stylus is probably more sensitive to vta than any cartridge I've owned!
-
Neo and Dl,
The only other unrelated AT body would be the Clearaudio Maestro. Lol!
Compliance could be a factor. Compliance was part of the reason that I wanted to try the 155LC.
I'll have to run the resonance checks to be sure. I'm not quite sure exactly what happens to compliance once you start transplanting styli. There really is no before and after with this sort of thing. Based on what I've read and what you guys have said, I'm expecting way more from the 150mlx.
As an aside, 200 power isn't really good enough for the microline styli. I can examine the tip easily enough, but I don't think I'll be able to discern the wear facets.
Don grb
You have a Maestro? That's a lower inductance AT motor and I think your efforts might be better spent on that one. If you have an ATN150MLX, then you could have the original Maestro - boron/ML, except for compliance. That's assuming your Maestro is without orig stylus. When you substitute a stylus the cart takes on the compliance, VTF of the new stylus. A successful transplant should retain the original compliance of the stylus.
Some people think that holding the stylus firmly against the plug during transplanting, or torqueing the compliance screw, will affect compliance. I don't think so. I think compliance is determined by the cantilever itself and the rubber donut.
200X is a bit light for wear examination on an AT ML. They are some tiny diamonds. With the right lighting you coulp probably get a good idea. You need a high intensity light on either side of the tip, and view it from above. Check out Sparky's sticky on Karma for some 200X wear photos.
Tell me about your Maestro and where you're at with these high inductance ATs. BTW, the TK5Ea is also high inductance. Is this experimentation?
neo
-
Neo,
It's funny, but that Maestro is how I found you and this thread. I was careless one day and allowed the tonearm to come into contact with the spindle clamp on my Scout. This resulted in the the cantilever becoming twisted within the grip. After many months, and with the help of this thread, I finally worked up the courage to attempt to straighten myself. After re-aligning the cantilever, it has been in the box ever since. At the time I wasn't aware of the relationship with Audio Technica, and was somewhat "put-off" with Clearaudio being unwilling to sell me a replacement stylus. I'm into the LS500 hook, line, and sinker at this point. I came here for the educational opportunity, so I need to see this one thru. There really is only one upgrade for this being the 150Mlx, after that, I plan to compare the Frankencart to the others. One note: I'm actually happier with the Frankencart than I have been with the others that I've owned. Those carts include: Benz Ace, ZYX R100,Clearaudio Maestro, the Signets, and the Ortofons. The Nagaoka MP-50, probably edges the LS500 at this point. I've also a 20x2l which I've yet to give a listen.
-
Given your cart collection my suggestion of a different flavour to try would be a DV Karat...
The other DV's are "ordinary", whereas the karat is its own category...
-
That is the plan. I'd like to sell the 20x2l, if I can do so without losing too much money.
I'm terribly curious about the Karat, and wish that I'd invested the extra few dollars on that one.
I was probably concerned about other Scout users reporting about problems with the spindle clamp.
That will probably be my next new cartridge.
-
How is the sound of the clearaudio concept v2 or performer V2 MM Cartridge vs the rest , are they competitive ...?
-
I don't have any experience with the newer Clearaudio carts.
Don grb
-
How is the sound of the clearaudio concept v2 or performer V2 MM Cartridge vs the rest , are they competitive ...?
You mean, is the SQ competitive?
All the CA MM carts share the same generator. The Concept and Performer have the same specs as all the original MMs. The V2 Maestro and Virtuoso have stronger magnets for a higher output, but are otherwise the same motor. If you're looking at a new one, all but Maestro would benefit from a stylus upgrade. If you could find a used one with a good motor you'll make out better and probably more than pay for the stylus upgrade. All but the body is the same.
The 15 cu compliance of these is for a med/high mass arm. For a low mass arm you could substitute a different AT stylus. If you mean competitive value, that's a tough question and depends on your preference. The Performer is $400. At that price point you'd have some other options, some of which might be better depending on what you're looking for. Any frame of reference? What arm are you using?
neo
-
Low to med mass arm (jelco) cartridges used Denon (dl110) grado ,AT440mla, at the Clearaudio price point looking at picking up a Denon 301 ...
-
All the Jelco arms I know of are high mass. Maybe you have one with fluid damping which will work better with higher compliance carts?
I never owned a 301, but I am familiar with the upscale Denons and the presentation is a little different. The Denon will give a very musical, relaxed sound. Detail will be pretty good, but the appeal IMO is in the relaxed presentation. Once you have them dialed in, they sound like music. Listenability is high. I'm guessing that the 301 will have more detail and information than a 103, but not quite the finesse of a DL-S1.
Most MMs are more immediate. Where a coil tends to have a more distant soundstage type sound, MMs are right there. At least that how it usually sounds to me, or the best I can describe it. If you had the 440 on the Jelco, it might not have been the best match. That one tends toward brightness, but it depends on your system and loading. With AT carts (including CA) capacitance must be kept low, < 200pF total. I used to load my 440 at 32K for better balance, but that depends on the rest of the stuff.
Anyway, without arm matching considerations the AT-100E ($80) has the same motor as the 150MLX. Put a 150 stylus on there and you have a lighter 150 which is easier to match compliance to mass.
The cu of the CA carts is a better match to Jelco arms. Considering the stock stylus I can't say a new Concept or Performer looks like a great value. Check out this one:
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-clearaudio-aurum-beta-s-high-output-mm-cartridge-2013-09-26-analog-95076
It doesn't have the wood top, but I'd get that in a heartbeat. If it's a little too pricey you could make an offer. This is for detail/resolution - accurately hearing what's on the record. Relaxed or otherwise, a more neutral and defined presentation.
neo
-
Ok, I couldn't resist. I admit it, I'm weak! The Beryllium cantilever is on its way.
There was an auction for a ATN15SS, and I won (lost?). At any rate the price of admission was less than the 150Mlx. Whether I can take advantage of the cantilever or not remains to be seen.
Don grb
-
Good luck with the stylus. At least it doesn't require a transplant for your LS500.
Let us know how it works out.
neo
-
The new stylus just arrived. No Beryllium, just ordinary Aluminum. As far as I'm concerned, any seller on Ebay that completely misrepresents an item, should be banned. End of story.
-
That's a shame.
I no longer use epay since my ex ran up thousands and I didn't pay the bill, but I was under the impression that you could open up a dispute and get your money back?
Seems that everyone is out of the 20SS except Gear. Now they want $300 for it. They have an ATN20S - aluminum/shibata for $250. That's crazy.
For $250 you could send it to Soundsmith and get a ruby/LC.
neo
-
That's a shame.
I no longer use epay since my ex ran up thousands and I didn't pay the bill, but I was under the impression that you could open up a dispute and get your money back?
Seems that everyone is out of the 20SS except Gear. Now they want $300 for it. They have an ATN20S - aluminum/shibata for $250. That's crazy.
For $250 you could send it to Soundsmith and get a ruby/LC.
neo
The seller has graciously offered a full refund. I really appreciate sellers that try to make things right!
-
Ok Neo,
I've listened to your advice and I've reinstalled the Maestro. The difference between the Maestro and LS500 is smaller than you might imagine. Their character is almost identical. When listening to the LS500, it's almost as if it is a slightly sloppier version of the Maestro. I have to believe the difference is due to the stylus/cantilever. I can't describe the stylus on the Maestro (mostly because it's too miniscule). The stylus on the Maestro is truly one of the finest I've tried to inspect!
Don grb
-
Hi Don,
do you have another Boron cantilever to compare it to, or is that your only one?
Jut curious to know whether it is a typical Boron cantilever (which are indeed very fine) - or something even slimmer...
-
Hi David,
The cantilever on the Maestro is about the same diameter as those found on the Benz Ace. The Nagaoka MP-50 cantilever is also about the same diameter, although a bit shorter.
Don grb
-
OK that would make it about the same as the SAS, my Empire MC1 etc...
yeah those are nice fine styli!
-
I suspect the stylus on the Maestro is an AT boron/ML, maybe w/o the gold dust on the cantilever like the 150MLX, and with cu of 15.
All the other CA MM styli are conspicuously AT and I doubt if Maestro is different. Check any AT ML under small magnification (30X). You can barely see it.
I can't say this from experience with an orig Maestro stylus, I've never seen one, but really?
I'm also skeptical about the high inductance/resistance LS500 sounding almost identical. Please don't take this as a criticism of your system or powers of discernment, but I think that due to some unknown system factor the differences are being masked.
Maybe someone has inspected a Maestro stylus under high power and can comment further. I always assumed it was a microridge type from Namiki, like most other micros. The world is getting smaller in that respect. Is Gyger still around?
Any further illumination on this or the world of micro styli, is welcome.
neo
-
My recollection is that gyger shut up shop a couple of years back... Ortofon said something about having stocked up on " replicants", but replaced the fg on their totl mm with a shibata... (it coincided with the shift from 5xo series to 2M )
Who makes the DV pathfinder needle?
AT and Jico are both Namiki customers...
-
Neo,
Please don't apologize for any statements which may be helpful in my education. I've examined the Maestro stylus under 200x, and it doesn't resemble anything that I've seen before. I'll have to double check, but I feel safe in saying that it's not the same as the 440mla. You are absolutely correct when you say that I do not possess the same level of discernment as you and the others.I don't have a "dog in this fight". I'm only curious as to why AT spec'd this cartridge the way they did. I'm not trying to sell you anything. As far inductance is concerned, I seem to remember there were a couple out units in the list which stood out. I believe the AT13Ea being one.I've been meaning to ask, if it's possible that it's not only the inductance that matters, but how closely the inductance and resistance match. It seems that some of your highly thought of carts shared this trait. Regardless, don't ever hesitate to question me or my powers. I'm here to learn, not to teach.
Don grb
-
Dynavector describes it (XV-1t) as a line contact - 7 X 30 microns. Manufacturer unknown.
Clearaudio describes their top MC diamonds as micro HD. The Maestro says boron/HD. When Maestro first came out, CA gave the tip some kind of Star Trek name. It began with a "T" but I can't remember exactly - Tetragon or something like that.
I believe Namiki is the largest manufacturer of these tips and I also think they often come mounted on the cantilever. Companies like Lyra and ZYX get their tips from Namiki. My Genesis has a microridge, undoubtedly from them in the '80s. I wonder if they could be induced to make a hollow tube boron cantilever again like my Genesis has. With the money they charge for top carts today, you'd think it would pay for a tube cantilever. I bought my first Genesis 1000 back in "87 or '88. It had response out to around 80K. About a year later they made a model change (quietly, w/o changing designation) and extended response past 100K. Can't say I could hear the difference, but I'm quite sure of the response claims. The supplied printout graph ended at 100K.
Sometimes changing a record or type of music can reveal previously unheard differences. Classical music tends to be more demanding and therefore revealing. Combinations of equipment or even cables, especially tonearm cables, can make everything sound similar. I remember reading about the Art DJ phono stage and someone said it made carts sound the same. I'm not saying what the situation is, but Don, I think you'd hear greater differences with further exploration.
neo
Don,
I just saw your response. It is a Star Trek tip? You've never seen anything like it? Any chance of posting a photo(s)?
-
I believe Clearaudio called it a Trigon P, if I'm not mistaken. I'm using Haydn's streichquartette an a means of comparison.
Don grb
P.S. I've not had difficulty with carts sounding the same. I'd think the Simaudio 310 lp would be reasonable.
-
Neo,
Please don't apologize for any statements which may be helpful in my education. I've examined the Maestro stylus under 200x, and it doesn't resemble anything that I've seen before. I'll have to double check, but I feel safe in saying that it's not the same as the 440mla. You are absolutely correct when you say that I do not possess the same level of discernment as you and the others.I don't have a "dog in this fight". I'm only curious as to why AT spec'd this cartridge the way they did. I'm not trying to sell you anything. As far inductance is concerned, I seem to remember there were a couple out units in the list which stood out. I believe the AT13Ea being one.I've been meaning to ask, if it's possible that it's not only the inductance that matters, but how closely the inductance and resistance match. It seems that some of your highly thought of carts shared this trait. Regardless, don't ever hesitate to question me or my powers. I'm here to learn, not to teach.
Don grb
Don grb,
We all learn here and I don't think your powers of discernment are less than anyone else posting on this thread, and I don't recall saying that. We're all limited by the equipment at our disposal and the time we have to devote to these endeavors. I remember at one point you were looking for a brighter sound. I assumed this was system related. Could this have something to do with results, Maestro vs LS500?
There's still much we don't understand about electrical parameters and performance. You hit the nail on the head about resistance. I don't think matching inductance is it, but I'm not sure. There's a relationship between resistance and impedance that seems important. High impedance is indicative of high reactance and to make matters more confusing, many of the specs we look up, seem wrong. We know for example the 440 impedance is 3.2K and inductance is 490mH. Why then is a 13Ea or your LS500 with around 1000mH and bigger coils, 1200 ohms? It doesn't make sense. Maybe 1200 is the resistance and impedance unknown.
Were you using the stock alum/LC stylus on the LS500?
neo
-
I've been using the stylus transplanted from the AT-440MLa. The curious thing about the current state of affairs is: the LS500 is supposed to go down to about 5 hz. I had only begun to optimize the ls500 in this regard. At this point I can't testify to the high end, but I've never heard a cartridge with this much low end.
-
Quite a few ATs were spec to 5Hz. There's really no information down there except warps.
Are you getting a prodigious amount of bass, relatively, with the cart? If so, there could be a couple of factors influencing that. One would be the response of cart, but more likely is your transplant might need tightening. Did you have this bass with the orig stylus? By your description I'm not sure if this is just deep or excessive.
I have a 12E that's supposedly the same motor. I haven't used it much - and only with the fake PC550 stylus, but response seemed reasonable. You're the only one checking out the LS500 so you tell us. Take your time. I suspect the MLa stylus might have brought it some life, but this is pure guesswork.
neo
-
Initially, the cart was bass shy. I had to add mass to the headshell to bring the bass alive. The bass isn't excessive it's just right. No one note bass, it's rich with harmonic overtones, just the way I'd imagine it should be. I'm not finished with the tracking force, but I'd have to guess this combination probably isn't the easiest to optimize.
-
As a general rule, when substituting a stylus you use the VTF range of the cart the stylus was made for. If you're using the 440 stylus, that would be a max of 1.8g.
Interesting stuff. Appreciate your observations.
neo
-
I'll admit my first run at the Maestro was during my earlier attempts at cartridge/table setup. I made no attempts to optimize the sound, I simply lined it up, set the azimuth and the tracking force. I'll try to be a little more patient with the Maestro this go ' round. As it sits today the settings are: capacitance right around 180 puff, 47k ohms, and the vtf is around 2g.
With the LS500, the vtf is around 1.4g, and I think I'm going to have to go a little lighter.
The highs aren't quite where I want them to be and I think harmonically it could be better. After comparing the ls to the maestro, I'm starting to think simple protractors will not be good enough for microline contact styli. I think these must be done "by ear" or with a ' scope.
-
Do you have the owners sheet on the LS500? 1.4g seems a little light. I don't know all the specs, but the LS400 looks like an AT-95 with compliance and VTF. Recommended max VTF for the 400 is 2.5g, which would make it nearly identical in that respect to the 95/CA.
Unless you have contrary information, I think you should try it in the Maestro range and in a med mass arm. What arm(s) are you using?
It takes awhile to get a handle on exactly what's doing what, when adjusting a cart. Even with experience sometimes you guess wrong. Your basic parameters are alignment, VTF, azimuth and SRA/VTA. If you're tracking too light you could get momentary dropouts from the stylus losing contact with the groove. As a general rule, I always start near the max recommended value for a cart.
If you have a good, easy to see protractor and some light magnification, don't expect a minor alignment change to be the revelation that some people go on about. Half the time you probably won't hear a change. Sometimes you will. It depends on the correction and whether the former alignment was going off into space, or just a partial alignment with another set of nulls, probably close. Many people don't understand alignment and think there is only two or three sets of nulls you can use or you're hopelessly lost. It ain't so. If you run out of room in your headshell and your nulls wind up at 64mm and somewhere near 120mm, you'll have a perfectly good alignment - almost Baerwald. As long as the cantilever angle gives you 2 good nulls near one of the standard alignments and not somewhere off the record, you'll be okay. If you make a radical change of arm height you should recheck alignment. If the alignment is way off there will be a phase difference between channels. I have a feeling this isn't the case with your set-up.
Speaking of arm height, this is one thing that will change tonality, top to bottom balance and minimize harmonic distortion. If the arm is too high you'll get strident high frequencies. If too low, the highs tend to drop out and the top sounds distant and/or nonexistent. Sometimes a level cart works, sometimes not.
neo
-
Neo,
I'm running the AT440Mla on the LS500. The tracking force range on the 440 is 1.0-1.8 (1.4 optimal).
I started out near the top of it's range and slowly backed the vtf down. After adding mass to the headshell, I listened for the harmonic structure of the bass. That is how I've gotten near the 1.4g vtf.
The highs are only slightly dull, and I'm sure I'll end up somewhere near 1.4gms.
I just can't imagine that I've totally screwed up the settings on the Maestro, but stranger things have happened!
-
Neo,
After thinking about it a little more, I'm thinking the string quartet may not be the strongest test.
Do you have any suggestions of available classical music which may provide a better test?
Thanks,
Don grb
-
Don,
The problem is, I'm not sure what's in print. I like symphonic music and I used to have a few gems on Chesky, Lyrita and some regular labels like RCA and London etc. A full orchestra will have it all, from massed strings to the bark of the bass and sometimes thundering tympani drums. Choral pieces are good too.
Brahms (especially the 4th) is great for strings. Aaron Copeland is a lot of fun and has it all. Most any standard by Dvorak, Mussorgsky, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven etc, as long as you get familiar with the pressing/recording. They seem to vary a lot in VTA/SRA and I can't listen to them unless I get it dialed in. You might want to look for the label.
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/classical-beethoven-concerto-piano-orch-paul-badura-skoda-audiophile-1973-harmonia-mund-2013-10-22-music-55405
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/classical-berlioz-munch-symphonie-fantastique-rca-shaded-dog-1962-2013-10-22-music-11801
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/classical-lorin-maazel-direct-from-cleveland-direct-to-disc-2013-10-18-music-32713
Can't say I know those particular recordings, just going by the label. The Chesky recordings were great and if you can find Malcolm Arnold on Lyrita, snatch it. I lost all those old classical records in a flood, and now I just have some miscellaneous pieces on regular labels.
neo
-
Ok Neo, I appreciate the help. Now here's the $ 64000 question: what is the problem when it's not dialed in? I'd really appreciate as much help as you can give me here as I feel like I'm on the precipice of understanding. Spare no words!
Thanks,
Don
-
What's the problem when not dialed in? You said spare no words, but two words will really suffice - harmonics and tonality.
Assuming alignment and azimuth are good, SRA - arm height makes a dramatic difference, at least for me. All the fuss about 92 degrees doesn't include all records. Matter of fact, the original recommendation was 91 degrees and Fremer changed it to 92. Top to bottom balance is a good indicator. Can I hear the bass? Can I hear the cymbals and do they sound right? Problem is, some records are bright and some are dull. Harmonics and basic tonality will tell you if it's right.
Many people are in the set and forget school, and one setting can work for most pressings, but, although many records seem to require no change, some do and sound much better when dialed in. I've found this especially true with classical music. There's a sticky up top that discussed this and has some good links for set-up and evaluation. There's really one indispensable trick - knowing what live acoustic instruments sound like.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=112433.0
neo
-
Gotcha
-
There's really one indispensable trick - knowing what live acoustic instruments sound like.
Uhuh - Oh Yeah... :thumb:
And if I might add another proviso - UNAMPLIFIED live acoustic instruments.... as the miking and amping process often changes (totally messes up really!) the sound...
Recently heard a small group playing acoustic middle eastern with a twist - Oud (middle eastern lute), darbouka (drum) and accordion - fabulous small trio in a small space.....
-
Dl,
There's the rub. I have recordings that are all over the map. Although I have the ability to adjust vta, I certainly can't see myself adjusting for different recordings. Anyhoo, I think I've landed in a pretty good spot. I can life with the choices I've made and my system should be easily maintainable for the years to come!
Thanks all!
-
"There's the rub. I have recordings that are all over the map."
Although some pressings require a change in VTA/SRA to sound right, it seems to me that most don't. Some evenings I'll play two or three records and not have to bother getting up and adjusting arm height. Many of the records that benefit from height adjustment are of similar vintage or label and one correction could be good for many records. Having VTA on-the-fly makes it easy. You can hear the difference immediately, and it - the sound will snap into place when you find the "G" (good) spot. Focus and tone/harmonics will mimic real instruments.
Even without on-the-fly VTA, once you've found that height where most records sound right, make a small mark on the arm pillar so you can come back there easily if you change it. Most corrections require a very small adjustment. Even though theoretically, cutting angles can vary as much as around five degrees, it rarely takes more than a mm or two of height adjustment to correct. I don't know exactly why, but you can hear it easily when you experiment. Having the arm too high will result in third order harmonic distortion, strident treble, loss of bass. Too low is more benign and usually dull with distant treble and emphasized bass.
Cart adjustment is an evolving process. When you make a change in one parameter, you have to check the others. Changing arm height will affect alignment. If your alignment is good at the height where most records sound right, then a temporary change of a millimeter or part of a millimeter, won't be a problem. The alignment change is so small it's imperceptible or nearly so. The longer the arm, the less alignment will change, but it takes more height adjustment to affect the same change as on a shorter arm.
neo
-
Just saw a new cart from AT, at least the listing says it's new. The 100E was a Japanese only model, now a US model. That's the $80 one with the straight cantilever and a bonded .3 x .7. It has the same generator as the 150MLX. The new one is the 5V - looks like the old Signet body like the 7V. Specs are nearly identical to the 150/100 except output is 5mV. Comes with a .6 mil spherical which should be good for mono records. All you need is a nice stylus for stereo. Looks like the AT designers read the forums. These new models have low inductance like we've been saying for a long time now.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/AT5V.html
neo
-
Apparently there is a 5, 7 and 9 in this series in Japan....
But I believe someone posted that the cantilever angle is different on these - after trying a cantilever transfer... so they may not be quite the direct relatives to the AT120/150 that we think they are...
Another minor thing - low inductance is only useful if the effective tip mass is very low... using low inductance with a lower end stylus merely exposes its flaws...
I spent quite a while chasing the low inductance holy grail - but I am coming around to high inductance models - I think low inductance ultimately only works with exotic tube cantilevers such as V15VMR, EPC100/205 - very low mass.
once the mass starts to rise you either have to raise the capacitance or live with the flaws of a higher mass cantilever (rising high end)
At some stage I should work backwards from the ATN152LP measurements and work out what the "perfect" inductance/capacitance match for it would be.... (I never got around to doing a full set of measurements for the 152...) - I expect it wouid be similar to the ATN150
But my experiments with the SAS strongly indicate that it is better suited to higher inductance bodies.... such as the V15III & V15IV and that it requires a lot of capacitance on a V15V to bring it into line (like 700pf)
So I am not so sure that the AT100 low inductance body is such a bargain....
bye for now
David
-
Hi David,
Vertical tracking angle is 23 degrees just like the 150MLX or the 100E etc. If the 5V takes a 100 series stylus, then a different cantilever angle doesn't make sense. I doubt if AT developed a new plug, set at a different angle to wind up at 23. If it's a new carrier/plug series then it might be, but it doesn't look like it.
Interesting new take on inductance/capacitance. You're making a case for MC superiority even if it's unintentional. You know what high inductance does to high frequency resonance and phase non-linearity. There's usually more than 200pF shunt capacitance at most user's input, often much more. This will have phase implications down into the midrange w/high inductance and the reality factor suffers. I'm not convinced that your amplitude response conclusions are completely accurate. Have you tried resistance loading in combination with capacitance loading? What price amplitude response perfection? Most adults can't hear above 12 - 15KHz and a rising high end isn't as objectionable as poor imaging. I don't own any Shure carts so I can't comment, but I think your scope might be malfunctioning.
As you know I had an ATN152MLP. It's the bomb on a 440 body. I was using 32K load and switched to 47K. The 152 generator was the same as the 440ML OCC. I didn't have a 100E or 150MLX body then, but I'm quite sure it would be even better. What about the low inductance AT15/20, no good with an aluminum cantilever?
My recommendation all along was to get the body, break it in, then upgrade the stylus. One can get better results than I previously thought with some high inductance carts, but they're never going to have the transparency, imaging or finesse potential of a low inductance MM or a good MC.
neo
Apparently there is a 5, 7 and 9 in this series in Japan....
But I believe someone posted that the cantilever angle is different on these - after trying a cantilever transfer... so they may not be quite the direct relatives to the AT120/150 that we think they are...
Another minor thing - low inductance is only useful if the effective tip mass is very low... using low inductance with a lower end stylus merely exposes its flaws...
I spent quite a while chasing the low inductance holy grail - but I am coming around to high inductance models - I think low inductance ultimately only works with exotic tube cantilevers such as V15VMR, EPC100/205 - very low mass.
once the mass starts to rise you either have to raise the capacitance or live with the flaws of a higher mass cantilever (rising high end)
At some stage I should work backwards from the ATN152LP measurements and work out what the "perfect" inductance/capacitance match for it would be.... (I never got around to doing a full set of measurements for the 152...) - I expect it wouid be similar to the ATN150
But my experiments with the SAS strongly indicate that it is better suited to higher inductance bodies.... such as the V15III & V15IV and that it requires a lot of capacitance on a V15V to bring it into line (like 700pf)
So I am not so sure that the AT100 low inductance body is such a bargain....
bye for now
David
-
A word or three of explanation for those not privy to previous conversations about phase and inductance.
Inductance at the output of a cart will combine with the shunt capacitance present at the phono input. The frequency where this happens is called the electrical resonance. It can be calculated if the values are known (see Hagerman site), and theoretically will cause a low pass filter - high frequency roll-off on the signal being amplified. I say theoretically because in actuality, it doesn't. It's the mechanical response that is the overwhelming determinate of amplitude response and electrical resonance lowers in frequency, the mechanical high frequency resonance.
Adding capacitance is sometimes used to augment a drooping mid-treble response. The high frequency resonance is lowered (w/capacitance) enough for this augmentation, but will also cause an extreme high frequency roll-off.
http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/load_the_magnets_e.html
One can get much better response from a stock M97 if one loads it at 62K. Capacitance has to stay at 250pF or the treble starts to droop again. Notice the extreme high frequency roll-off?
With AT carts I think one can accomplish the same thing in reverse (more mellow, not less) by lowering resistance value. Running my stock 440 at 32K with low capacitance accomplished that end. On the other hand an Ortofon M20 FL Super has a distant upper mid to treble. Mfg recommendation was as high as 600 to 700pF shunt capacitance, that's 400pF in addition to cables and preamp. Leaving capacitance around 200pF, 55K worked just fine without excessively lowering the high freq res.
The phase response of a cart depends on two things, high frequency resonance and mechanical damping. There's a 180 degree phase shift in the response of a cart at high freq res. On either side of that point phase and amplitude response diverge. The rate of diversion is determined by mechanical damping. The greater the damping the greater the diversion rate. Imaging capability is dependent on accurate phase response.
neo
Edit: Correction about that last explanation. At hi freq res there is a 180 phase shift - amplitude and phase are diverged at that point. Amplitude and phase gradually reunite and the rate they come back together depends on mechanical damping. The greater the damping, the slower this unity reoccurs. MMs are typically more heavily damped and phase non-linearity can go down to around 1 - 2K. A MC with hi freq res at 27K will have phase implications to around 8 - 10K.
Concerning the Shure V15V - Back in the day magazines supported labs and some issued thorough test reports. It seems to me the V15V didn't need 700pF to achieve pretty flat response although I didn't pay much attention at the time. Is the SAS stylus that different from the original?
-
David,
I've reread your last post and it seems like you've been experimenting with capacitance/inductance only, trying to correct amplitude response. You mentioned the ATN155LC in that context and the V15/SAS as needing 700pF.
Have you thrown resistance load into the mix? I'd be interested in any other results or comments. Many HO cart users are stuck at 47K, although it's easy enough to load down. Any more light you can shed on this subject would be relevant. My feelings are the less shunt capacitance necessary the better, but resistance loading isn't always possible. A correlation between capacitance loading and resistance loading results would be enlightening.
Web site still going? I lost the link when my last PC went down.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
apologies for the silence, I didn't want to answer by typing on a phone.... and have not had time to get to my keyboard..
During my measurements a couple of years back (is it that long ago?) - I varied all 3 parameters (L, C, R) - the most difficult was Inductance (L) as it required various bodies that match - which was not always possible... With the Shure bodies I have "fat shank" bodies ranging from 500mH to 700mH, and the V15V at 320mH - I used a VN5MR-SAS and VN5xMR-SAS across these...
Initially I thought I would end up with the low inductance bodies as my optimum choice, but after working through it, science led me to the conclusion that for 47kOhm on a V15V body, optimum seemed to be circa 700pf.
I then set this asside for a while, thinking I must have done something wrong - and got on with other things.
With regards to imaging / soundstaging and phase - there are two parameters that are important, the first and most obvious one is seperation - the Shure design is a little more constrained in seperation than the AT VM design - on average the AT system has a 5db lead over the Shure.
The second aspect is phase, and I started to focus on phase...
Once I understood that any resonance generates a phase anomaly, I started to try to understand the physics behind it... The outcome of lots of reading was this:
Almost all naturally occuring phase variances are "Minimum Phase" - and the mathematical/physical nature of a minimum phase relationship between phase and amplitude, is that the two are symmetrical - that is to say, if you use another minimum phase technique to correct an amplitude deviation, you will also correct the phase deviation.
This is why a proper RIAA network corrects phase as well as amplitude - minimum phase encoding and decoding...
A standard LCR network as used for equalisation in many different circuits is a minimum phase circuit.
It took me quite a bit of googling and reading to investigate the maths behind cantilever resonances - in the end it was scientific papers on cantilever behaviour in electron microscopes that clinched it - cantilever resonance is another minimum phase phenomenon.
Once you have this - the keys are in your hands (/brain) - if you correct the amplitude variation generated by the cantilever resonance, using minimum phase equalisation methods, you will (in theory) correct the associated phase anomalies - approaching it this way - flat frequency response does in fact equal flat phase response.
It took me a while to get to this last conclusion, and even then I sought further confirmation, and searched for other data online that might confirm or debunk this hypothesis.
As you know testing phase is difficult (HUGE UNDERSTATEMENT) - and in fact would require a custom recorded LP with special test tracks... (which I may commission someday)
The only mechanism I have for looking at phase is square waves, which I do have a couple of test LP's for, but I have not gone down that path yet. My website was leading towards this, but I have not had the spare time and energy to do the many days of work that completing that investigation would require - another future project.
So getting back to the topic at hand:
The fundamental principle in audio is usually the same as with medecine "first do no harm" - so we like to avoid anything that alters either phase or amplitude frequency response (ie anything that affects linearity) - hence high shunt capacitance and high inductance are as a general rule to be avoided.
BUT - here we have an extremely non-linear aspect of reproduction - the cantilever...
An ideal cantilever, needs to have its native resonance at least 1 octave above the end of the audible audio zone.... if we assume that to be 20kHz - then the resonance needs to be at 40kHz or higher.
The only cantilever I own that achieves this is the Dynavector Karat 23RS - with the 2.3mm long ruby cantilever.
None of the AT cantilevers achieve it, nor does the SAS, or my Boron cantilever Empire MC1 etc... etc...
IF the cantilever achieves this goal - then a very low inductance can be used (such as MC) - and capacitance becomes relatively a non issue...
For MM/MI designs a lower inductance works well, combined with a low capacitance (eg: Technics EPC100 / EPC205)
BUT - the more imperfect the cantilever (ie the lower the resonance frequency) the more it affects the audible frequencies... and the more inductance and capacitance is required to then correct it.
If the cantilever resonance is well within the audible zone (such as 16kHz) then correcting it requires a high inductance body with mid-capacitance or a lower inductance body with much higher capacitance. In these cases what is achievable is flat F/R to 16kHz followed by a steep drop off - prime example is the Shure M97xE.
So coming back to my SAS / Shure measurements - it actually is not as bad as I thought if I need to combine a 320mH body with a 700pf capacitance - given that the cantilever involved has its peak resonance at 28kHz, and therefore impacts on the audible zone from 14kHz upwards. - The end result is an exemplary flat F/R.
Going into speculation mode - the Ortofon orthophase article that got several of us started on investigating phase, was part of a series of tests that Ortofon did, which led them to conclude that "Golden Eared" listeners preferred a slightly rising top end, even though this implied a phase variance. All Ortofon cartridges since that time (early 80's) have therefore used this as their ideal template...
It seems to me that AT may have reached the same conclusion, as their designs seem to reflect the same top end rise - and it became pretty much the standard in audiophilia....
On the other side of the fence - recording/mastering engineers aimed for flat frequency response so they could properly compare their end product (test pressings) to the master tapes.... and their preferred cartridges were Shure V15 and Stanton 881 families... (at least in the US) - it is interesting to consider that at the same time that audiphiles were preferring rising top ends recording engineers were preferring flat...
Which brings us back to the objective "lets reproduce the master tape" approach to a recording, vs the subjective "I like it better like this".
There is one aspect of all this that I have not yet got a handle on - and that is impedance...
Low inductance goes hand in hand with low impedance -and this may have an audible impact - however the impact of the low impedance (which is a reduced impact) - needs to be considered in balance with the concomittant reduced signal level (output V) - the non-linearities although lesser are also imposed on a lesser signal level, and may in fact be the same or greater for that relative signal level. (I hope I am making sense)
My intuition tells me that all else being equal - a lower impedance would be better - but lower impedance designs usually also reduce both inductance and signal levels... so all is NOT equal.
I also do not have any sort of a handle on what the impact of impedance would be on the audible signal.
Further note: - Yes I did and do vary R as well as C in my tuning experiments... and my optimum is seldom 47kohm
The combination of LCR can be used to flatten the high end, but it is also often used to fill in the midrange trough - another cantilever behaviour.... the midrange trough seems to be caused (my hypothesis) - by cantilever flexing - loss of energy, which is converted to harmonic distortion. - this phenomenon is unfortunately NOT a minimum phase one, as here we are converting from signal to harmonics - and boosting the signal using LCR methods results in flat amplitude response but NOT flat phase response.
This type of boost in the midrange approach is often used with lower and low-mid range cartridges with aluminium cantilevers (Shure M97xE...) - and is almost guaranteed (in my mind) - to result in some phase issues in the critical high midrange area where the most audible zone is for imaging/phase.
This area of performance is one where hollow tube cantilevers have an edge over solid rods.... (and shorter an edge over longer!)
So for a high quality MM/MI - a solid rod exotic cantilever will in almost all cases require a balancing of capacitance and inductance to achieve flat phase and frequency at the high end - and if the cantilever is of high enough quality, the midrange trough should be minimised (and may be correctable using digital linear phase methods... but that is a different topic). My conclusion with the SAS is that 320mH requires 700pf and vice versa 650mH requires circa 250pf (along with R tuning)
Another note: the AT20ss I have is picture perfect right on spec at 150pf and 47k
on the topic of the web site - I have not touched it in a couple of years.... when I start another round of tests and such I will update it accordingly!
bye for now
David
https://sites.google.com/site/zevaudio/
-
Fascinating!!
Do you still have the Ortofon paper? If so maybe you should reread it when you get a chance. It could be that a secondary cantilever resonance causes a phase anomaly, but if I remember correctly none showed up on the MM tests. Those were 5 unnamed MMs from 1982 or thereabouts. Surely some had aluminum cantilevers.
The MC, an MC200 (I believe) had spectacular imaging when left undamped, but the naturally rising high end, 10 dB @ 20KHz, rendered it unlistenable. Damping the cantilever compromised the imaging, but for listenability they took it down to about a 2 dB rise at 20KHz. It then had phase non-linearity down to just below 10KHz. The rising high end wasn't to please audiophiles, it was a compromise to preserve imaging/phase as much as possible. High frequency res was 27KHz and there were no phase problems within the audio band when undamped.
The contention was that all carts have a naturally rising high end and damping is required not just to tame the high end, but also to control the cantilever.
To be honest it's been a long time since I read it. I'll have to dig it out and read it again.
neo
-
The Ortofon Ortophase article was a series of tests done using several MC200's with the cantilevers variably damped...
And they demonstrated that phase anomalies occurred wherever there was a resonance!
One thing that we have to be careful of is that a rising top end will in many cases enhance the perception of imaging, as many of the cues are in that frequency range - a true test to seperate phase from amplitude would be to compare a rising top end (10db @20kHz) with the same response when corrected using a high end digital linear phase filter.... that would leave the phase intact but drop the amplitude down.... If the listeners still prefer the "imaging" of the rising top end version, then it is a perception issue linked to amplitude...
Psycho-acoustics is terribly sneaky!
bye for now
David
-
I had to download the article again. I lost it when the last PC died. My email was malfunctioning, what a PIA. Anyway:
Although it didn't show up on the graphs, it seems you're right about secondary resonances and electrical resonance causing or contributing to phase shift.
Because there were no obvious glitches in MM phase vs amplitude response, I think electrical resonance' contribution to phase anomaly is additive. That could be the case for secondary resonances as well, otherwise there should be a spike. Perhaps the resolution of the graphs wasn't sufficient to draw that conclusion, but I think it was good enough to see an obvious secondary anomaly. What's your take on this?
The case of the MC200 is almost exactly as I described. 180o shift at HF resonance (all carts including MM). Undamped amplitude + 7 dB @ 20K. The other samples +3.8, +1.9, and -0.3 dB respectively. Conclusions were just like I said, based on phase integrity not amplitude response.
neo
-
What I find interesting in the article, is that they state the outline of the facts (phase and amplitude), state the outcome of the golden ear listening tests.... then state their conclusions.
I read the same facts and the same listening tests, and I am not convinced by the conclusion.
The most heavily damped MC200 in that test, has its frequency-amplitude deviation in the high midrange (10kHz) zone - where it would be most obvious!
The undamped example has no phase variation to speak of until up around 25kHz - so what the golden ears are hearing is all amplitude variation...
Was the improved soundstage due to phase correctness in this sample - or was it due to exagerating the amplitude of those frequencies that most influence imaging/staging?
The only way to tell would have been to EQ the undamped sample back to flat using linear phase methods - something which would have been technically almost impossible at the time.
The influence of damping, EQ and resonance are all minimum phase, they are all additive - and they are all symmetrical with regards to amplitude - which means if you correct the amplitude using a minimum phase method you will as a side effect also correct phase....
At least this is my impression from reading as much as I could find on the maths behind these phenomena..... it is also coincidentally very convenient!
In the third cart tested - the damping has controlled the resonance sufficiently to expose the slight midrange trough that one would expect from standard cantilever behaviour.
The last one - with the heavy damping - seems to have something else going on altogether. Not only is the resonance damped, but there is a also a boosting effect around 10Khz which also fills out the midrange trough (and ups its amplitude a bit too much) - hard to tell what is going on - and there is insufficient information provided for more analysis - my suspicion is that the damping method has introduced additional resonances lower down that are boosting the amplitude - although the lack of phase change seems to indicate that this is not the case..... something suspect about the 4th example.
bye for now
David
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=89817)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=89818)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=89819)
P.S. also interesting to note that Ortofon were pushing the MC has lower effective mass mythology.... at a time when Technics had the EPC100/205 on the market and had clearly debunked it!
-
Thanks David!
-
David,
Thanks for posting the paper.
So you think amplitude was responsible for the great imaging? I don't, although like you say we can't be 100% sure. Maybe it was a combination of the two, but I think phase is mostly the reason. Does an overly bright record or cartridge image better?
Moving mass - wasn't the EPC 100/205 the exception rather than the rule? In the '80s it was generally thought that MCs were usually faster. Do you think Ortofon was being deceptive? They must have been aware of Shure, AT, Stanton etc. I wonder what those 5 MM were.
Well, I think it's obvious there's no 180o phase shift at electrical resonance, as stated by that inmate at the asylum. Without the use of minimum phase filters, phase integrity is important IMO. I suspect that any additional filters, EQ, will degrade the sound, provided you have top flight source components.
neo
-
I have been thinking of running some experiments in the digital domain - using high quality digital filters (Ozone software) - but the easy to use version I have is linear phase - and it would cost me another $900 to purchase the pro version of the current software that allows the same capability with minimum phase as an option.... it also provides a heap of other mastering tools, that I don't need..... :x
Someone (or several someones!) were pushing the MC is lower mass barrow at the time....
Technics EPC's were one example, but the Shure V15V was also up there, and a number of others - pretty much all the ones that had hollow tube exotic cantilevers - which were all the rage at the top end in the 80's.
The change came about when the exotic magnets became available - which is when Stanton/Pickering switched from the 681 to the 881 - that combined with the exotic hollow cantilevers made very very low mass MM's possible.
Ortofon then as now made its big bucks on the higher margin MC's, so I do wonder....
I have spreadsheet models that show (plot) the electrical resonance phase shift - all based on the physics behind it! - The type and degree of the resonance also determines the level of phase shift....
I really do wish I had an easy way to measure phase response in a cartridge.....
-
Did you ever get ahold of the AES paper that corresponds to the article? They attached an accelerometer to the headshell? I guess that would give a time reference vs the output. Maybe with the right software you could duplicate those tests and even take it further. Ever measure the high frequency resonance of your Dynavector 23?
It's interesting to note that a cart like Lyra Kelos, Atlas has response to 50K, yet high frequency resonance appears to be just under 30K. From the amplitude plot (see Atlas thread), phase plot should look similar to MC200 plot 2, except Atlas has some kind of asymmetrical damping scheme.
Some of the old magazine test reports included square wave photos. Even if you're in the camp that says square waves are not really appropriate for phono carts (not saying you are), the carts would be on equal footing and the results should give an indication of relative transient response. I think this is one area where brightness might give an impression of speed. The V15V doesn't seem exceptionally fast to me, but it doesn't seem slow either. Some high inductance carts like the 681 sound slow to me - maybe that's mostly amplitude response. Never owned a 681, my first Stanton was a 981 and an 881 before I accidently killed it.
neo
-
A Great Deal on Agon -
Here's a Pickering XSV 3000/NOS D5000 This Pickering is the same as the Stanton 881. Despite the description, the D5000 fits the 881 and 981. This stylus is unobtainium and worth more than the asking price. I'm using a Pickering D3001E on my 981.
https://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-pickering-xsv-3000-with-nos-d5000-stylus-2013-11-24-analog-92322-cedarpines-pk-ca
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I never properly answered your last posting....
Did you ever get ahold of the AES paper that corresponds to the article? They attached an accelerometer to the headshell? I guess that would give a time reference vs the output. Maybe with the right software you could duplicate those tests and even take it further. Ever measure the high frequency resonance of your Dynavector 23?
Nope never managed to get hold of that paper - would need to join the AES to get hold of it...
I do have a Denon test record with sweep tracks up to 50kHz - when run at 45rpm that extends the range to 68kHz - which is not too shabby!
Yes I have measured the DV23 and it is flat as a ruler within the audio range - I measure a peak out around 50khz with a gentle rise to it starting circa 20kHz - maybe even 19kHz but the whole plot to around 40kHz is very very flat - I have not seen any other cartridge with a F/R even close to as flat as this.
It's interesting to note that a cart like Lyra Kelos, Atlas has response to 50K, yet high frequency resonance appears to be just under 30K. From the amplitude plot (see Atlas thread), phase plot should look similar to MC200 plot 2, except Atlas has some kind of asymmetrical damping scheme.
A frequency response without +/- db parameters is non meaningful.... all it is saying is that there is measurable signal at that frequency.... a measurable signal 60db down is of no useful purpose!
It is standard practice to consider the frequency response of a piece of audio gear within +/- 3db (ie up to 6 db variation) and really good gear boasts within +/- 1db or less (as did some of the best cartridges of the golden era)
Some of the old magazine test reports included square wave photos. Even if you're in the camp that says square waves are not really appropriate for phono carts (not saying you are), the carts would be on equal footing and the results should give an indication of relative transient response. I think this is one area where brightness might give an impression of speed. The V15V doesn't seem exceptionally fast to me, but it doesn't seem slow either. Some high inductance carts like the 681 sound slow to me - maybe that's mostly amplitude response. Never owned a 681, my first Stanton was a 981 and an 881 before I accidently killed it.
I think square wave plots can be usefull - but they won't give a quantifiable measurable value - rather from experience with square wave plots, you can quickly see whether the frequency response is extended or rolled off, and whether phase is linear or not...
The more rolled off the high frequencies, the more "jagged" the edges of the square wave, phase variance shows up as "lop sidedness" of the square wave....
I did a series of experimental plots of digitally generated square waves which I then filtered in various ways to vary frequency and phase seperately so I could see the effect -it is posted on my ZevAudio website....
I think the better a setup is (hesitant to single out the cartridge!) - the more descriptions like "fast" become irrelevant.
I used to run Quad electrostatic speakers - speakers don't come any "faster" than that - but they do not sound "fast".
The Gallo Ref 3.1's I now have have their own special tweeter design, which by all objective criteria is very "fast" (ie: it does not delay the signal, nor does it have a slow rise time etc...) - again it does not sound "fast".
I think frequently when I have heard speakers / setups described as "fast" - I described them as overly bright with a harsh edge....
I remember Magnat and Pioneer metal dome tweeter speakers of the mid 80's sounding like this....
And I remember also the lovely Boston Audio A400/150/100/70 series with their soft dome tweeters.... which gave the Quads a decent run for their money... they sounded very neutral, they dind't sound "fast" they sounded "right". (Yes the Quads were my reference at the time, and still today by memory.... although due to WAF issues they are no longer with me.)
Similarly with cartridges - the V15V, the DV Karat, and any of the other cartridges with very low effective mass styli (below 0.3mg) are all "fast" - and most of them don't sound it.
You may have noticed that I tend to avoid as a general practice the attempt to describe an aural experience verbally/textually - It is fraught with issues!!
The assumption that everyone uses the same terms to describe the same aural experience is in most cases false, and that is without getting into the deep quicksand of psycho acoustics, and how various sounds are perceived. (let alone memory....)
So mostly I duck the subjective discussions and stick to the measurable and plottable.... although I am sometimes game to go hunting after the measure of something I hear.... (if I have the necessary tools or if the necessary tools are sufficiently economical to do so as a hobby...)
Once I get my real vinyl setup back up and operational (when I am back in my renovated home and not camping out at rented premises nearby) - I need to redo my top cartridge comparisons....
And see whether the theoretical matches my own subjective preferences....
I keep thinking of the Sony XL-MC10 / MC104P - High output MC, which is measurably flawed with a resonance of several db at aorund 6kHz - but it has a beautiful bell like clarity to it, which on simple arrangements of violin, recorder, flute and such sounds just magical - but it simply does not cut the mustard on more complex large orchestra material.... Mahler, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, etc...
I sometimes have a similar problem with my current speakers.... an issue Quad ESL63's and 989's never had. The ability to coherently reproduce very complex recordings like the symphonies really does seperate the best gear from the merely good gear (regardless of price!)
bye for now
David
-
A Great Deal on Agon -
Here's a Pickering XSV 3000/NOS D5000 This Pickering is the same as the Stanton 881. Despite the description, the D5000 fits the 881 and 981. This stylus is unobtainium and worth more than the asking price. I'm using a Pickering D3001E on my 981.
https://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-pickering-xsv-3000-with-nos-d5000-stylus-2013-11-24-analog-92322-cedarpines-pk-ca
neo
I see this listing is still current. I want to correct my info.
The XSV-3000 is a lower inductance cart than the 881. It's 290mH, 700 ohm (impedance). The 881 is 450mH, 900 ohm.
This makes the 3000 even more attractive IMO. These carts have short aluminum cantilevers. Short is the operative word here. Response is listed (VE) to 50K. The D5000 is a nude stereohedron stylus.
neo
-
David,
Here's a link to Atlas test report PDF:
http://www.fastaudio.com/workspace/uploads/downloads/stp_04_12_sd_atlas.pdf
Amplitude response is up around 6dB @ 20KHz.
To me, fast means transient response. I was trying to get at the correlation between tip mass and transient response. I'm not sure of the correlation, if any, between different electrical characteristics and transients.
I know what you mean about your Quads. I used to have Acoustat panels with direct drive amps. Maybe fast isn't a description that draws attention, but lack of good transient response or slow, is.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
my German is not up to it, but the f/r plot is clear.
Res F = 20khz, makes ETM circa 0.54mg.... not so great!
OM30 has ETM at 0.3mg...
This is unlikely to be a particularly "fast" cartridge in the objective sense....
Perception of its sound will be largely driven by the amplitude rise....
The Atlas design focuses on everything except tip mass, and control of extraneous vibration is key to great results, but so is tip mass...... :scratch:
-
[quote ]
http://www.fastaudio.com/workspace/uploads/downloads/stp_04_12_sd_atlas.pdf
[/quote]
I was trying to figure out why a cart like Atlas would have a hi freq res at 20KHz. Look at page 2 of the test report. There's a close-up of the stylus sitting on a big plate mounted to the bottom of the cantilever. Maybe that has something to do with it?
I was actually thinking of Kleos and ran across the link to the test report. I thought Kleos HFR was close to 30KHz w/o the platform (which also seems a little low), but I remembered it wrong.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=91012)
This is from the same Atlas thread. I'm not sure but I thought Kleos is w/o the plate. This seems like a deliberate trade off - extension/tip mass for stylus/cantilever rigidity. I think both of these have boron cantilevers.
David, maybe you're right about a rising high end giving the illusion of imaging specificity. Phase linearity would be horrible, except the rising high end would compensate somewhat. Maybe the Lyra asymmetrical double damping scheme helps also.
BTW, I was on another forum on a Stanton/Pickering thread. It turns out, those top carts have an eff tip mass of .2mg.
neo
-
My 7500 stylus has its res f at 26kHz which calculates out to 0.32mg - quite a bit more than the claimed 0.2mg... but still an excellent figure.
The 7500 is also more sensitive to loading than one would think with a low inductance designs of this kind!
My experiments have not been extensive, but they have shown quite a variance with changing R load at 50pf, and this becomes more exagerated with increasing C load - at 300pf a 30ohm load really drops the high end out massively, whereas with a 1k or 10k R load there is no substantive difference between 50pf and 300pf.... it really does prefer a 1k to 10k load... below that a midrange droop kicks in, although the rising top end is then restrained. The rise to the 26kHz resonance begins at 9kHz with 20kHz being about +4db on the 9kHz level, there is a gentle and very linear drop off from 1kHz to 9kHz of around 1db so the cartridge registers +3db/-1db 20-20k - which really is quite exemplary....
Same stylus in the 3000 high inductance body, requires 300pf and 51k to achieve a similar midrange profile to circa 10kHz (-1.5db - 0.5 db worse, but that is within margins of error for the measurement method, so not significant). It then rises to +3db @ 20kHz for a very very similar overall profile.
I have not done extensive listening comparisons - it is difficult to compare apples with apples here as my 3000 body is p-mount XSP3003 and the 7500 is the standard 1/2" item - so there are other issues related to arm matching and associated resonances that make it an apples and oranges comparison. If I get a XSV body I may run the comparisons for my own satisfaction as I can then use the same headshell and really compare nothing but the change from low inductance to high inductance with the identical stylus...
bye for now
David
-
My 7500 stylus has its res f at 26kHz which calculates out to 0.32mg - quite a bit more than the claimed 0.2mg... but still an excellent figure.
The 7500 is also more sensitive to loading than one would think with a low inductance designs of this kind!
My experiments have not been extensive, but they have shown quite a variance with changing R load at 50pf, and this becomes more exagerated with increasing C load - at 300pf a 30ohm load really drops the high end out massively, whereas with a 1k or 10k R load there is no substantive difference between 50pf and 300pf.... it really does prefer a 1k to 10k load... below that a midrange droop kicks in, although the rising top end is then restrained. The rise to the 26kHz resonance begins at 9kHz with 20kHz being about +4db on the 9kHz level, there is a gentle and very linear drop off from 1kHz to 9kHz of around 1db so the cartridge registers +3db/-1db 20-20k - which really is quite exemplary....
Same stylus in the 3000 high inductance body, requires 300pf and 51k to achieve a similar midrange profile to circa 10kHz (-1.5db - 0.5 db worse, but that is within margins of error for the measurement method, so not significant). It then rises to +3db @ 20kHz for a very very similar overall profile.
I have not done extensive listening comparisons - it is difficult to compare apples with apples here as my 3000 body is p-mount XSP3003 and the 7500 is the standard 1/2" item - so there are other issues related to arm matching and associated resonances that make it an apples and oranges comparison. If I get a XSV body I may run the comparisons for my own satisfaction as I can then use the same headshell and really compare nothing but the change from low inductance to high inductance with the identical stylus...
bye for now
David
Not sure where the claim of .2mg came from. I was thinking it was probably from an old test report on one of the quad carts, but who knows?
I have noticed differences in cantilever lengths which would make a difference. The D3001E which I'm using (on 980LZ) seems to have a shorter cantilever. I think the 3001 was from an earlier series. The Jico D98 replacement is gigantic in comparison - at least 1mm longer and considerably stouter. The 3001 is a nude .2 x .7 and the Jico is a bonded shibata. Jico usually gets the cantilever length right, AFAIK.
Maybe some of the older Pickerings like the 4500Q have shorter cantilevers?
You said your experiments haven't been extensive, but you previously said that square waves looked better at 220 ohm load (@ 50pF?). I think it was overshoot in particular. This is interesting to say the least.
People refer to these carts as low inductance, < 1mH. Depends on how you look at it. The inductance is extremely high for .3mV out. No MC with .3mV will come close to 1mH. I think that's the reason for your results with differing capacitance. I'll have to see if I can get a higher value load on it. I've been running it at 270 ohms and it sounds a little dead. My AHT stage didn't seem to get along with it - trouble getting DC offset to stabilize. Maybe it has a ground strap I could cut. Thanks for the amplitude response info. I'll have to dig it out and get a 1K load on there.
neo
-
By the way, thank you for the link to that D5000 stylus... it should be on its way to me shortly...
Just remembered that I posted my plots of the 7500 on my website... https://sites.google.com/site/zevaudio/turt/cartridge-comparison-list/pickering-xlz-7500-s
I need to review the original recordings in which I determined the resonant frequency - some of the ones I looked at showed 26kHz and the one I posted way back was showing 20kHz and 38kHz - which would indicate an even higher tip mass... I may have mixed something up!
-
From your old plots it looks like somewhere between 1 and 10K might be best. I like that tracking ability -100um! I'll have to give it another try in the AHT.
I forgot to wish you luck with the stylus. According to Flood2 the guy on the Asylum thread, Stanton/Pickering QC wasn't always the best. He spoke of sometimes getting bonded or industrial grade diamonds and sometimes getting gem quality. That's the first I've heard of that.
Hope you get a good one.
neo
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=vinyl&m=1066624
-
Well the D7500 literature ( on Michael-otto's archive) claims 0.2mg but I measure substantially more.... Was it perhaps retooled... Who knows!?
The D5000 is purported to be 0.23mg according to the same archive docs, but we shall see....
The 1/2" mount cab body will also allow better comparison with the sox body.... What I need now to complete the set is a p-mount low z body!
Bye for now
David
-
The Stereohedron II is slightly smaller than the original. It might be the same as the Quadrahedron. I don't think that would be enough to account for the difference in tip mass numbers. That plus a smaller/lighter cantilever might do it. All those top Stanton/Pickering were spec to 50KHz. That doesn't tell us HFR though. I'd be curious to hear this with an exotic cantilever and a micro.
My D3001E is a .2 x .7 elliptical. Although I don't have many hours on it, it will probably wear pretty fast. When it needs replacing I'd like to get a micro on there. The Jico shibata would be a good candidate for a new cantilever and tip. I prefer the Pickering stylus holder though.
I forgot to mention, I was just given a high quality conventional microscope with USB. Top magnification is 400X - perfect. The person who gave it said they couldn't get the USB to work. I plugged it into my PC and it recognized it as a web cam. Not sure if that's a good thing. Maybe I can download the software from the mfg and get it going. First it has to be adapted for stylus examination.
neo
-
Ok Neo,
I've listened to your advice and I've reinstalled the Maestro. The difference between the Maestro and LS500 is smaller than you might imagine. Their character is almost identical. When listening to the LS500, it's almost as if it is a slightly sloppier version of the Maestro. I have to believe the difference is due to the stylus/cantilever. I can't describe the stylus on the Maestro (mostly because it's too miniscule). The stylus on the Maestro is truly one of the finest I've tried to inspect!
Don grb
Looks like we guessed wrong about the LS500. Did you see this?
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?p=7431285#post7431285
It makes sense now. The 14Sa is a very nice cart - more like a 12Sa or 15/20 than a 13Ea.
neo
-
I was watching. By the way, the problem that I was having was totally related to my not having compressed the rubber washer which is a part of the cantilever assembly. When compressed the Ls500 was every bit as brilliant as the AT-15Xe. For a brief moment, I had really good compression of the washer, but the magnets were mis-aligned. I then readjusted the magnets, but lost the compression. It really is tricky business.
-
FYI,
I measured the inductance of one body at 970 mH. It seems even higher than the 13EA based on the reports. I've not measured the 13EA.
Don grb
Just found this old post. I wonder if the meter is giving false readings because of its impedance? Remember that Elliott PDF?
neo
-
Neo,
I believe the LS500 is a different cartridge. I can't bring myself to open the AT-13EA.
I was hoping to pick up another 13EA, but I can't find one cheap! The rolled off characteristic puzzled me with the Ls500, but it was during some playing around that I realized the problem was mechanical. I'll have to compare the two head-to-head on the big table. Honestly, I've just been too focused on trying to figure out why Audio Technica would have spec'd the LS500 the way they did. I'm a bit like a beagle. I get sidetracked easily.
-
Well, Lini on Karma gave us the answer. The LS500 is of the same series as the 14Sa, but has a different and high inductance generator. Like the 12E and 12Sa, the former has the same motor as the 13Ea, and the later has a low inductance 4-ch motor.
This question about inductance is tricky, especially since David posted about getting reasonably flat response with some low inductance carts. I tend to think like CarlosFM on the VE cart loading thread, characterizing inductance as the enemy. There's no doubt cart inductance combines with capacitance and rolls off the high end. IMO high inductance carts might sound nice, but don't have the potential of a low inductance one. Carts have to be evaluated on an individual basis and some might require an exotic cantilever and/or loading, but it seems to me low inductance ones are more transparent, less cloudy (for lack of better descriptors). Does it come back to the same old thing, "musical" vs detailed? I haven't tried an exotic cantilevered stylus on my 12E. I could chop the plastic on a 20SS stylus and try it, but for now I'll take Timeltel's word for it - sweet, rich, and reasonably detailed. Maybe some day I'll try it. Lately, it's all I can do to stay warm.
neo
-
:singing:
-
Hello fellow Frankensteiners,
I have a question I would like to address to anyone with knowledge that deals with doing a possible transplant in a Signet TK 9 or 10ML.
Replacements for either of these have become nonexistent so it would appear transplanting will be the only option other than sending it off for someone else to graft on a new cantilever assembly.
Does this cantilever/stylus assemble also have the tiny screw that holds the cantilever in position, like the screw we were finding on some of the AT95's?
BTW Neobop: The Maestro with the 440MLa cantilever has become my favorite M/M.
Regards,
Don
-
Don,
The 95E doesn't have a compliance screw. It has a press fitting. The higher end replacements have the screw as do most ATs except the 3400 series and Clearaudio.
I had a TK10ML II years ago, but I never removed the stylus. I assume it has a compliance screw, maybe David can confirm this. I think he has an AT23 which has the same stylus fitment type. It has an additional screw on the bottom to secure it, no wings.
So, a Maestro/440MLa has replaced the LS500 at the top? What other styli have you tried on the Maestro? Did it have the stock stylus when you got it?
neo
-
Neo,
I'm not sure if that last message was for me, but I'll answer anyway.
I'm still stuck on the LS500 with the 440mla (Ls540mla). I'm sorting thru the compliance issues due to the info in the other threads. I'm leaning toward the LS540mla combo, but I haven't been fair to any of the other cartridges.
Dongrb
-
Apologies to both Dons. I guess I saw a G and assumed.....
Griff,
Really? I found this post of yours on p15 of this thread:
Hi Neo,
Currently I have 2 turntables. One is the VPI Extended Aries with the outboard flywheel and a Graham 2.2 arm. The other is a Victor (JVC) TT-81 with a JVC 7045 arm. Both are run from a BAT VK10SE with the (what is referred to as ), 'depth charges'. I'm a little embarrassed to say but I'm pushing 60 cartridges.
The TK10 and the AT180 sound so similar, that I would could consider them twins. Another one that is also so similar that perhaps what I have is triplets, it the Technics U205C MK4. The CA Maestro/440MLa is a great sounding cartridge, but (isn't there always a 'but'), it just is not at that level. There is a delicate refinement with the previous mentioned 3 that just doesn't present itself with the FrankenMaestro. Still, it does stick its head above the crowd of many of the cartridge of the month also rans. I sure you do know which forum I referring too! (grin)
I have not heard about using a cartridge as a dummy load? Where can I find this thread about phase and this dummy load? Sounds like something I definitely would be interested in.
BTW: I like your 'more like good and better' comment. I need to remember that!
Regards,
Don
If you have a TK10 I guess you didn't want to pull the stylus and check for a compliance screw?
That's an impressive list and now the Maestro/440MLa is your favorite? Did you ever get around to trying it with an ATN150MLX ?
neo
-
I was just thinking it's funny how this mix and match works out. Griff likes the Maestro/440MLa. Dongrb likes the LS500/440MLa.
I have a 440 and much prefer it with a 152ML or 150MLX. I think the 160 has the same generator as the 440. Beryllium ML methinks.
Maybe I'll get 440 stylus and transplant it into my Virtuoso.
Dongrb,
What's the compliance issue?
neo
-
Hello fellow Frankensteiners,
I have a question I would like to address to anyone with knowledge that deals with doing a possible transplant in a Signet TK 9 or 10ML.
Replacements for either of these have become nonexistent so it would appear transplanting will be the only option other than sending it off for someone else to graft on a new cantilever assembly.
Does this cantilever/stylus assemble also have the tiny screw that holds the cantilever in position, like the screw we were finding on some of the AT95's?
BTW Neobop: The Maestro with the 440MLa cantilever has become my favorite M/M.
Regards,
Don
Hi Don,
I will take a look to see whether it has a compliance screw.
The needle holder on these is not plastic but a solid chunk of metal, which screws into the body - so there is no question about a positive mating with the body!
I have a couple of these bodies with broken styli (intended for a retip at some point) - I will remove the stylus (stub) and look for a compliance screw....
Need to find them in my storage first...
bye for now
David
-
Lately, it's all I can do to stay warm.
Come here and you can have some of our heat...44c (111F) today, yesterday was only 43c (109F), tomorrow is expected to be 43c again....
Give us some of your cold and take some of this stifling heat!
-
Hello Neobop,
Do not confuse my current favorite (maestro/440MLa), statement with best sounding. My best sounding non M/C would be the London Decca Jubilee in addition to the ones you and just mentioned. By favorite I meant most fun and most often used M/M.
I did (I guess you could say for a couple of days), successfully transplanted the AT 150 MLX. Because it was a NOS stylus, I was giving it a few day to run in before I did any close listening when one morning I found the forward half of the cantilever sitting on the surface of the turntable. Forward half being the part forward of the screw. I have no ideal what happened. I'm leaning towards the thought that perhaps I had to much force applied to the screw because when I loosened the screw, a small piece of the cantilever fell out. I try to be extra careful with the Clear Audio's because of how the cantilever sticks out in such a way that it appears to be begging to be bumped so I don't think the problem was cause from anything I did. Anyway, I put the 440MLa back in and have left it there ever since.
Neo, I perfer the shibata from Jico or the Vivid Line from LP Tunes over the 440MLa in the Virtuoso. There is a brightness with the 440MLa/Virtuoso combination that is not complimentary. Very detailed but leans towards the bright side. I did consider trying to load it down, but really wasn't interested in trying to make it improve. At the time, I was still disappointed in the lost AT 150MLX cantilever. I'm sure there are systems out there that could use a little brightening up, but my system is not one of them. The extra wood on the Maestro seems to help damp this effect down when the 440MLa is installed in it. I bought the Maestro without a cantilever so the closest that I have heard the Maestro sound as intended by Clear Audio would have been from the little audition I did with the 150MLX installed.
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Don,
Given the cartridges you are/have been playing with and the exalted company they are keeping....
Have you tried the Dynavector Karat family? or the classic Panasonic Strain Gauge?
I have a feeling these are very similar to the Decca family....
I put my straing gauge aside a couple of years back due to a chanel imbalance that may be due to the strain gauge pre...
-
Hello Neobop,
Do not confuse my current favorite (maestro/440MLa), statement with best sounding. My best sounding non M/C would be the London Decca Jubilee in addition to the ones you and just mentioned. By favorite I meant most fun and most often used M/M.
I did (I guess you could say for a couple of days), successfully transplanted the AT 150 MLX. Because it was a NOS stylus, I was giving it a few day to run in before I did any close listening when one morning I found the forward half of the cantilever sitting on the surface of the turntable. Forward half being the part forward of the screw. I have no ideal what happened. I'm leaning towards the thought that perhaps I had to much force applied to the screw because when I loosened the screw, a small piece of the cantilever fell out. I try to be extra careful with the Clear Audio's because of how the cantilever sticks out in such a way that it appears to be begging to be bumped so I don't think the problem was cause from anything I did. Anyway, I put the 440MLa back in and have left it there ever since.
Neo, I perfer the shibata from Jico or the Vivid Line from LP Tunes over the 440MLa in the Virtuoso. There is a brightness with the 440MLa/Virtuoso combination that is not complimentary. Very detailed but leans towards the bright side. I did consider trying to load it down, but really wasn't interested in trying to make it improve. At the time, I was still disappointed in the lost AT 150MLX cantilever. I'm sure there are systems out there that could use a little brightening up, but my system is not one of them. The extra wood on the Maestro seems to help damp this effect down when the 440MLa is installed in it. I bought the Maestro without a cantilever so the closest that I have heard the Maestro sound as intended by Clear Audio would have been from the little audition I did with the 150MLX installed.
Regards,
Don
Excuse me for jumping to conclusions (current favorite MM = best sounding). How is the tracking on the Decca? Some say you trade off some detail/resolution for dynamics. What's your take on this Don? I bought an old Decca on fleabey once and figured I'd get it retipped, but it was DOA.
I thought perhaps the wood on the CA body and difference in generators might compensate for the aggressive sound of the 440 stylus in the 440/120 body. Maybe I won't get another one. Maybe it's better in a higher inductance body like Dongrb's LS500? Probably still depends on system and loading.
Speaking of loading if you're running at 47K sometimes just going down a hair will smooth it out. 400K in parallel will net you around 42K. My experience with the stylus is somewhat different. I found that switching to boron or beryllium afforded a big improvement in detail and harmonic textures. That was with the 440 body. Rigidity has it's benefits but I don't think extra warmth/dynamics is one of them compared to aluminum. Unfortunately, I too broke a couple of nice styli attempting transplant. The patient survived but the donor organs didn't. This mix/match aspect leads me to Raul's take on the Maestro vs Virtuoso. He was using a Virtuoso with Soundsmith level 1 - alum/elliptical and preferred it to stock Maestro saying it was overdamped. I suspect the best Maestro is with a SS level 2 or 3 - ruby/LC. Short of that, I think the 3472 P-mount series outperform the upgrade 95 series, at least on a Virtuoso in a med or light arm. Try a 92E for $21 (B&H) and see what I mean. That's a .3 x .7 If you like it you can get a 3472 Vivid line or whatever.
neo
-
Neo,
Sorry, I wasn't being unresponsive, but had to change phones yesterday and I couldn't communicate.
My JMW-9 arm is only 7.7 grams and it might not be the best match for the 440mla. That was the reason for the pointed questions in the other thread. I've taken your advice regarding the input capacitance, and it really makes a difference!
Grb
-
Hmmm - With an aluminium cantilever you have reduced rigidity and increased mass, it flexes more - this leads to a slight upper midrange trough in the signal reproduced....
The lost energy is however maintained (physics rules!) and pops up as increased harmonic distortion - being harmonic it can subjectively "enhance" the sound.... (I believe it also tends towards even harmonics)
Aluminium cantilevers do tend to be more "romantic"
I would need to analyse one of the Jico/LPgear Shibata/VL styli to work out what exactly is going on - but I suspect that the cantilever resonance is at a lower frequency as compared to the 440MLa, and that the frequency at which the MLa resonance happens is one that you find more objectionable.
I do now have an Aurum body and an AT95HE - unfortunately the S-arm tables are all in storage and these beasties will not be happy in my Revox arm.... so the experiment will have to wait.
Maybe I need to order myself one of the AT92 HE/VL styli.... I have a feeling they are the exact same cantilever in a higher compliance suspension.... the resonant frequency should be the same...
I have already measure the MLa stylus - and I strongly recommend lowering the R loading a tad (somewhere between 35k and 42k) - it really does bring that resonance into line.
Getting back to the cantilevers - some of the lower end AT's (3472 and others) use the carbon fibre cantilever - Jonathan Carr made the comment that he did not like the sound of CF cantilevers....
I wonder whether the CF results in the harmonics being shifted more into the odds as opposed to the even harmonics of the Aluminium....
In theory the CF should be competitive with the exotics - in practice there are very few better cartridges that use it. (The Nagaoka JT555 is an exception I think)
Those cantilevers/styli are so economical however that it may be worth experimenting with them at negligible cost.
Interesting thread on CF cantilevers here:
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=11676
bye for now
David
-
Dongrb,
7.7g arm should be a near perfect match for the stylus, depending somewhat on cart weight. "They" say maintaining compliance with a transplant is dependent on pressure applied to the rubber donut when securing the compliance screw. I disagree. A minimal amount of pressure has to be maintained to get a snug fit and it seems to me a new stylus is just that. I don't think AT or Jico, whoever, varies insertion pressure to maintain compliance. Springiness is built into the cantilever assembly and the donut is damping.
neo
-
Hi David,
I do have the Dynavector on my radar, but I have never tried a Strain Gauge. Too many cartridges and not enough time! (grin)
I see those Panasonic pre's on ebay from time to time. They are not cheap but what is these days.
I noticed in a following thread that you would like to try the Jico Shibata and the Vivid Line from LP Tunes. If you are serious, I am willing to loan you both of mine. I also have the Sound Smith Level 1 ellipitical I could also send. Do not refuse due to fear of damaging them. I understand that sh*t happens so we would chalk it up to cost of investigative reporting! (grin)
There is an Italian dealer that bought up a collection of NOS cartridges from a widow (husband died), located in Rome. I bought the following M/C's from him so I am rather busy at the moment breaking them in so you would be able to keep the Clear Audio transplants for as long as needed.
Five of the M/C's I bought are 1) Ortofon MC 2000, 2) Klipsch MCZ 10 R, 3) Shinon Red Boron Improved, 4) Krell KC 100 (Miyabi Standard), 5) Denon DL 305
They were not going for bargain prices but normal (ha, ha,), market value. Considering that they were NOS, not eBay used, I did and still do feel that this was like stumbling into a gold mine. Number 1 and number 4 will take your breath away. I have thought that I had reached a level where my equipment was my limiting factor because I just could not get my system to rise above a certain performance level. The Ortofon and the Miyabi have demonstrated that it wasn't the plateau that my equipment was at that needed to be elevated but it was the plateau that my cartridges were at.
In addition to a Dynavector, I am also looking for a Kieski. Either a Black or Purple Heart or a Gold Spot, but it is tax time, so I need to wait a bit to recoup some finances. (grin)
BTW: Send me your address and I will send you the 3 transplants. They are all in trimmed housings so all you will have to do is 'pop' them in! Yes, I imagine you also have time constraints, but like I said, no rush!
Cheers,
Don
-
Hi Neo,
It is not you that need to be excused, it is I. The wording 'favorite' was not the best word to describe my thoughts.
In regards to the London. To be honest with you, it is hard to concentrate on detail 'because' of the dynamics. It is so
alive sounding that it is hard to do anything but be amazed! Drum whacks just jump out of the speakers. It is really rather
startling and it does take a long time to get over the (I want to go back to the London Jubilee), feeling when I force myself to continue
rotating my harem! After extended time with the Jubilee, everything else just sounds flat?
I have been running it at 47K. My next setting down in my phono stage is 10K. I have bought one of those DB Systems Resistive Loading Kits but they are from
20 ohm up to just 200 ohm. It does come with 2 empty spare plugs for user experimenting so I have bought a pair of 32K resistors. I bought
them to load a Grado Signature 8M I got cheap. That load is suppose to work wonders with that Grado.
You made a comment in regards to the 3472 P. If I'm understanding you correctly, are you are saying that the 3472 P is a Vivid Line? I thought it
was an elliptical? I have/had one of those cut down but sent it to a friend in The Netherlands (Nikola), when he mentioned needing a new stylus for
his Virturoso. If it is a Vivid Line then Damn, I let that one get through my fingers. I must admit though, it did sound good! I bought that based on notes that I have been keeping from you and David. Found it on eBay!
Your comment to Dongrb in regards to the compliance issue and the donuts. I have always thought that the donuts were of different compositions. Some stiffer and some softer. That is where (I think), the 'compliance' is created. In the material itself. Anyway, how would it be possible to measure pressure applied to a donut when the cantilever is being installed? I agree with you that it is just a snug fit, then tighten the screw!
Regards
Don
-
Hi Griff,
Nice stuff!!
Isn't the DB systems loading plugs, put the RCAs in parallel with the 47K default of your preamp? If so, use a parallel resistance calculator to figure out the value for the desired load. For instance, 47K with 100K nets 32K. That's why I previously said that 47K with 400K nets 42K. Like this:
http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-paralresist.htm
Check out LpGear 3472 series. Page 2 has Vivid Line.
http://www.lpgear.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?
There's even a 3472ML in the AT listings. It seems a little steep at $150 for a bonded ML on a straight alum cantilever. I was thinking about it but an MLa is $125 so it doesn't make much sense.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I would seriously like you to explain this parallel resistance calculation. My phono stage with all dip switches off, is 47K. There are 3 dip switches labeled 100, 1000, and 10000. The 4 one is empty and allows the user to install his own resistors. The M/M side (capacitance), is 100, 470, 1000, and the 4th one is also user install-able.
If all dip switch when off are 47K, then to flip dip switch #1 to on and get a 100 ohms load as a result, what value resistor has to, or should I say, is in place to be in place to obtain this number 100?
What resistor would have to be run in parallel with the 47K to have obtained the 1000 or the 10000 load? I have used that calculator that you posted but I do not either trust my findings, or just plain don't understand whats happening. A little clarity into this crystal ball would be very much appreciated. I have been told that I can (add) the dip switches (loads), to come up with settings other than the 100,1000, and 10000. The term 'add' is what I have seen stated, but I don't think 'adding' (1+1=2), is really what should be done. How about helping an ageing old man get his head around this. (grin) Thanks Neo
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Griff,
What phono stage are you using? Do you have the manual?
It sounds like you might have a direct value plug-in (#4). If that's the case then you had it right in the first place. When you said DB systems I thought you were using a parallel resistance kit. Maybe we can figure it out with the model/and or manual. If it has additive capability by pushing multiple switches (possible) it's probably only for the MC section. But I'm guessing.
For ATs and most MM/MI use the 100pF setting for capacitance. That could even be a bit much with most cables - their capacitance gets added in. Here's a link for some 50pF caps:
http://www.partsconnexion.com/capacitor_film_silvermica.html
Didn't mean to throw you a curve, but as long as we're here it's good to understand how it works.
This is the correct link for the 3472 styli.
http://www.lpgear.com/category/LPG.html
BTW, I have a 3400 spherical stylus with a carbon fiber cantilever. This is the stock 3400. I have it wingless and tried it in my 95 and Virtuoso. I was thinking of using it for mono records. To be honest it sounds pretty bad. I have some nice Japanese mono jazz LPs and they deserve better.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
My main phono stage is the BAT VK-10SE with the 6 pac option. I do have the manual and I do have the parallel resistance kit from db but I have not used it. I have a couple of cartridges that ask for 30 ohm loads, so I though I would try this db kit and load them at 30 instead of my minumum setting of 100 per the BAT. Knowing that this kit also has 2 empty plugs, I thought I would also try the 32K load that is recommended for the Grado Signiture 8M. Like I said, I have not tried this resistance kit. I decided I want to understand first just what was going on with these various settings.
If I was to solder a 32K ohm resistor in the empty plug from db, and inserted it in line with my phono cables at the input location on the BAT VK-10, I would assume that I have loaded the installed cartridge at 32K. With this calculation formula, I do not know if this is true or not.
In the manual, this is what is stated. **********
Cartridge loading switches
Resistance:
The 47K load resistor is permanently connected to the cartridge input. If a different loading value is desired, it can be obtained by switching in additional resistors, installed on the VK-10 PC board. This is accomplished by using the two DIP switches, (S101) and (S202), that allow multiple choices for resistive and capacitive cartridge loading. Four positions are reserved for the choice of resistance and four for capacitance. Out of each group of four, one position is loaded with female pins and allows the user to install any desired value component (this position is marked "USER"). Gold plated solderable pins are supplied with the VK-10 accessory kit, that should be attached to either resistor or capacitors supplied by the user.
The following resistors can be added in parallel with the 47K load.
Switch position Resistor Value
1 100 Ohm
2 1K
3 10K
4 User-Defined
Any parallel combination of the these values is also allowable.
Capacitance:
Various values of capacitance can be connected in parallel to the input via switches (S101 and S102).
With these switches in the OFF position, there is no capacitive loading to the cartridge.
The capacitance choices include:
Switch Capacitor Value
5 100pF
6 470pF
7 1000pF
8 User-Defined
Any possible combination of these values is also allowable.
**********Neo, the above is word for word out of my manual. The switches 1 thru 8 are dip switches. Thanks for helping me tackle
this mysterious 'Voodoo'! (grin)
Regards,
Don
-
Neo, I hate to disagree with you but my experience suggests that the 'damper' must be compressed when the cantilever is installed. The cantilever 'spring' isn't capable of providing the kind of resistance as suggested. It is helpful to think of this spring as hair-like. I believe the 'spring' only serve to maintain the tension on the 'damper'. I'm starting to wonder about these compliance figures and the associated effective masses. It may be that it is time for a fresh look. I must mention that the 7 hz figures are with the addition of mass at the headshell and at the pivot. It also includes the damping using the silicone oil.
-
Although there is "springiness" to the cantilever it is unrelated to the low frequency resonance, and is notable only in the midrange losses caused by its flexing.
By design it is intended to be as rigid as possible (no springiness) - and what flex there is to the cantilever is an imperfection/compromise caused by the realities of the limitations of available materials.
On AT styli, all the "springiness" at low frequencies (compliance related) is therefore completely down to the rubber (or perhaps more appropriately elastomer) "doughnut".
What is interesting is the discussion with regards to whether the screw is designed as a compression adjustment (and therefore a means of tweaking compliance) -or whether it is simply intended to keep the doughnut in place...
The reason the screw is there might be just to allow adjustment of the cantilever angle through rotation, something that may not be relevant to lower end styli, where it is not even fitted.
interesting
bye for now
David
-
Five of the M/C's I bought are 1) Ortofon MC 2000, 2) Klipsch MCZ 10 R, 3) Shinon Red Boron Improved, 4) Krell KC 100 (Miyabi Standard), 5) Denon DL 305
Lucky Lucky man - I have been hunting an original MC2000 :drool: (the V1 high compliance one!) for a number of years without any luck.
The others have not been on my radar but if an opportunity like that cropped up I would probably grab them too!! :tempted:
Last time someone lent me a stylus it took around 2 years for me to return it - not that I used it much, but serious listening and lab measurements both take a solid contiguous chunk of free time...
Whereas blowing hot air in forums online can be done in snippets taken from the day...
So my answer is yes I would love to investigate/get to know/listen to those styli - but only if you are OK with it taken a LONG time. :roll:
The birth of my son has turned from someone who was time rich, into someone who is time poor.... not that I am complaining! :D
bye for now
David
-
Hi David,
I would have no problem with the wait. I have far to many cartridges to play with and not having the Virtuoso in the mix would not even be missed.
Do you only need the styli which is mounted in the plugs or do you also need the Virtuoso body? I have one each of the Red and the Black.
In regards to the MC-2000. I believe there were only 2 models. The original and then there was a model called the improved. I was fortunate enought
to have found a NOS original. :D
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Neo,
My main phono stage is the BAT VK-10SE with the 6 pac option. I do have the manual and I do have the parallel resistance kit from db but I have not used it. I have a couple of cartridges that ask for 30 ohm loads, so I though I would try this db kit and load them at 30 instead of my minumum setting of 100 per the BAT. Knowing that this kit also has 2 empty plugs, I thought I would also try the 32K load that is recommended for the Grado Signiture 8M. Like I said, I have not tried this resistance kit. I decided I want to understand first just what was going on with these various settings.
If I was to solder a 32K ohm resistor in the empty plug from db, and inserted it in line with my phono cables at the input location on the BAT VK-10, I would assume that I have loaded the installed cartridge at 32K. With this calculation formula, I do not know if this is true or not.
In the manual, this is what is stated. **********
Cartridge loading switches
Resistance:
The 47K load resistor is permanently connected to the cartridge input. If a different loading value is desired, it can be obtained by switching in additional resistors, installed on the VK-10 PC board. This is accomplished by using the two DIP switches, (S101) and (S202), that allow multiple choices for resistive and capacitive cartridge loading. Four positions are reserved for the choice of resistance and four for capacitance. Out of each group of four, one position is loaded with female pins and allows the user to install any desired value component (this position is marked "USER"). Gold plated solderable pins are supplied with the VK-10 accessory kit, that should be attached to either resistor or capacitors supplied by the user.
The following resistors can be added in parallel with the 47K load.
Switch position Resistor Value
1 100 Ohm
2 1K
3 10K
4 User-Defined
Any parallel combination of the these values is also allowable.
Capacitance:
Various values of capacitance can be connected in parallel to the input via switches (S101 and S102).
With these switches in the OFF position, there is no capacitive loading to the cartridge.
The capacitance choices include:
Switch Capacitor Value
5 100pF
6 470pF
7 1000pF
8 User-Defined
Any possible combination of these values is also allowable.
**********Neo, the above is word for word out of my manual. The switches 1 thru 8 are dip switches. Thanks for helping me tackle
this mysterious 'Voodoo'! (grin)
Regards,
Don
Griff,
I'm sure that's a great sounding phono pre, but the instructions are terrible. It says, "The 47K load resistor is permanently connected to the cartridge input. If a different loading value is desired, it can be obtained by switching in additional resistors, installed on the VK-10 PC board." From this we should assume that if a 32K load is desired you need 100K resistors in position 4 - all resistors or positions are in parallel with permanent 47K.
The following resistors can be added in parallel with the 47K load.
Switch position Resistor Value
1 100 Ohm
2 1K
3 10K
4 User-
I take this to mean that in position 1, 100 ohms is in parallel with 47K. In this case it doesn't matter much because this results in a load of 99.8 ohms.
You can engage multiple switches. This matters slightly more. If you engage all 3 switches you'll wind up with 89. 9 ohms. If you want 30 ohms you should get 30 ohm resistors and use position 4. Here's a multiple resistor calculator, it might come in handy for odd values or MM settings.
http://www.1728.org/resistrs.htm
Capacitance is different. Values in parallel are additive. It's hard to imagine using anything other than 100pF for a MM/MI out of the options they give you. Maybe some people use it for MC? Some HO carts might be better with more than 100pF, but first here's how it works. The capacitance load is the total of your internal tonearm wire + cables + preamp input capacitance. Most high end arms have < 30pF, but cables vary widely. The recommendation of 50pF is to make allowances for internal wire and cables.
You might want to check with BAT to make sure I interpreted correctly. They might make a great phono pre, but they're not very good with explaining how to use it.
neo
-
Although there is "springiness" to the cantilever it is unrelated to the low frequency resonance, and is notable only in the midrange losses caused by its flexing.
By design it is intended to be as rigid as possible (no springiness) - and what flex there is to the cantilever is an imperfection/compromise caused by the realities of the limitations of available materials.
On AT styli, all the "springiness" at low frequencies (compliance related) is therefore completely down to the rubber (or perhaps more appropriately elastomer) "doughnut".
What is interesting is the discussion with regards to whether the screw is designed as a compression adjustment (and therefore a means of tweaking compliance) -or whether it is simply intended to keep the doughnut in place...
The reason the screw is there might be just to allow adjustment of the cantilever angle through rotation, something that may not be relevant to lower end styli, where it is not even fitted.
interesting
bye for now
David
David,
Compliance is springiness and you're saying it's unrelated to resonant frequency? I beg to differ.
Cantilevers might be designed to be as rigid as possible, but they vary widely. Differing length, weight, rigidity are all factors in compliance, and combined with arm/cart eff mass, determine low freq res.
neo
-
Yes resonant freq. and "springiness" are related.
But the cantilever's own inherent "springiness" is totally negligible - whereas the "springiness" of the rubber doughnut (sticking to the AT design for simplicity) is proportionally HUGE.
As you know, lower compliance (making the suspension "stiffer") raises the resonant frequency a low compliance cartridge in a low mass arm can have a resonance of above 20Hz - and still be using a rubber doughnut as its "suspension"
When you move from rubber doughnut to no doughnut (ie depend on the inherent springiness of the cantilever) - your resonant frequency will rise dramatically - it will be nowhere near the low frequency zone and may (should?) be well outside the audio range in the ultrasonic frequencies.
I have not worked through the physics but the math is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantilever
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooke's_law
Simple physics for the resonance of an aluminium rod (http://courses.physics.illinois.edu/phys193/Lecture_Notes/Vibrating_Rod/Longitudinally_Vibrating_Singing_Rod.pdf) seems to indicate a calculated first resonance for a 0.007m rod of circa 357kHz...
But I think this is the wrong approach as we need to calculate the resonance generated by a cantilever which is a bit different (hence the first couple of links)... I may work that up in a spreadsheet later to see where it ends up.
The "spring" in a cantilever is in fact the rubber doughnut - the whole design of the cantilever is focused on being "non-springy" (rigid) - so we are talking a whole different order of magnitude in terms of the springiness and as a result in terms of the resonance....
The mathematical relationship between cantilever resonance and effective mass is relatively simple and does not involve the material of which the cantilever is made... but even the heaviest stylus cantilever calculates out to a resonance of several kHz...
To get a cantilever with a resonance in the sub sonic range, would require something of the hardness/springiness of a hair - which would not be much use as a stylus!
As an example consider the Stantering damping brushes - the flexing of the horsehair is used to damp the sub sonic resonance...
bye for now
David
-
Hi Don,
I will take a look to see whether it has a compliance screw.
The needle holder on these is not plastic but a solid chunk of metal, which screws into the body - so there is no question about a positive mating with the body!
I have a couple of these bodies with broken styli (intended for a retip at some point) - I will remove the stylus (stub) and look for a compliance screw....
Need to find them in my storage first...
bye for now
David
The Signet TK9/TK10 as well as the AT 22/23/24/25 stylus assemblies that I have all have compliance screws.
Jack
-
Given the current discussion, we may need to consider changing the terminology - compliance screw may be a misnomer
-
Hi Neo,
It is good to know that it is not just me who's eyes are glazing over when he reads this BAT phono stage manual. (grin)
It didn't seem to matter how many times I read it, I still didn't understand what was being conveyed.
That 99.8 ohm load number is also the number I came up with, but when I plugged in all 3 of the dip switch load numbers
and still came up with a number that was still basically the same as switch #1 (100 ohms), that is when I began to doubt
that I had a grasp of what was going on. I thought perhaps I was not using the calculations formula correctly.
Thanks for your help Neo. It really is appreciated.
Best regards,
Don Griffith
-
David,
I think that view is incorrect. If you remove the rubber donut completely the cart still retains compliance but loses damping. How else could Ortofon play the MC200 without damping in that phase paper?
"When you move from rubber doughnut to no doughnut (ie depend on the inherent springiness of the cantilever) - your resonant frequency will rise dramatically - it will be nowhere near the low frequency zone and may (should?) be well outside the audio range in the ultrasonic frequencies."
Have you done this? Be specific please. Some carts might use the rubber damper for compliance, especially those with no cantilever, but for most "conventional" carts I don't believe so.
Compliance isn't related to springiness, it is springiness. What does cu x 10 6 cm/dyne mean?
Dyne is a unit of force that is measured in centimeter per gram. This force is equal to the amount of force necessary to create the movement of one centimeter for each second, which is equal to one gram. So we're talking about force necessary to create a small (x 10 6power) movement in a specific direction and measured at a specific freq. In other words, flex.
neo
-
One thing the wire tie back on the end of the cantilever does is stop longitudinal movement of the cantilever when tracking a record groove. This stabilizes the stereo image compared to a cartridge that has the cantilever mounted in a rubber doughnut without a tie back. Compliance is also a function of the rubber doughnut's elasticity. Actual cartridge compliance would be determined by the tie back tension and the doughnut's modulus of elasticity.
The cantilever is not intended to be a spring, if it flexes information is lost because the motion of the stylus in the groove was not directly translated into motion of the magnets.
That is why so much R and D has gone into making a cantilever as ridgid as possible.
Here are a couple links to the referenced Ortofon MC200
MC200 cartridge cutaway.
http://www.ortofon.com/images/stories/cartridges/MC_200/Ortofon%20MC%20200%20p.2.pdf
Cantilever design discussed.
http://www.ortofon.com/images/stories/cartridges/MC_200/Ortofon%20MC%20200%20p.3.pdf
Scotty
-
David,
I think that view is incorrect. If you remove the rubber donut completely the cart still retains compliance but loses damping. How else could Ortofon play the MC200 without damping in that phase paper?
"When you move from rubber doughnut to no doughnut (ie depend on the inherent springiness of the cantilever) - your resonant frequency will rise dramatically - it will be nowhere near the low frequency zone and may (should?) be well outside the audio range in the ultrasonic frequencies."
Have you done this? Be specific please. Some carts might use the rubber damper for compliance, especially those with no cantilever, but for most "conventional" carts I don't believe so.
Compliance isn't related to springiness, it is springiness. What does cu x 10 6 cm/dyne mean?
Dyne is a unit of force that is measured in centimeter per gram. This force is equal to the amount of force necessary to create the movement of one centimeter for each second, which is equal to one gram. So we're talking about force necessary to create a small (x 10 6power) movement in a specific direction and measured at a specific freq. In other words, flex.
neo
One more thing to add to the above viewpoint. The cart has a suspension, some kind of wire or supporting structure that is part of the cantilever system. On an AT cart that suspension is directly behind and part of the top of the cantilever. It is held in place by the compliance screw, misnamed or not. The MC200 suspension wire is as thick and longer than, the cantilever itself.
Sometimes the suspension in a cart will fail/collapse and the cart winds up sitting on the record. This is not a rubber donut failure, it's a broken suspension. The cantilever and the suspension primarily determine the compliance. They are made to have varying degrees of springiness, flexibility or movement for a given force. The rubber damper primary function is well, damping. Maybe it can be used as part of cantilever/suspension system, depending on design.
neo
-
Well consider the ADC cartridges - no wire.
By design the cantilever is as rigid as possible so as to avoid all flex (other than as an imperfection) - so for our low frequency purposes in this discussion it is by definition non-springy.
The only thing providing "springiness" in these designs (along with damping) is the elastomer holding the cantilever in place.
In those designs there is also a pivot point, a hard point which is the fulcrum of the cantilever...
Could the compliance screws be the fulcrum point? or tightening of the fulcrum?
When I overtightened the screw on a berillium AT15ss stylus the boron cantilever snapped and dropped out...perhaps I should see if I can find that loose cantilever (I put it aside) and measure its length.
I am trying to put together the formulae required to calculate the flex of a boron cantilever... but I am pretty sure the result will be absolutely negligible for our purposes and at our frequencies. Aluminium cantilevers are more complex to calculate due to the tube/pipe hollow structure + anodising.... simple boron rods should be easier...
There are a number of reviewers and audiophiles who have claimed to be able to immediately hear the specific colourations introduced by tension wires...
In cartridges with a tension wire setup - the wire is part of the suspension and it does indeed flex - (and the level of tension/flex is of course related to compliance) - but the cantilever itself remains rigid.
bye for now
David
P.S. thanks for those links - That brochure is also available on VE and it has some good reference material in it...
-
Here is a link to Audio Technica's "A Guide to Phono Cartridges".
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/resource_library/literature/da2d70c7d46a2803/a_guide_to_phono_cartridges.pdf
This pdf DOC has a detailed drawing of the AT Paratoroidal Signal Generator showing the location of the compliance screw and the Radial Damping Ring.
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/resource_library/literature/da2d70c7d46a2803/a_guide_to_phono_cartridges.pdf
Same DOC in color.
http://www.coolgales.com/brochures/AudioTechnicacartridgesbrochure.pdf
I will take the alleged colorations from a tension wire any day over the poor imaging that a cartridge without adequate control of the cantilever's longitudinal movement will exhibit.
Scotty
-
Ahh thank you...
so it is in fact a compliance screw - as it screws down it puts increased tension on the rear tensioning wire (for some reason I thought the AT styli didn't have a wire... ) and therefore reduces compliance - but given that it is applying pressure directly to the tensioning system the whole setup is quite delicate....
Neo - formula for deflection from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflection_(engineering)
Deflection in Radians = F*L*L / (2EI)
where F = force applied (VTF)
L = length of cantilever (7mm)
E = Young's modulus / modulus of elasticity (material spec for Boron = 478GPa)
I = effective tip mass (area moment of inertia)
Resulting deflection in degrees is 9.78975E-17
Does it flex - yes
Is it relevant - no
to all intents and purposes 1g of static force does not cause a boron cantilever to flex.
The influence on the tension wire however would be quite different!
bye for now
David
-
David,
That's what I said in the first place. You were looking at the rigidity of the cantilever alone. It doesn't work that way. The cantilever, suspension and damper comprise a system that determines compliance. I'm not familiar with ADC system and lack of wire. Maybe that's why the all seem to fail? The cantilever has to be attached to something and doesn't act alone.
You can see in the AT illustration that the suspension filament (wire) is contained within the cantilever attachment piece I was talking about. Some older beryllium stylus had no housing around the filament. It looked like a cantilever extension. A 150MLX has a housing around the filament so there are or were some variations in design.
BTW, some aluminum cantilevers flex considerably. The amount is relative to other types and dimensions. I think you'd agree that the difference in rigidity is audible.
P.S. I noticed on another forum you said that CA carts are potted. I wasn't aware of that. Are you sure?
-
P.S. I noticed on another forum you said that CA carts are potted. I wasn't aware of that. Are you sure?
Got me there - I am guessing... I cannot believe that they would simply rebadge cartridges and mark them up 400%+ even if they put a new mounting surround on them.... so I figure they must at least pot the damn things... ( I should do a proper investigation)
-
Far be it for me to defend CAs pricing, but it's not the same generator as the 95. Beside the difference in resistance, the 95 is among the least expensive in build quality. It doesn't even have OCC wire like the 100E, 110E, etc. We don't know exactly what CA has or how it differs. The separation spec for the 95 is 20dB at 1K. The crosstalk spec for the Virtuoso V2 is better than 30dB at 1K. Channel balance is 0.2dB. Channel balance for the 95 is 2.0dB.
It is interesting to note that the Concept seems to have identical numbers as the 95.
Looking at the CA web site it seems like they keep revising the numbers. Inductance was 420mH for all of them, now it's either 400 or the Maestro is 12:40H. Maybe that's 412mH? The V2 Maestro is listed at 3.6mV out. When V2 first came out they were at 4.1 mV. Ca seems to play with the specs quite a bit. SPECIFICATIONS SUBJECT TO CHANGE. They're looking more like the 95 all the time. Maybe you're right and separation and balance is selected examples? I wonder if I put a wood top on my potted 95 would it sound identical to the Virtuoso?
http://clearaudio.de/de/products/cartridges-mm-v2.php
neo
-
Try it in a wooden headshell.
-
Until someone actually measures CA's cartridges and generates cross-talk,channel balance and separation specs I won't believe the claimed numbers are real. CA's MM cartridges could certainly be selected AT cartridge bodies from a production run which have the specs they claim
for their cartridge models.
As far the inductance claims go they could vary depending on the measurement procedure used and the spec is irrelevant to most prospective buyers.
Scotty
-
Scotty,
Inductance is supposed to be a straightforward reading at 1K. There was a question about home meter readings due to the resistance of the meter, but this shouldn't be a problem with a mfg. The thing is, up until V2, all CA MM were supposed to be 420mH. The 95 is 400mH. 95 impedance is 2800 and CA says 660 (questionable). They seem to change some aspect of specifications a few times a year.
Output is supposed to be boosted on some top CA V2. These specs linked to above, say it's virtually the same as before. This is changed from when V2 first came out and I checked. It's enough to make you dizzy trying to figure it out. Maybe that's what they want.
I previously had the impression that CA played with the specs to make the bottom ones look worse. It now looks like they're gradually going to 95 specs. My Virtuoso seems to have higher end performance than the potted 95. Could the wood top be responsible? I didn't used to think so, but now I'm not so sure. Have you read those raves about V2 Maestro? I wonder if that could be wishful hearing, pride of ownership or if they just messed up the specs on their site.
neo
-
Inductance can also be measured at 10kHz. 420mH is within 5% of 400mH, this difference could easily be accounted for by production tolerances. The sound of the cartridge can be changed rather dramatically by how the cartridge body is damped. I used 4 layers of very small rectangles of 3M DAMPING SHEET from Music Direct on both sides of the cartridge body. This constrained layer damping transformed the sound of the cartridge. I would bet that the wood that the CA cartridge body is mounted in makes a similar improvement for the better.
Spurious vibrations in the cartridge body and the stylus assembly are some of the biggest problems the stock AT cartridges have. The ATN-ML150/OCC and AT150MLX use a ceramic base to help suppress unwanted vibrations in the cartridge body. The Signet line actually attached the stylus assembly to the cartridge body with a screw, which is something I wish the entire AT lineup did. I super glued the stylus assembly on my AT 440ML to the cartridge to try to achieve the same result.
Scotty
-
The only Signets that I know of that had the stylus screwed to the body are the TK9 and TK10, which are the signet branded versions of the AT22/23/24/25 - which also had the stylus screwed to the body...
The rest of the Signet range did not have the body screws....
The other brands that I have seen screwed in styli with are Technics (EPC100, EPC-P205) and Nagaoka (MP30, MP50, MP300,MP500)
Any others?
bye for now
David
-
Those were the ones I was thinking of, I mistakenly thought the entire line had this vital feature. Mind you I haven't seen a TK9 in the flesh in well over 20 years.
Scotty
-
On the Audiogon thread (the legendary one that Raul started)- there were a series of discussions and I recall it being mentioned a few times that the AT20ss sounded best in a wooden headshell.
There is also this thread on here: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=33028.0
Basically using a thing layer (up to 3mm) of plasticine between cartridge and headshell.
This has been reported to work effectively for Grado's...
I would think that for best results the "plast-i-lator" should heave the plasticine constrained sideways, so it doesn't gradually get squeezed out over time - you need the plasticine slightly compressed for best damping results - and the cartridge screws not too tight (otherwise you are bypassing the plasicine and transmitting the energy via the screws) - I usually use nylon screws with the high compliance cartridges to reduce mass - they also don't screw on super tight (you strip the thread if you overtighten).
Some of the better headshells have a damping layer in or on the headshell itself - I have such examples from Denon and Audio Technica.
Yes - I am quite certain that most cartridges can be improved with some damping of the stylus/body/headshell/arm system. (talking about midrange frequencies here, not low frequency fluid damping type ...)
The Linn and post Linn school of arm design with the cartridges rigidly mounted to the arm - as tightly as possible - depends on the arm (and any internal damping fitted) to dissipate the energy...
The S-arms - well in an ideal world we can do some external damping with heatshrink, a little internal damping with cotton in the armtube, perhaps some damping dots (not sure about those), we can opt for headshells with twin pins top and bottom for a better connection to the arm, and then damp headshell and cartridge.... all of which adds mass so we end up having to carefully walk the tightrope between the right mass for the compliance and the damping it also needs...
The high compliance cartridges we play with need less damping than the lower compliance cartridges - so exemplars like the AT150 and AT20 need less damping (the high compliance stylus suspension passes less energy through to the cartridge body) - the lower compliance examples such as AT95 and CA need more damping.... nature of the beasts.
I theorise that the best low priced option would be to use the AT92 upgrade styli (up to shibata) on the CA or AT95 bodies, and treat with damping mods.... the woodies might not need the damping mods, the AT95 and Aluminium bodied CA's probably would....
bye for now
David
-
Griff,
Before I get caught up in further discussion I want to say, helping to figure out your preamp manual was my pleasure. The instructions are confusing.
You have a great accumulation of audio toys err gear, and your comments are interesting and most welcome. Your brief description of the Decca sparked my interest again and your loan offer to David is very generous. Please don't hesitate to join in the discussion, comment, or question.
neo
-
I've eyed off some elderly decca's a couple of times myself - I have a feeling they would work well in the JVC.... :thumb:
(I don't think they would suit the Revox AT ALL!! :nono:)
So far I have resisted temptation - although my motto is "I can resist anything except temptation"
-
Neo, I thought that I should at least acknowledge the fact that I may have been mistaken with regards to my preference of the ATN-440mla over the ATN-140LC. It obviously could be a case of my not having installed the cantilever correctly. I will, in time, give the 140LC another shot. I think the difficulty in sourcing the 140 makes the question moot.
-
The wording I have seen in a number of postings becomes admirably apt here....
It definitely becomes a mute point.... Wink2
-
D_Grb,
I kind of doubt that, being mistaken that is. Although I've never tried the ATN140LC on my 12E, it's similar to the ATN440MLa. The LC is more compliant and tracks at 1.5g max if I remember correctly, and of course a nude ML vs nude LC. That's about it - tip, cu and damper. I loaded both with my 440 at 32K. What is it about the sound of the cart with the MLa you'd like to change? Can you put your finger on it?
neo
P.S. I have an ATN140LC with < 2 hrs on it. If you'd like to transplant it maybe we could trade, but I think you might be barking up the wrong tree.
-
Neo,
In a word, nothing! Thanks to you and the others, I think that I'm finally there. Reducing the capacitance, adjusting the tonearm with mass, and finally not being a 'hardhead' and playing with the COMPLIANCE screw finally brought me home. In the end, we were both correct about the tie-back wire. I took the opportunity to adjust and listen, and I did indeed have to much pressure on the damper. One small tweak (loosening) of the compliance screw, and all was well. I haven't run the resonance check, but I would seriously doubt that anything had changed. If there was one thing, it would be the slight mid-range droop that's been previously discussed. I'm still going to pursue the 150mlx.
Dl,
My apologies if I've been unclear, but unlike many of you, I lack the vocabulary to fully express my thoughts!
I'm fairly thick-skinned, so don't waste an opportunity to correct me!
-
Ahhh I was not making any comment on your use of language, rather I was commenting on the incorrect use of language very common on the web - wala for voila - and mute for moot
In the case of the expression "moot point" - not being able to source NOS ATN140LC, I turned it into a pun.... it being a mute (ie: unable to speak) point (as in needle)
I do have a liking for puns and even on occasion multi-lingual ones....
You have been crystal clear .... it was just me failing to be funny.... :duh:
-
No. It was funny, I'm just sensitive.
-
There is a NOS AT 140ML (not MLa) stylus over on the (you know which auction site), for $95 buy it now! I wish they had kept that numbering system they use to have. I would have like to just post the auction #. Would be so much easier to locate.
Regards,
Don
-
Thanks Don!
-
I think the ATN140ML is tapered aluminum like the 440. Interesting bit about the output, it might be 5mV like the 440ML OCC. It looks like the OCC stylus sported stronger magnets. The motors are the same. To be honest, it didn't seem to make any difference with the ATN140LC (also 5mV - same motor). Maybe I didn't loosen the suspension sufficiently with only a few sides played. I'll have to try it again and see what happens.
neo
-
Here is some food for thought...
both hysteresis and eddy current effects increase with the signal level - ie the higher the output, the more the high frequencies are affected by these magnetic effects.
So... a stylus with a "weaker" (hopefully lighter too!) magnet, may well have sonic benefits.
Lower output voltage from the same body is likely to be more linear - high frequencies more dynamic and less compressed...
On the other hand, some compression at the high end, would help control the cantilever resonance rise in output, and provide a subjective impression of improved high end detail, soundstaging etc... (as the lower level signals would be reproduced correctly but the higher level signals would be compressed.... a sort of frequency dependent natural gain riding mechanism)
Nobody measures frequency response at various signal levels to identify this type of effect.... and it is very difficult to do reliably using differing test records.... (I have experimented with this)
I know of no test record that has the same F/R sweep or pink noise recorded at differing levels for this type of testing
bye for now
David
-
Repeatability from one test record to another can be a problem. I believe it was Werner, the reviewer on TNT and EE, who wrote that the frequency sweeps on HFN and Analogue Productions test records were off - not properly calibrated.
Nonlinearity with output voltage is a problem for any transducer. Amplitude response changes with groove velocity.
neo
-
OK so a combination of you guys having too much fun with cantilever grafting, and a damaged ATN95HE "grip" has led to my 2nd Foray into cantilever transplants....
I came across an AT95HE going cheap on the auction site... so I picked it up.
When removing the stylus from the cartridge it got recalcitrant - next thing I know :duh: :
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93758)
OK so nothing to lose!
Looking at the way these are mounted, I cannot see how the screw pressure can be used to adjust compliance - however, If one varies the amount by which the doughnut is compressed by pushing it into the plug, then screwing the compliance plug down to hold it in place - this will indeed alter the compliance - except how do you control this pressure?
When they manufacture these, I think the wire coming out the end continues further, and the appropriate level of tension is provided that way, before the screw is tightened and the wire is then cut at the back of the plug....
Anyway here is the visual progress of my transplant:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93759)
Removing the cantilever
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93760)
Inspecting the cantilever
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93761)
Hmm something strange about where the cantilever meets the pivot point...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93762)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93763)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93764)
This looks like someone may have salvaged an HE cantilever and needle by mounting it in another pivot/magnet assembly.... or are the HE's built like this?!
In any case moving right along
I looked at several AT95 and related bodies and picked the one I own with the best matched channels - which happened to be an AT105.
So I am creating an AT105HE...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93766)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93765)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93767)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93768)
Alignement check
Then I tightened the screw and checked it from the inside as well
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93769)
Then I tried to plug it into the AT105 body...
now things got troublesome - the magnets were too far forwards... only by maybe half a mm - but it was not fitting in.
So I compared to an original AT stylus - the doughnut on that one seemed "thinner"
After some thought, I loosened the screw again and used a secondary implement (needle) to compress the doughnut while I tightened the screw. - At times like these it would be nice to be an octopus.
End result seems good - but not currently testable as my S-arm table is not currently deployed...
Clearly these transplants are touch and go with regards to compliance - no way of achieving repeatable results with this method!
Could you guys look at some of your HE or VL styli and see whether the mounting to the pivot is like this example, or whether what I received was someone's repair job?
thanks
David
-
David,
I have a 95HE but I don't need to check it to see that you got a grafted cantilever. I'll take a look anyway to see if that damper looks right.
Did you take a look at the diamond?
If you can break the cantilever support with the compliance screw, maybe it can adjust compliance with the correct torque? Maybe its function is more to limit movement of the suspension wire like off/on.
neo
-
David,
I take that back. Now that I've taken a good look, that is how the HE is made. The compressed damper looks the same as yours and the cantilever fits into a grey colored extension of a black piece that holds the magnets. That grey piece could actually be a separate piece that connects the cantilever to the black plate.
I don't think AT makes these the same, although I never looked that closely. I think I have an orig 95E lying around somewhere. I'll see if I can find it.
I'm starting to think that compliance is determined by the same 3 things that define it. The cantilever itself, the suspension, and the damper.
neo
Nice photos BTW.
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93762)
The OEM 95 stylus looks similar, but without the grey stuff surrounding the cantilever in front of the plate. That's the plate that holds the magnets and has a hole in the middle and an extension that looks like a flagpole stand facing down. The extension is shorter on the OEM. With 30X my HE looks similar to the photo.
I think the grey stuff reinforces the coupling, but I'm not sure if it's adhesive or another connecting piece. The longer "flagpole" extension might effectively shorten the cantilever. I would think the grey stuff would increase tip mass. Maybe one makes up for the other.
I tried to take photos, but my good camera is loaned out at the moment. The other one isn't good enough for the necessary magnification.
It's now obvious (thanks to David) that damper compression has a big, if not the biggest influence on compliance when performing a transplant. If you want to retain the original cu performance of the stylus being transplanted, duplicate the damper compression like in the original holder.
Changing compliance of a stylus, or getting it to fit, might entail changing dampers.
neo
-
I considered trying to swap dampers (to move the HE to a P-Mount fitting where I could try it on the Revox.... which requires high compliance) - But I could not work out an easy way to seperate the damper from the magnet plate... it seems to be glued together - and I was unwilling to try to force things .... (every time I try THAT - things end badly!!)
-
Foiled again. Not much you can do with that HE unless you find a plug with a cu screw. The 105 and the 110E have interchangeable styli, but I don't know if any upgrades exist that plug right in. It's interesting - they have a cu screw on the bottom and all the "standard" 3400 series comes with the fitting.
Do you have a 92E for the Revox? With the same generator as the 95, the stylus has a thinner damper, if I remember correctly. I don't think there is an easy way to pot it though. For $21 + shipping, it's hard to go wrong. The .3 x .7 stylus is worth the price of the cart.
You've cleared up some of this transplant confusion, but it doesn't make it any easier. I was thinking maybe you could repair the HE plug with a couple of strategically placed drops of superglue.
neo
-
Here is some food for thought...
both hysteresis and eddy current effects increase with the signal level - ie the higher the output, the more the high frequencies are affected by these magnetic effects.
So... a stylus with a "weaker" (hopefully lighter too!) magnet, may well have sonic benefits.
Lower output voltage from the same body is likely to be more linear - high frequencies more dynamic and less compressed...
On the other hand, some compression at the high end, would help control the cantilever resonance rise in output, and provide a subjective impression of improved high end detail, soundstaging etc... (as the lower level signals would be reproduced correctly but the higher level signals would be compressed.... a sort of frequency dependent natural gain riding mechanism)
Nobody measures frequency response at various signal levels to identify this type of effect.... and it is very difficult to do reliably using differing test records.... (I have experimented with this)
I know of no test record that has the same F/R sweep or pink noise recorded at differing levels for this type of testing
bye for now
David
This brings up a performance issue, output voltage and desirability of greater output. Dynamics (in the sense of difference in voltage between loudest and quietest) is increased with higher output and has an appeal. Hysteresis and eddy currents are sources of distortion and nonlinearities. That's why the MCs with air core coils sound "pure". It's like a speaker crossover coil, but in reverse. Use an iron core inductor instead of an air core, and it doesn't sound as good but you can attain greater inductance values.
I wonder what's going on with Clearaudio MMs. I just checked their site again and Maestro V2 output is still listed as 3.6mV. It was 4.1mV when it first came out and they touted stronger magnets. It's almost as if I'm looking at an archived web page except the format is different.
It doesn't take much imagination to believe reports about the AT-50ANV and ART 7 (air cores) being some of the finest MCs ever made. I tried a DL-S1 and it's a great natural sounding cart, but the ATs overcome problems with the Denon's high resistance and inductance.
neo
-
I got an email from a friend in Europe. He has a couple of Technics carts and the suspensions have collapsed. One of them is a 205 C III I believe, and the other has a similar style but different stylus fitment. I'll check my email again to see exactly what they are.
He was told by Axel (German cart repair) that a new damper won't fix it. [Apparently the conversation was confusing, but that was the jist of it.]
I assume that these have a suspension wire that has broken. What kind of cantilever/stylus does the 205 have? I am wondering about his options for getting it fixed. Most of the repair people are limited in cantilever types for replacement if that is necessary.
neo
-
It seems to me there is a difference in the sound of a MC versus a MM/MI. I don't think having the same amplitude response (if any 2 carts can) makes them sound the same. One might disagree with this and I have no problem with that, but why?
Is the presence of inductance at the output of a HO cart, the reason?
How about the need for another gain stage with a LO?
I say this based on listening to various carts and not a theoretical hypothesis. There seems to be a difference in presentation that's hard to describe.
neo
-
Hi Neo:
I agree with you on two fronts here. To me, I would describe the M/M as having a more bold (heavy), sounding presentation. Where as the M/C is more of a light and airy sounding presentation. And it is awfully hard to describe in such a way that it is understood by all! I also use the term 'thicker' when describing the M/M but who (other than me), would understand what the h*ll that means! (grin)
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Neo:
I agree with you on two fronts here. To me, I would describe the M/M as having a more bold (heavy), sounding presentation. Where as the M/C is more of a light and airy sounding presentation. And it is awfully hard to describe in such a way that it is understood by all! I also use the term 'thicker' when describing the M/M but who (other than me), would understand what the h*ll that means! (grin)
Regards,
Don
Hi Don,
That sort of sums it up for me as well. The MM/MI sounds more straightforward. I wouldn't describe it as thicker, to me that means slow. The MC sounds more sound-stagey and sometimes more layered. Airy and transparent? When I think of the better examples of each, these qualities seem to overlap, but maybe the MCs have the edge there. Trying to describe this gives me a newfound respect for Mikey Fremer. He's pretty good at it.
My phono stage only has one gain stage and I vary the amount of gain and resistance. It might not sound identical with up to 24dB gain change, but it would probably come close. Even with the Stanton 980LZS I can tell it's a MM. John TCG said the same thing. He had a Pickering 7500.
For awhile I thought it might be inductance in the output of a HO. I'm not sure. I think it might just be the difference in the way mechanical energy is converted.
neo
-
Far be it for me to defend CAs pricing, but it's not the same generator as the 95. Beside the difference in resistance, the 95 is among the least expensive in build quality. It doesn't even have OCC wire like the 100E, 110E, etc. We don't know exactly what CA has or how it differs. The separation spec for the 95 is 20dB at 1K. The crosstalk spec for the Virtuoso V2 is better than 30dB at 1K. Channel balance is 0.2dB. Channel balance for the 95 is 2.0dB.
It is interesting to note that the Concept seems to have identical numbers as the 95.
Looking at the CA web site it seems like they keep revising the numbers. Inductance was 420mH for all of them, now it's either 400 or the Maestro is 12:40H. Maybe that's 412mH? The V2 Maestro is listed at 3.6mV out. When V2 first came out they were at 4.1 mV. Ca seems to play with the specs quite a bit. SPECIFICATIONS SUBJECT TO CHANGE. They're looking more like the 95 all the time. Maybe you're right and separation and balance is selected examples? I wonder if I put a wood top on my potted 95 would it sound identical to the Virtuoso?
http://clearaudio.de/de/products/cartridges-mm-v2.php
neo
Looks like I might have been wrong again. A funny thing happened. I realized I hadn't measured the resistance of the 95. I remembered checking the Virtuoso, but I couldn't remember what it was, so..... Turns out they're both 400 ohms +/- a few. :duh:
According to the latest CA specs and my measurement, the 2 carts have the same output, inductance, and resistance.
I don't think OCC wire makes a difference in resistance. Seems to me there are carts made before 1986 (first OCC) with identical specs as those made later with OCC. Not sure how much of a difference it makes, more detail or brighter? One my favorites is the 20SS and no OCC there, but we don't even know if CA has it. What if they just order a big batch of 95 bodies w/stylus, sort them by spec tolerance, pot them? insert in wood housing, and mate with corresponding stylus.
It looks like their styli come from AT also. Stock CA has the same fitting rather than compliance screw, as AT. I haven't seen the Maestro plug, I wonder if that's an ATN150MLX with lower compliance?
What's that old saying? The more things change the more they stay the same.
neo
-
A thread on Agon about Clearaudio specs, a guy called Kiddman who tests carts, said that most high end mfg. make them up. I think you'll get a kick out of this:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1392385752&openfrom&1&4#1
"Come on, nearly all of these manufacturers make up the specs. Measuring lots and lots of high end analog, I've found the specs are dreams and wishes. MC's that show flat but have a rise of 8db by 14khz. Turntables that quote .01% wow + flutter but are really .3%."
Sometimes I read opinions that are so precise and authoritative and are diametrically opposed to another opinion, it makes you wonder if these people are listening to the same cart. Maybe not.
It would be interesting to hear more about specific brands/models.
neo
-
Without test records like the CBS series, phono cartridges can't be adequately measured.
None of the important parameters like frequency response, flatness of response curve,channel separation and distortion can be measured.
Deviations from flat response alone can explain a lot of comments in the audio press concerning the sound of phono cartridges.
Scotty
-
Scotty,
I don't know who this Kiddman is or if his findings are published. One generally doesn't see testing of that sort on cart reviews today. All this subjectivism leaves a lot to be desired IMO. We're left with mimes giving their impression of how something sounds. :rotflmao:
Some of them are a joke and can't be taken seriously. The others are somewhat informative if you've read most of their other reviews and have a frame of reference. But if sample to sample consistency is lacking, what are you spending your money on? What good are reviews?
Lots of people have test records. David has at least a couple of those vintage ones. There are only a couple modern ones currently available, that I know of, although I don't know if all tests would be covered with them. Amplitude response is a very important parameter, but it is one of many. Pick up an old Hi Fi mag from back in the day. You might even see square wave response. Vintage test records are available, just like vintage records.
neo
-
Saw this on another forum and thought it might be of interest:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=96288)
It's interesting that inductance and DCR increase as you go up the line, then all of a sudden the TK9 appears. Sorry the size is small, maybe you can magnify from browser tools.
neo
-
Yes well the TK9 / AT24/25 are a completely different beast really....
And with a tapered beryllium cantilever.... Fully torroidal coils (not para-toroidal like the rest of the AT range)
They really were AT's attempt at no holds barred best possible MM at the time.... and I think they came out before the hollow exotic cantilevers appeared on the scene....
Did AT ever produce a cartridge with a pipe/tube cantilever?
I believe the bodies of these cartridges are a magnesium alloy too...
-
Tube cantilevers? Not that I can find.
Nakatsuka used them with the Genesis series with microridge styli, so I assume Namiki manufactured them. AT probably sourced the ML from Namiki, but hollow boron was probably too expensive. Nakatsuka always used the finest parts he could find. When he designed the Accuphase MCs in the '70s he used line contact styli and boron I believe. I assume nobody makes tube boron any more. No current cart I can find has it, including ZYX, Lyra, etc. etc.
neo
-
I heard about a couple of others, I think there was one with a ruby or sapphire tube. I'm having trouble remembering. It dawned on me that the Accuphase AC3 from the early '80s had a boron tube with a beryllium rod in the middle for strength. That one had an early micro tip. That was the last Nakatsuka Accuphase design. The Monster ones were hollow boron with diamond dust vapor deposited on the outside.
I remember now, the Sumiko Alchemist III and III S HOMC had sapphire tubes and line contact tips. They were the best Talismans IMO, better than the LO. The Shinon Saphic LOMC also had a sapphire tube and line contact. I never heard that one, I imagine it's rare. I can't remember seeing one for sale. If I come up with any others, I'll let you know, but I don't know of any MM/MI with tube cantilevers. I imagine they were phased out in the early '90s - a terrible decade for analog.
neo
-
Neo, I went to your gallery and copied a link to the chart and used my browser to enlarge it to improve legibility.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=gallery;area=browse;image=96288;size=huge
Scotty
-
Which makes my point... the TK9/AT24/25 tapered beryllium cantilever was possibly the top cantilever ever produced by AT... (the AT150ANV would be the other competitor...)
-
Thanks Scotty, much easier to read.
David, Whether beryllium is superior to boron is a matter of opinion. I usually like beryllium with ATs, but boron has some advantages, not the least of which is rigidity. The 150ANV is a sapphire rod (not tube), and tracking is said to be inferior to a 150MLX. I haven't heard it, but the guys on Agon who bought one seem to like it after break-in.
You previously mentioned (I forget exactly where) that tapered cantilevers are more rigid. It seems to me that a straight cantilever will be more rigid but have more tip mass. Think of an aluminum cantilever flexing like crazy, wouldn't the tapered end flex more, not less? Beryllium or boron already have weight advantage and I wonder how much better tapering them is.
You have a Grado don't you? What's the deal with the cantilevers, they're telescoping, made in sections? I never liked them until I borrowed a TLZ. That one was rather amazing with vocals. Ella sounded incredibly fluid and elegant, just luscious until a big band came in behind her. Then it fell apart.
neo
-
I have been hunting down a good low output Grado body - I now have several signature series bodies and an 8MZ as well as a G1+ needle....
Been doing some reading on the grado's - they are definitely not telescoped in the way that the SAS or V15IV are... rather they seem to have some form of internal damping within the aluminium tube, basically it appears that they turn the cantilever into a sort of transmission line, and in a similar way to transmission line speakers, damping is applied along the length of the transmission line.... I am not claiming to understand this!
Wayner or Frank VanA might perhaps be able to shed more light on this....
My impression of the Grado's in general has been one of superb midrange - but coloured response outside of that - I am intending to test this further soon now that I have the necessary bodies and a couple of the better styli...
With regards to tapering - thinking further on it - tapered tubes have advantages in terms of rigidity over straight tubes - in addition to the mass advantages.
But I agree with you that I cannot see that the same rigidity advantage applies to a solid rod (straight vs tapered) - so perhaps the only advantage was mass.
I generically tend to think of Boron and Beryllium as equivalent - I think differences are marginal between the two materials - especially when used in solid rod form.
In tube form - beryllium could be worked as a foil that then got rolled - as per Shure, Boron on the other hand had to be vapour deposited around a core of a different material, and the core was then dissolved away using a solvent that does not affect Boron - this made for a much more expensive process - although it appears that most of the very best (lowest mass) cantilevers of the golden age used this technique (patented by Technics/National/Matsushita).
The foil beryllium method is I think more prone to flex than the vapour deposit boron rod method - and I wonder whether the solid rods (of either material) are perhaps more rigid than the beryllium foil method? Hence the choice by AT to stick with rods in competing with Shure? (trading off mass for rigidity?
The AT20ss I have is exceptionally neutral with negligible midrange trough - and this was AT's weapon of choice against the V15VMR.... It really is a very good cartridge - more neutral than my TK9e.
bye for now
David
-
What's a good replacement stylus for a TK7E ? Gear sells an ATN22 for $100. Says it's a bonded .2 elliptical - seems a little pricey.
The 7E will have a round plug and I would think it better to have a stylus where the wings fit the sides of the body, otherwise it might rotate somewhat?
I don't know if a ATN12S or 14S, something like that will fit. Chops is looking for a replacement here:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=124493.0
Looking for a LO Grado body? Wouldn't that be a Woodie with a fixed stylus, or maybe a vintage one w/replaceable stylus? BaMorin (marc morin) used to be the resident Grado expert around here. John the Chair Guy was a big Grado fan and used a Gold with a better stylus and a longhorn. The two of them used to wax poetic about the magic. Personally, I didn't relate. To me, they all sound like they have compromised transient response and lose detail when things get complex. Marc said the problem was either wrong arm or feedback. No denying that was a possibility and those vocals were magical.
neo
-
I had to collect 4 Signature bodies before I scored one that is low ouput (MCX) - I was a bit disappointed with the Gold1 that I purchased new - so I figured if I am to give the Grado family a chance I need to aim substantially higher....
Being unwilling to pay the rate for one of the upper woodies, I am aiming to get close to that level of performance (based on Marc Morin's input) by combining the signature bodies (this gives me a chance to also compare the G1+, MCX, Signature1, Signature8 and the Gold1) - with two of the better styli from that family 8MZ & G1+ - if it seems to have potential I will look at getting a TLZ stylus potentially...
As a long time owner of Quad ELS57 speakers, I really do apprciate midrange done right...
The TK7e fitted with an ATN15ss or ATN20ss becomes quite legendary.
There is debate as to whether the TK7e/su bodies are better than the AT15/20 ones - the generators are the same....
My AT20SLa fitted with ATN15ss is one of my absolute favourite cartridges - I also have a TK7e body, but its electricals are not as tightly matched left to right as the AT20 so I have stuck with the AT20...
I am pretty sure you can fit any of the ATN13/14/15/20 (definitely the 15/20) styli and you may be able to fit an ATN12s or ATS12s with minor mods....
I have a feeling the Signet stylus mount is better than the AT one - heavier too - but it grips the sides of the cartridge body more positively and therefore may in fact be the better alternative - for a stylus transplant that is!
bye for now
David
-
Here's an interesting LOMI:
http://www.sound-smith.com/cartridges/hyperion.html
Soundsmith TOTL with low cu and a cactus cantilever. Put a heavy headshell on that 17g arm and see how it sounds. Only $7K.
I seem to remember DaveyW making cactus cantilevers.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=92976.msg925926#msg925926
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=404018
neo
-
The process of transplanting a naked stylus onto a new cantilever is far beyond my self-perceived level of competence... let alone the tools I have available!
Although I do love the idea of DIY cantilevers
-
The process of transplanting a naked stylus onto a new cantilever is far beyond my self-perceived level of competence... let alone the tools I have available!
Although I do love the idea of DIY cantilevers
All you need to do is change that perception. I saw an AT ad back in the day and a lab tech was using a micro comparator to align something or other. That's all you need really, that, tweezers, and a bit of Gorilla glue. I wonder what Shure did with all their stuff when they closed shop. Some of it might have gone down to Mexico to make the M97, and they still haven't learned to use it. Maybe the instructions were in English.....
A low power (50X?) industrial scope should do it. I bet you could rig up something for that USB you took the stylus pictures with. I'll have to read that DaveyW thread again, although he might have been making splints. Sourcing tips might be a big investment. Oh well.
neo
-
On a more serious note I've been thinking about phase integrity and implications. I think David is right about amplitude response, a rising high end, and imaging. In the Ortofon article they claim that superior phase linearity is responsible for spectacular imaging and as the MC200 was successively damped and imaging worsened, phase nonlinearity was the cause. If we look at the graphs, phase performance didn't change much. Best case it extended down to approx. 10K, and worst case to approx. 7 or 8K. More dramatic was amplitude change - rising high end. Maybe the cause is both, but I suspect amplitude response is mostly responsible.
At this time I don't see any way around inductance and electrical resonance lowering the frequency of the phase peak. If you have an inductor in a filter, there's no getting around its presence. Add more elements, inductors, capacitors, whatever, you just have a more elaborate filter.
What happens to phase? Phase is timing. A 180o phase shift is opposite phase like hooking up a speaker or cart pins with the wires crossed on one channel. That's what happens at high frequency resonance. What happens to the sound, does it go forward or back as a result of the intermediate part of the phase event? I'm not sure, I think it goes forward. Maybe it depends on the preamp.
This seems counterintuitive, but one element in a filter can change a loudspeaker driver's phase forward by 15o (with respect to the other drivers or the signal). I'll see if I can look it up to confirm, but I think that's right. High inductance carts tend to be mellow - rolled off because of amplitude response. Perhaps phase response mitigates that to some extent and makes the sound seem like it's still in the room instead of coming from down the street.
neo
-
Yes, the phase shift is plus. On another old thread we discussed phase and its importance, but I'm not sure of the importance of the difference in these relative amounts of phase shift. Maybe it depends on the mechanical HF resonance as much as the amount of inductance. If a high inductance cart has mechanical res in the audio band, 180 phase shift will be lowered by electrical resonance. It looks like everything above that peak will have negative phase shift and tend to cancel. If HF resonance and inductance is reasonable, the shift will image forward.
neo
-
I thought the AT-100E and 150MLX shared the same generator. That's what I was told and when I checked they did seem the same. I'm wondering if they changed the 100, or maybe I missed something?
The inductance and impedance is the same. DCR is 530 ohms (150) and 800 ohms (100).
Output is 4mV (150) and 4.5mV (100).
I don't get it. Could the 100 have slightly bigger coils that have the same inductance at 1KHz ?
neo
-
Even within the AT150's there have been variations - the AT150E - 540mH/767ohm, AT150EA 358mH/488ohm (both are Japan only eliptical versions - with purportedly the same body as the MLX)
Within that family of bodies there seem to be 3 differint models
Most of the p-mount versions use 565mH/770ohm and 530mH/660ohm, and the 1/2" versions seem split between 350mH/530ohm, 490mH/770ohm - but the lines are blurred and sometimes one of the other engines crops up where it is not expected!
-
Even within the AT150's there have been variations - the AT150E - 540mH/767ohm, AT150EA 358mH/488ohm (both are Japan only eliptical versions - with purportedly the same body as the MLX)
Within that family of bodies there seem to be 3 differint models
Most of the p-mount versions use 565mH/770ohm and 530mH/660ohm, and the 1/2" versions seem split between 350mH/530ohm, 490mH/770ohm - but the lines are blurred and sometimes one of the other engines crops up where it is not expected!
As far as I can tell the 150E, Ea are discontinued. The current Japanese 150MLX has the same specs as the US version. AT has made so many different carts it's hard to sort it out, especially with their habit of reusing numbers.
I think the problem with the specs of the current 100E and 150MLX is somehow their impedance is the same yet DCR and output is different. I can see how identical impedance and inductance can make them seem the same, but difference in output?
They're close enough that one should get virtually identical performance with the same stylus? The 100 slightly more "live" and the 150 more transparent?
Could be too close to call or like Clearaudio V2, better because they say it is. BTW, their site still has the same specs - virtually the same as the 95E.
neo
-
Differences may also be in magnet size/strength....
-
Magnet strength - somehow I suspect that ship has sailed, and like exotic tube cantilevers, never to return.
If you scour the list of carts with the classic 490mH/3.2Kohm motor, you'll find many with 5mV out. When AT changed the 440ML to the MLa they said they could no longer source a part and they would keep the cart as close as possible to the original. The only thing that changed was output.
Stronger magnets cost prohibitive? Problem with the small size and rarity or stability? It looks like Clearaudio used them for a minute or two and has now gone back to regular magnets. Why?
Maybe they used them just long enough to generate some excitement for the new V2 line. My guess is, that's exactly what they did. Plant the seeds of "improvement" and get some new endorsements for the most expensive line of MMs.
neo
-
I was looking for a review and stumbled on this review/discussion at Analog Planet.
Seems to be one rather knowledgeable poster:
http://www.analogplanet.com/content/can-putting-jico-v15xmr-stylus-replacement-turn-shure-m97xe-v15xmr
Higher inductance compliments cantilever resonances - look at the total picture approach. The V15 IV and M97 are better candidates?
I don't own any Shure carts, so I won't comment. I just wonder how viable the M97/SAS is for around $250. Could be.
neo
-
I was thinking about the phrase I used, look at the total picture approach. It's not the total picture is it? It's factors that determine frequency response.
Frequency response, while of great, possibly primary importance in determining the character of the sound, isn't the only factor. What about detail, harmonic resolution and complexity, dynamics, imaging and soundstage? The ability to unravel complexities of a symphony, to play everything at the same time and present it in a believable manner, isn't addressed by amplitude response alone. In fact the plots might not be representative of response at different velocities (volume) other than the test velocity.
The goal of the "absolute" sound, is to recreate a musical event. Seems to me the goal should be to recreate a recording of a musical event. To say they're the same, requires a leap of faith. Maybe that's where we go wrong. Most of us choose natural presentation or detail, to state it in basic terms. A stock DL103 has a natural presentation like a song on the radio, but doesn't have the detail of some others. I think this choice goes beyond taste. It speaks to the resolution and abilities of our systems - some factors that determine taste. Preferred amplitude response might be that which compliments our system's frequency response and no more. Does that cantilever resonance compliment a system anomaly, or make it sound worse?
Just some ramblings, observations here. Feel free to put your $0.02 in. For some reason the 95HE sounds remarkably akin to a 103, and the Virtuoso sounds more like the detailed variety. Is this due to the wood top? OCC wire? I'm thinking of getting a 150MLX stylus, but I'll probably not transplant it. Maybe a VL or 440MLa is as good as the Clearaudio gets? Just a little hard for me to accept. I prefer the detail of a more exotic cantilever.
neo
-
You're right about getting the overall right...
This is something that I always grapple with - in speakers I felt that the Quad 63's and 989's that I used to own did it better than my current Gallo's (but the Gallo's are more household friendly...)
In trying to analyse and breakdown the aspects of a cartridges performance, I did do a series of extended listening tests with comments focusing on dynamics, timbre, presentation, soundstage, etc....
And found differing cartridges to be quite different.
Then I went and normalised their amplitude to within 0.1db of each other and did the exercise again - all of a sudden I had great difficulty telling them appart!!
I could still measure differences in peak amplitude vs average - but actually identifying that difference while listening now took extended listening sessions, and I cannot be certain whether the results are truly audible or whether they are figments of psycho-acoustic imagination....
Each of these cartridges does have differing frequency response - although like all decent cartridges they at least aspire to a flat/neutral response. (and most of them were quite nice cartridges.... not bottom of the line by any means)
This is what started me investigating the parameters of cartridge performance - trying to work out whether this emperor has any clothes or not.....
Are there differences once we get to a certain level of quality (AT440MLa and up...) - yes there are.
Can most of these differences be adjusted out through proper use of load/equalisation - yes they can.
Some aspects of performance only show up on extreme recordings... (which may not be overall extreme, but may have particular aspects that are difficult to reproduce/track eg: cymbals... sudden, dynamic, high frequency, and often at a surprisingly high amplitude) - and these are where the best get seperated from the also rans....
But if the also rans are properly adjusted, the two will sound very very much alike most of the time.
I continue to be concerned (or perhaps better said - interested?) also about the signal level related non-linearities.
This came to my attention when testing a phono stage, and I discovered that the gain varied somewhat by frequency and amplitude - at higher frequencies, higher level signals were boosted less by the phono stage than lower level signals. - In other words it was compressing the highs slightly - making the low level details more prominent and noticeably in a very subtle way.
A likeable trait really - but a flaw never the less. (not a cheap phono stage either!)
How many people go to the bother of running a F/R test at 10db increments of input level just for the hell of it?
How many phono stages (and amplifiers in general?!) have these types of non-linearities I wonder.
Getting back to cartridges, I continue to suspect that eddy current/hysteresis provides a similar type of effect - level sensitive drop, starting at circa 2kHz - and laminated core bodies reduce this effect.
Without rigorous testing, and from scanning many plots, I suspect the unlaminated bodies suffer up to 3db drop in the high midrange, where laminated or HPF cores can reduce this to 1db or perhaps even 0.5db - my test records are not up to the task of reliably differentiating when we get down to 1db and below... (all the test records I have seen are within +/-1db - so quite a margin of error when trying to measure this type of effect!)
I think once you have a good cartridge well loaded / EQ'd then the level of fussing I have been doing is really just a mental exercise - curiosity - in terms of performance I should probably be focusing on the arm, the platform and the phono stage... (not to mention the room)
bye for now
David
-
"Then I went and normalised their amplitude to within 0.1db of each other and did the exercise again - all of a sudden I had great difficulty telling them appart!!"
I believe you, but this brings up more questions, not the least of which is what other aspects got equalized? If phase integrity was maintained by using a digital EQ, then the analog signal had to be digitized to do that. The first law of hi-res analog is straight wire and gain, less is more. No tone controls because just having the signal hooked up to them (even if they're turned off) would degrade the sound. Are we to assume you can digitize without loss of some low level resolution? So, we have a twofold problem. We can't EQ in analogue without degradation, and a digitized signal is suspect.
"Are there differences once we get to a certain level of quality (AT440MLa and up...) - yes there are.
Can most of these differences be adjusted out through proper use of load/equalisation - yes they can.
Some aspects of performance only show up on extreme recordings... (which may not be overall extreme, but may have particular aspects that are difficult to reproduce/track eg: cymbals... sudden, dynamic, high frequency, and often at a surprisingly high amplitude) - and these are where the best get seperated from the also rans....
But if the also rans are properly adjusted, the two will sound very very much alike most of the time."
When I put an ATN152ML or an ATN150MLX on my 440, then readjusted the load, the cart was transformed. There was all kinds of detail present that was missing before. I don't see any way digital EQ could restore what wasn't there, but it could wipe out the superior resolution of the exotic cantilever?
I think there's merit to both positions here and wouldn't ignore either one. Other opinions/anecdotes welcome.
neo
-
Sorry for my lack of clarity - when doing those comparisons, there was no EQ applied.
Normalisation was applied solely as an amplitude boost or drop, based on calculating the average (RMS) amplitude of the recording.
I never took the experiment to the next stage (applying EQ) as that is substantially more complicated and I was concerned about issues such as phase.
So each of the recorded clips retained their individual frequency response anomalies...ie: their voicing.
The clips were also recorded using a default setup without individual cartridge loading adjustment...
Which is why it led me to ask whether "the emperor is wearing any clothes".
The test was purely empirical - not much theory involved at all.
The audiophile purist approach of no signal adjustment was obviously not maintained as the signal was digitised, manipulated using high quality software, and then reproduced via a DAC... so several steps of processing were introduced.
Regardless the differences were easily audible when I made the error of adjusting amplitude based on peak levels rather than RMS levels - once adjusted to RMS levels the differences became much harder to identify.
The effect was therefore purely psycho-acoustic, and not related to any technical capability of the cartridges, loading, or recording/replay gear.
Results are of course only tested with my own ears.... and they indicate that with RMS levels matched to within 0.2db of each other I personally have trouble differentiation between them without much more extended listening. A different listener might be more sensitive.
I also started researching the literature on amplitude sensitivity and matching etc.... it does appear that the threshold for audible identification of differences is around 0.2db. So technical literature appears to support the overall direction of what I was doing.
If this was achievable using only overall amplitude adjustment, how much closer can these clips get to each other if each cartridge had its loading optimised for flat frequency response (step 1) and then was digitally EQ'd - gently! - only mild adjustments to ensure minimising undesirable effects - (Step2)?
It is worth noting that I had to upgrade my digital gear to make this work well. My earlier ADC/DAC was not sufficiently transparent.
The experiment requires setting aside biases and pre-judgements with regards to digital "evils", while also ensuring that the digital equipment involved is of sufficiently high quality to pick up nuances of difference between clips.
If my overall system was more resolving, would the differences between the normalised clips be greater? - quite likely! - but that does not invalidate the observation that amplitude matching reduces perceived differences between the clips.
I also did a lot of my listening through headphones - which can in many ways be a more critical listening environment.... their weakness is in the soundstaging/imaging area, where some cartridges can show particular strengths and weaknesses... eg: Stantering family - with great seperation vs Dynavector karat with relatively low seperation - the headphone test tends to minimise the differences due to seperation.... doing it with properly set up speakers/room is the only way to test for imaging capabilities.
bye for now
David
-
Oh my, that's kind of amazing, but makes digitizing even more suspect.
Before I forget I want to tell you about the Philips golden ear challenge. This is ear training similar (supposedly) to what Philip's techs go through. I think you'll find it interesting. The first post has the link:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=124269.0
The thread got kind of silly, contentious, and it turns out that some phones are much easier than others, to pass the tests. Not sure how valid this is, but it might be interesting to compare to your speakers.
This comes to mind because I'm skeptical. How in the world could you not hear the differences, or have differences greatly reduced, with only the volume normalized? I know some of the carts you own and I'm sure you can hear differences even when the volume is precisely the same. At this point there's only one thing that makes sense to me and I've already said it.
neo
-
Thanks for the referral to the Golden Ears site!
I have worked my way through to the Silver level - have not had the time to continue on yet.
Of particular interest - I am clarifying my own weaknesses...
Bass easy, Timbre Easy, Loudness Easy
Where I had trouble was with Noise detection, High Frequency extension, amount of treble and MP3 artifacts.... my problem areas clearly appear linked to my known hearing notch at circa 4kHz and possible high frequency hearing loss due to age....
Interestingly I have no problem identifying timbral variations.... so the effect is not simple!
I did have to cheat and get the other half to complete the noise detection and HF extension tests for me (the first was in the BASIC level - how embarrassing :oops:)
Fascinating!
bye for now
David
-
Oh my, that's kind of amazing, but makes digitizing even more suspect.
Before I forget I want to tell you about the Philips golden ear challenge. This is ear training similar (supposedly) to what Philip's techs go through. I think you'll find it interesting. The first post has the link:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=124269.0
The thread got kind of silly, contentious, and it turns out that some phones are much easier than others, to pass the tests. Not sure how valid this is, but it might be interesting to compare to your speakers.
This comes to mind because I'm skeptical. How in the world could you not hear the differences, or have differences greatly reduced, with only the volume normalized? I know some of the carts you own and I'm sure you can hear differences even when the volume is precisely the same. At this point there's only one thing that makes sense to me and I've already said it.
neo
The interesting thing is that I could differentiate quite clearly and quickly between them before they were normalised, but not after they were normalised.
So it indicates not that there is a digitisation problem - as otherwise the differences would be obfuscated in the first step (digitisation) - but the differences were hidden only in the second (normalisation) step.
I have since obtained a studio mastering grade ADC - so next time I try this, I will have a very high level of confidence with regards to the transparency of the digitisation process... (the previous ADC was a very good eMu 1616m which is semi-pro mastering level, the new one is Mytek Stereo96)
I did quite a bit of auditioning with the previous ADC, and found that I could not reliably identify pure analogue from the digital version (when level matched etc... within my own setup obviously) - which meant that it met my initial criteria of transparency within my personal environment.
The new ADC is basically a "luxury", it takes things an order of magnitude further, and is one that a number of mastering engineers who are well respected in the industry have recommended as one of the most transparent available... (alongside the Lavry which is its main competitor, comparisons have also been made to the Benchmark units, which are apparently rated very musical, but not as transparent)
So the gear is now at a level where I have a very high level of confidence in the technical capabilities of the setup - it should be an order of magnitude better than my own hearing. - That way any improvements in my setup should become easily audible in the digitised files without the need for re-recording (which rapidly becomes a nightmare!)
bye for now
David
-
The interesting thing is that I could differentiate quite clearly and quickly between them before they were normalised, but not after they were normalised.
So it indicates not that there is a digitisation problem - as otherwise the differences would be obfuscated in the first step (digitisation) - but the differences were hidden only in the second (normalisation) step.
David
The only possible flaw in the logic, that I can identify offhand, is the assumption that being able to differentiate after digitizing, then not being able to after normalizing, is the equivalent of that same thing in analog mode exclusively. The question remains, if you were able to normalize without digitizing would you get the same results?
It would be difficult, maybe impossible to normalize in analog with the same degree of accuracy, so we might never know.
I don't have top notch digital set-ups, but I still read comments from some that do, that the subjective feeling of missing information persists, as in the past. These comments attest to analog being more natural sounding - put on a record and relax and listen to music rather than your system. Why, what's missing?
I'm not exactly sure but I think it's mostly harmonic and timing. Digital chops up the signal with insufficient information to reconstruct it properly. Here's a better explanation:
http://www.zyx-audio.com/technology_sup.html
neo
-
I agree - and that has been one of my concerns...
The best theories I can find seem to focus on digital jitter - ie: clocking/timing of the conversion procession (both ADC and DAC).
Any issues that happen in the ADC step are non-remediable (for obvious reasons) - the key seems to be to get the clock precision up very high... and that is exactly what the top Mastering setups do... the Mytek I have gets down to below 10picoseconds... by comparison my previous emu 1616m was around 500ps - and many current DAC's can go as high as several 000 ps (which is pretty damn poor given where the tech is at today)
I still have my first generation Revox CD player - and it is suprisingly good... just basic good engineering, precision craftsmanship and a very good sounding player.
I have tested it a number of times against TT's since 1985, and it has always fared well, although it has not always been the better source - but the question of mastering differences between vinyl and digital has always interfered in the end. The fact that there has been consistent to and fro-ing between the two mediums using this particular player has indicated to me that the medium is not the problem, but the implementation often is.
My last digital analog back to back attempt was the testing I did to select my previous ADC - where the source was vinyl records, and the objective was to be unable to tell whether the vinyl is playing or the digital....
That was achieved with the 1616m, but it was achieved using my receivers DAC's which I think are of limited resolving ability.... and may have been limiting the overall resolution - I am planning a revisit of that exercise in the next year or so using the Mytek ADC and a DAC that is yet to be purchased (perhaps another Mytek)
Will I be able to again demonstrate transparency to my own satisfaction, I simply don't know.
The ADC I owned before the 1616m (Maudio Audiophile2496) could not achieve transparency, under the same conditions where the 1616m did manage it.
Will vinyl ultimately prove superior (in my setup / environment) - still to be seen. I have been comparing analogue and digital for almost 30 years now, and still am not quite satisfied with the digital side of things....
My analogue gear has improved along the way though, so digital has to do better today to match what my TT(s) can do than it needed to do 20 years ago.
But I am getting further and further off topic for this thread!
And I am in danger of being accused of iconoclasm & heresy
bye for now
David
-
Seems like we're the heretics these days. This is the "beyond" part of the thread and seems relevant, especially when some guru on Agon declares digital superior because it has better bass. But that's another story probably best left untold.
For those not familiar with the ZYX name and what it represents - in reverse order they are frequency, amplitude and time. The theoretical objection to digital goes beyond jitter. As I see it, it is an objection to the process itself, of chopping up the sound, assigning each instant a number and trying to reconstruct without losses. From the link above:
"Is it a proper disposal to devide time axis of audio electrical signals to approximately 40,000 bits a second in such holy time territory, being too much intent on converting audio into digital codes? This idea neglects the natures (three dimentional information having X-, Y-, and Z- components) of sound, if various characteristic (in the data territory expressed only by X and Y components) are judged equivalent when the artificial digital signals are concerned back to analog signals. Time axis (Z-axis) of digital audio is reproduced by an array of time pieces divided, while time should not be counted like 1,2,3... by its nature.
Furthermore, it should be noted that each digital code divided on a constant time base contains simply two dimentional information (X,Y) (y component averaged within a divided time) because the time axis Z is being held. This terrible fact! As aforementioned, it just contains similar information components like color, and sound native to each musical instrument mutually intermingles each other only to be diversified to different sounds. Diversified sound, which has never existed in the world of nature, is abnormal and one of revenges against human who behaved against provision of nature.
Digitally coded music is formed when converted back to false analog audio by sequentially linking the diversified sounds. When a music is played by a single performer, such diversified sound will never be produced. But in majority of music sound reproduction, such evil naturally occurs. Many of Europe and America made high end speaker systems do not reproduce stereophonic sphere such as being wrapped peculiar to omni directivity, but concentrate sound image to be center between the left and right speakers when digital audio is played through generally used omni directional speakers. And we hear more complaints about digital sound quality such as no softness, hard, metallic, dull, rough, lack of atmosphere, harsh, week rise, etc, all these are derived from the quality changed sound due to compound. Won't a listener, especially a youngster whose brain should still grow, be affected by such unnatural deteriorated sound?"
Seems like a valid argument to me. Even if you can reconstruct without jitter, all the frequencies present at one instant and their respective volumes are represented by one number. If you take more samples per second it becomes more continuous but the missing information isn't restored.
If you go to the ZYX link and click on the 'About Sound Element' link (upper left) there is an introduction to the above quote.
neo
-
Here is a link to the ZYX information referenced above. http://www.zyx-audio.com/technology_sup.html
This is an argument against 16/44.1 native recording which is less valid when 24/96 and 24/192 technology is in use.
Scotty
-
Here is a link to the ZYX information referenced above. http://www.zyx-audio.com/technology_sup.html
This is an argument against 16/44.1 native recording which is less valid when 24/96 and 24/192 technology is in use.
Scotty
Hi Scotty,
You might not buy the argument, but it would still apply. You're still turning two dimensions into one before reconstruction. The basic method of digitization remains the same.
neo
-
I am afraid that do not understand the argument ZYX makes.
Scotty
-
Scotty,
Not sure I can explain it better. All the sound in an instant of time is averaged and assigned a number. Then the sequence is reconstructed in analog to sound like music. Assuming this can be sequenced perfectly (no jitter), it's still inadequate and a higher sampling rate is also inadequate, just less so.
It's hard to imagine how all the sound in an instant can be assigned a single number, but it works at least to some extent. The assertion is, both the frequency(ices) and amplitude(s) averaged then put back in sequence incurs losses. Quite simply the three dimensions after being converted back and forth don't retain all the analog information.
Interesting thing at the end. Seems that people using omnidirectional speakers complain more about digital sound. I guess that has something to do with the mastering or the very nature of chop and reconstruct. No doubt digital has gotten much better, but.....
neo
-
Does anybody know if there is the equivalent of the SPARS code for vinyl.
Scotty
-
I've seen the SPARS code used on a few LP's mostly from the 80's and early 90's.... when a DDA recording was somehow supposed to be superior!
-
The reason I brought this up is that with the prevalence 24/96 mastering, the chances are good that unless the album specifically claims to be all analogue from microphone to cutting lathe, the music has probably been through digital conversion,( ie A to D and then D to A), at some point even though a vinyl record is the final product.
This makes an argument against digital technologies rather pointless as it may well nigh be an inescapable consequence of progress.
Scotty
-
I helped with setting up the sound for a concert just 2 weeks ago, the musician involved insisted on close miking his acoustic instrument and adding boom (mid-bass) and reverb to it...
Few and far between are the muso's who understand and value purity of sound (strangely!) - when offered a setup that provides clarity, detail and the simple amplification of the sound of the natural instrument, the choice opted for is one that adds distortion, obfuscates the timbre of the instrument and muddles the detailed sound of the strings...
With regards to recording, the idea of recording in analogue would not even occur to most muso's. Many of them have never even encountered a cassette deck let alone a reel to reel....
At the top end things may be different - but from what I see (and read in pro-music forums) - analogue is becoming more and more marginalised.
Regardless of the final distribution format (vinyl, download, cd, cassette) - the recordings are all (99.999%) made digitally.
There is good and bad in this - the older digital recordings and the ones made today on more basic gear, often have limitations that can be exposed on the better listening setups...
Recordings are mastered seperately for digital and for analogue media so there is sometimes an opportunity to grab a version that has better mastering... for many 80's recordings the better mastered versions are on vinyl... but as the recording engineers who learnt their trade in the 70's retire, I expect that the new generation of engineers will do their best work (are doing their best work) in digital.
Vinyl is therefore about access to older libraries of software rather than being about the ultimate medium...
For oldies and anachronists like us the discussion about vinyl vs digital still exists, but practically speaking, the world has moved on.
-
That being said my vinyl copy of YES-Fly From Here, sounds pretty good and not particularly digital. I do like the imaging and sound quality I get from some of my older analogue records. And not just Crystal Clear and Sheffield Labs pressings.
Scotty
-
Yes, as David said, the world has moved on. With that said, it seems to me that digital storage and playback scheme types can make a big difference in overall SQ. When I read about jitter, error correction, averaging and all the compromises, it makes me slightly nauseated. It not that analog tape or phono doesn't have compromises, but it's a continuous "natural" process. Digital is like a Star Trek transporter of music. It's chopped up in little pieces and recreated on the other side. The problem is, Mr Spock is recreated without one of his pointy ears.
Theoretically speaking, there aren't enough bits or a fast enough sampling rate possible, for digital to compete with continuous, and if you accept the ZYX dimensional objection, averaging and imperfect time recreation prevent that from happening. That's why digital gets sucky at low volume and distortion goes up while info starts to drop out - just the opposite of analog. The S/N ratio and dynamic range for digital can never be realized. Once you go beyond 0 dB when recording, distortion gets horrendous, so engineers have to stay far away from it. Ever notice that loud percussion is the best sound on digital and low level acoustic textures, harmonies, don't fare so well?
In the late '80s digital recordings starting getting better. I have quite a few records from that time and later that were made from digital. Without exception those records sound better than the CD equivalent. I used to compare them to "state of the art" CD players. Although I can't make that claim today (about top notch digital playback), why is that? I suspect it is because conversion back to analog on the storage media gives a more continuous playback and avoids the added errors of the DA home conversion. No doubt digital has gotten much better, but.....
neo
-
I suspect it is because conversion back to analog on the storage media gives a more continuous playback and avoids the added errors of the DA home conversion.
neo, I am not sure what you mean here? Is this in regards to records cut from digital masters?
Scotty
-
Scotty,
Yes, sorry if that was unclear. I think, if the AD conversion is done in the mastering studio rather than home, quality should be better. I also think it's safe to say that a "decent" record player should do a better job portraying a continuous event with the superior AD conversion and the superior low level resolution of a record. All the problems with digital are already dealt with. In doing these comparisons the record would still sound digitally mastered, but not as objectionable as a CD. Both media are subject to degradation. Clicks and pops vs error correction or a badly scratched CD getting stuck and sounding like a machine gun - pick your poison.
Things are a little different now with hi-res and disc-less media, but objections remain and not just on a theoretical level.
neo
-
Not convinced :shake:
Either way the end result is analogue - what we hear from the speakers is definitely analogue.
So regardless of whether it is digital or not there will always be a DA conversion.
With vinyl there are additional limitations, and encoding/decoding from RIAA....
The whole discussion about sound being "chopped up" and reconstituted fails on one major issue - there have been quite substantial repeated tests that have shown that our hearing cannot differentiate.
The issues are both mechanical /biological (what are we capable of hearing and differentiating) and psycho-acoustic (how we perceive what we hear).
Really golden eared individuals can differentiate between two devices that are both technically excellent, even when they are both totally analogue - so merely being able to tell that the devices are different (even if marginally so!) is insufficient - the golden eared individuals should consistently and statistically signigicantly be able to tell which is digital and prefer the AAA over the DDD/DDA/DAA/etc...) - this has not happened. (or at least not in situations where later improvements in digital would invalidate the earlier experiment).
The issues identified with digital are:
1) Timing / Jitter - these have been resolved over the last 10 years with the latest developments, in the early years of this century the very best Mastering ADC's got to the stage where this was a non issue. Around 2005 this started trickling to more mainstream pro and semi-pro ADC's, it has not yet become commonplace in the consumer market, although it is starting to be seen in some audiophile devices.
2) Phase and other Filtering anomalies - these are generated by the filters required at the frequency limit of the chosen digital sampling rate (ie at 22kHz for 44kHz sampling, at 48kHz for 96kHz sampling etc...). Although many valiant efforts have been made to improve these filters, ultimately the real solution has been sampling at a sufficiently high rate to move the filtering anomalies to inaudible frequencies, and provide sufficient bandwidth to use gentler (slope) filters that have fewer anomalies to reduce associated intermodulations in following gear.
Moving to 48kHz is theoretically sufficient but marginal, 96kHz is definitely sufficient.
Much like the issues with the cantilever resonance in cartridges/styli, the solution is to move it up as high as possible to leave the audible frequencies "intact" - really good cartridges shift it to the high 20kHz/low 30khz range, (Jico SAS, V15V, AT152, etc...) the very best move it to the high 40's or further (EPC100, DV Karat, etc...)
Many DAC's oversample (use double or quad internal sampling rates) to allow the use of filter at much higher frequencies, and 192kHz sampling will certainly eradicate the problem, albeit at the cost of susbtantial data storage overheads. (not to mention processing overheads)
3) Processing / CPU limitations - as the sampling rate and data rate rises, the resolution starts to strike the limitations in the processing abilities of current generation technology.
I did a series of tests about 5 years ago, which showed that at the time mainstream audiophile and consumer gear theoretically capable of 192kHz sampling rates, had fewer anomalies (and sounded better) when running at 96kHz.
Achieving 192kHz 5 years ago was pushing the chips involved right to the limits of their abilities - which is never a good idea!
Current top end mastering and audiophile gear released in the last 12 month is overcoming this - we are probably another 5 years away from it becoming more mainstream.
(Gear coming out now with 384kHz sampling ability should probably not be used at higher than 192kHz for optimum results for the same reasons!)
4) Signal to Noise and Dynamic Range limitations
This is an area where Digital is quite different to analogue, in that there are "brick walls" at either end of the signal amplitude spectrum.
Above 0db (and in many cases starting at around 0.2db) there is nothing but extremely harsh distortion - no signal at all!
Below the resolution threshold of the bit rate (-96db for 16bit) - also another brick wall.
With analogue, at the noise level (often as little as -60db) - there is more information below the noise threshold, and in most cases we can hear "through" the noise threshold.
So analogue has a seperate Signal to Noise range and Dynamic Range - assuming a noise threshold of -60db, analogue will often have audible material 10db below the noise - so Signal to noise could be 60db, while Dynamic range would be 70db!
This is further improved by the fact that 0db is NOT a brick wall - distortion and other issues start to impact as we rise above 0db, but it was common recording practice to extend the dynamic range by allowing peaks to go above 0db - +5db was not unusual.... so given a noise floor of -60db, we would have a Signal to Noise of 70db and a dynamic range of perhaps 75db.
Going back to digital, 16bit dynamic range is circa 96db, 20bit dynamic range is circa 120db, and 24bit is circa 144db - so 24bit should be easily ample to record anything that is out there! (given that our analogue systems used before the ADC in recording never get anywhere near that!)
BUT real world limitations in integrated circuits is still limiting best case signal-noise to 124db (with many consumer grade components limited to well below that).
So current real world Signal-noise/dynamic range in digital is limited to around 20.5bit resolution... (latest top of the line implementations are starting to achieve 128db this year... so a touch over 21bit resolution)
Looking at the real world limitations and capabilities, we currently have gear running at 24/96 which at its best (ie selecting appropriate pro/semi-pro/audiophile ADC's and DAC's) should be able to easily match vinyl in all audible domains...
Jitter below 10ps
Dynamic range & Signal/Noise over 124db
No measurable or audible anomalies within the 20-20kHz range
Sure - but how does it sound?
My personal take - based on my setup, gear, ADC / DAC etc... - completely identical to the input signal I am recording. In other words, to the best ability of my aural acuity and the resolving ability of my equipment, it is totally transparent.
So garbage in garbage out, and quality in quality out....
It is far more economical today to achieve this level of quality in digital than in analogue.... for between $1k and $2k you can purchase both ADC and DAC capable of the highest level of audio resolution at 24bit/96kHz. Even 5 years ago this would have cost 2 or three times as much if not more, and 15 years ago this was not possible.
Like I said, I don't believe "good" digital is a limitation any more.
bye for now
David
-
I'm not sure I buy your complete argument, but okay. It still seems to me that there are so many variables in the chain that any single explanation may be an over-simplification of the actual state of affairs.
Me, I got nuthin'. All I know is the only time I have two records that sound similar to one another is when they are recorded, mastered and cut in the same studio. Sheffield Labs and Rudy van Gelder's work spring to mind. Inconsistency from record to another or one ripped file and another is the only constant.
Scotty
-
As far as DACs go I think that with at least 20.5bits of resolution the biggest limiting factor may be the point where current or voltage has to amplified enough that it is useable(ie greater than 1.5volts) before the preamp in the system. Think if we had a DAC that put out about 2 volts to begin with and had the specs of the top of the line DACs from AKM, Wolfson or Cirrus Logic for example, we might get a little further down the road.
The dis-incentive to manufacturer to do this lies with their customers who desire to claim that their output stage design is superior to their competitions. This output stage is more parts in the signal chain and there are losses incurred with the addition of every single part you place in the signal path. The elimination of an entire gain stage and its associated parts count has to result in some kind of improvement.
Scotty
-
Quite! hence the appearance over the last year of digital integrated amps.... integrateds with onboard DAC....
This has of course been commonplace with receivers, but the AVR's have not been audiophile oriented for the most part, and most of them have quite shocking issues with jitter - the next generation of AVR's I would expect would resolve this issue. (it is one of the main constraints in my "lounge room" system)
I expect true audiophile AVR's should become more readily available over the next 2 years...
-
David,
"Not convinced
Either way the end result is analogue - what we hear from the speakers is definitely analogue.
So regardless of whether it is digital or not there will always be a DA conversion.
With vinyl there are additional limitations, and encoding/decoding from RIAA....
The whole discussion about sound being "chopped up" and reconstituted fails on one major issue - there have been quite substantial repeated tests that have shown that our hearing cannot differentiate."
We are unfortunately, talking about digital recording only and not if it's a good idea to convert an analog signal to digital, then back to analog the natural waveform. First you speak of RIAA encoding limitations, but not until much later do you mention the horrendous DACs common in home equipment. Whether or not a digital recording sounds better on a record with studio DA conversion and a phono stage, or better with home DA conversion would depend on your equipment methinks. What was true 20 years ago would be different today, depending on what you've got.
Your point about repeated tests that show we can't differentiate, is bullshit. Double blind tests are near worthless objective quantification of a subjective phenomena and are only valid for gross differences. The fact of the matter is, those tests don't duplicate the way we listen at home when our objective is to enjoy the music, not concentrate on playback differences on an unfamiliar system. I think it's fair to say that virtually no one listens to music like they're taking a test, put on the spot, and have to choose A or B. Often, the harder you try, the more disenfranchised you become from the "normal" listening experience. Comparing components at home is very different. Everything else is familiar in the system and you can relax and hear subtle differences on familiar recordings.
As far as ultimate quality attainable with digital today, I'll have to defer to others. I haven't experienced it, but I've read many posts of those with top equipment who say the opposite of you. I don't think it would be productive to continue that train of thought.
neo
-
So there's no misunderstanding, that last sentence about not pursuing that train of thought, I meant myself. Please feel free to post anything you like. I found the discussion about resolution, DACs etc. informative. This is the future whether I approve or not.
Heard any good carts lately? For some reason I've been thinking about the Sumiko Blackbird. I think that cart has been in continuous production for nearly forty years. I can't think of a better HOMC made today. It sounds fast/clean with a boron cantilever and .3 x .7. Cu is listed at 12 and I assume that's 10Hz. Max VTF is 2.2g and weighs 9.6g. I would call it accurate as opposed to romantic. I wonder who makes these for Sumiko. Sumiko is a holding company/importer and represents many small manufacturers. That might have changed and they could have bought some of those small companies or started manufacturing themselves.
neo
-
I was expecting to get some flak about double blind testing. I guess when someone says it's near worthless, there's not much else to say?
I'll say this, it depends on what you're trying to test, and the methodology. That bit about objectifying the subjective, can be a real factor. Test conditions almost never duplicate a home listening experience. I don't think it's hard to see that test conditions can influence the outcome despite the objective/subjective factor and testers often rig the test, sometimes unknowingly. When you read the details of many of these tests, think about possible ways for the outcome to be reversed.
I read all the time about people saying HO cart A is nice and HO cart B is a POS. Meanwhile cart A, their frame of reference is an Ortofon M20 FL Super and they have 450pF shunt capacitance at 47K (recommended) on their phono input. B is some cart like an AT that wants to see 150pF and needs extended break-in, possibly resistance loading. Surprise surprise!! They don't like B.
Is that so different than testing a DAC with designer high capacitance analog cables?
Because there are differences of opinion about hi-res digital resolution vs analog, I don't accept the statement that people can't tell the difference.
neo
-
It is tricky - to say the least!
Any two pieces of differing equipment will to some degree differ - what is the threshold of discernibility of that difference?
For some parameters it is relatively well known - THD has been well studied, as has IMD...
And then there are psych aspects - which is why the double blind exists.... and to throw more FUD at it all there is psycho-acoustics....
Just last year (or was it the year before...) I remember reading at least one professional cartridge review in a magazine that I thought was deeply flawed - the author clearly did not understand the impact of capacitive load.
So what hope has the average listener posting his review in a forum!?
All I can say is that I have put many hours (days, weeks, months) into my own testing - to satisfy my own insatiable curiosity....
And I can therefore post about my own experiences - all the while being aware of the weaknesses in my testing... both technical (equipment limitations, lack of double blind) as well as personal (I know I have a notch in my hearing.... and being almost 50, high frequency hearing may also be questionable) - still I hear differences, and work through the process of developing a test that eliminates as much as possible of the potential reasons for variation to try to identify the reason for the differences I hear.
With all its flaws, I decided a few years back, that the most efficient way of doing my own back to back comparisons was to digitally record and then be able to directly switch back and forth between two differing configurations in perfectly level matched form.
I was aware when I made that decision, that my digital gear would likely be my limiting factor (beyond my own hearing) - and therefore worked towards upgrading that end of my chain...
Over the next week I should be receiving a new (used) Mytek DAC which will complete my digital headphone based chain from ADC through to DAC with top level mastering grade equipment....
I am not sure whether it will make a difference, as the current kit is not half bad either, but my new setup will be state of the art circa 5 years ago - and according to some of the best recording engineers in the business - as transparent as it is possible to get. The bar may have shifted up a bit further over the last few years... but still it should be more than capable enough - sufficiently so to place any flaws in the recording/playback chain outside of my own threshold of audibility - and hopefully beyond the threshold of audibility of most of the population....
Which will therefore make the clips I record when testing various aspects and comparing, an order of magnitude more credible.
It also gives me the level of confidence I was aiming for before starting to digitise the Analogue collection - something I have put off several times, due to an awareness of the flawed nature of the recording chain. (and the possibility of therefore needing to rerecord 000's of records is severaly offputting!)
In the meantime - the digitising project led me to investigate cartridge differences, cartridge optimisation (loading) - and various sundry never ending areas of turntable optimisation - it is a fascinating and ongoing journey.
The same record perfectly recorded (so lets put aside the whole digital discussion), will sound different when recorded with differing cartridges, phono stages, etc....
BUT - the really good cartridges, phono stages, turntables etc... when optimally set up, do indeed tend to sound more and more alike rather than different - the sound qualities tend to get closer to each other as they get better, rather than diverging and becoming more different.
Yes a Karat is more limited in its soundstaging capabilities than is a Stantering... and the Karat does end up sounding more dynamic that the stantering (even the best of the stanterings!)
Can one have ones cake and eat it too.... don't know yet - havn't heard enough cartridges (! :icon_twisted: !)
As I identify the differences, I do question to what degree within the limitations of audibility, the differences can be eradicated through (very careful and very light handed) processing in the digital domain?
Some of the timbral variations I am picking up are caused by variations in amplitude at specific frequencies of less than 2db - sometimes less than 1db - a light but of EQ may be able to eliminate that difference.
Dynamics and soundstage related differences I feel are much much more difficult to tackle in processing terms, and involve a lot of risk in terms of potential audio anomalies generated by the processing - hence my attitude to date has been to leave it well alone.
Sometime over the next couple of years I will do a series of clips from differing cartridges and post them so people can go through the same exercise I have been and see what they think.
bye for now
David
-
I have a mental picture of you sitting in your laboratory wearing headphones and a white lab coat, like an old Polk loudspeaker ad with Matthew Polk in his lab coat, except he didn't wear headphones. I don't mean that in a demeaning way. Polk was trying to look like a scientist, but I wonder how much chance you get to actually sit down and play a record the old fashioned way. I know you can listen to the analog version in your lab (for want of a better term), but I suspect you get caught up in digital investigations and spend you time doing that, almost exclusively.
Before I forget, there's a little caveat to that Golden Ears headphone thingy. On the last page of the AC thread there's a link to an Inner Fidelity article about the challenge. At the end people post comments. One guy took the challenge with 20 or 30 different phones and rated them for ease of passing the tests. They ranged from easy as pie to impossible, to paraphrase the ratings. You might expect this sort of thing on a qualitative level, but that's not exactly the case. Have you ever looked at frequency response graphs of headphones? I realize cans sit right on your ears and we all hear differently and have different shaped ears and heads, but .....
Anyway, I hope that Mytec works out. With your investigations you've contributed more to the general gestalt of phono cart parameters, than anyone.
neo
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=98932)
-
Something useful might be learned if the digital recording of a particular phono cartridge was compared with the phono cartridge itself playing back the same recording that was digitized. The A/B/A comparison should be done in a system using stereo loudspeakers so that any differences in three dimensional sound-staging between the actual cartridge and the digital recording could be heard.
Scotty
-
Something useful might be learned if the digital recording of a particular phono cartridge was compared with the phono cartridge itself playing back the same recording that was digitized. The A/B/A comparison should be done in a system using stereo loudspeakers so that any differences in three dimensional sound-staging between the actual cartridge and the digital recording could be heard.
Scotty
With imaging capability comments like those of 23RS vs. Stantering, I'm sure those comparisons were done. Some other details might be more easily revealed by "good" phones. Maybe I assume too much. One could hear an imaging comparison on a record years ago and use that conclusion as a factoid in ongoing investigations, most of which might have little to do with imaging. On the other hand, I would think a cantilever resonance (more likely on a Stantering?) would affect imaging more than separation?
That might be a bad assumption. Separation is critical for imaging and a cantilever resonance could actually enhance it, similar to a rising high end.
This stuff is interesting, but I wonder about the frame of reference when it comes to analog vs. digitized. We become acclimated to the medium in which we work and ongoing comparisons stop. A referenced conclusion like, "there have been quite substantial repeated tests that have shown that our hearing cannot differentiate" is like hearing "perfect sound forever".
neo
-
The most action I've seen on Vinyl Circle is digital vs. analog debates. Proponents of either side come swooping down from parts unknown to throw in their $0.02 and make the definitive comment(s). It usually gets nasty at some point, but hey, that's a big part of the appeal. Everybody loves a good fight and sitting at your PC, you don't smell the bile and bullshit. This discussion is rather civilized and I daresay illuminating, thought provoking.
One thing playing records allows is customizing or tuning your playback. That brings up a couple of the latest AT models to reach these shores.
The first is the AT-5V:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/AT5V.html
Now this is interesting. 5.0mV out / 360mH / 610 ohm DCR / 2.1Kohm impedance. Specs looks like a 150MLX on steroids, but comes with tapered AL/.6 mil spherical. Like a Denon 103? Could be good for non height adjustable arms. Wonder what it sounds like with an ATN150MLX ?
Gear took the generator specs of the 7V off the description. It also has 5.0mV out. I think it has higher inductance. Anybody remember? I'll see if I can find it. The 100E is 4.5mV / 350mH / 800 DCR / 2.3K impedance. Seems that all of these models are similar to the 150.
Okay I found them. The 7V is 5mV / 500mH / 650 DCR / 3.0K impedance. Little more mellow? Guess it would depend on stylus/cantilever resonances. The 7V generator actually looks a little more like the 440ML OCC. Users report 7V sound is balanced.
At the other end of the spectrum is AT ART9 MC:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATART9.html
Sort of like the ART 7 of nonmagnetic core fame, this has body structure derived from the 50ANV. Output is the opposite of the ART7. It's 0.5mV.
The yoke is permendur. That's 50% cobalt and 50% iron and has very high permeability when saturated. Bet it sounds better than a Lyra Atlas. I could have saved $9000. :duh:
neo
-
What a coincidence, I've just (not five minutes ago) ordered my first 150Mlx stylus to try out with my LS500. I'm excited, but a little bummed, because I'll have to disassemble a good grip to hear the combination. I can't wait to hear this combination!
-
Hi DonGrb,
Look at it this way. The only round plug exotic still available (AFAIK) is the ATN20SS which is now $300. So this is actually an economically sound move.
If you perform the surgery with the right frame of mind, relaxed and single minded, you'll be successful. The key is no second thoughts or anxiety to shake your hand or break your concentration. If the doorbell buzzes or the phone rings, just ignore it. Even if it's your mother in law and you know you'll be in for some verbal abuse, let it go. If it's the wife and you suddenly remember you forgot to pick up the kids, maybe you better put it down and do it later.
The Zen approach is what's needed. You want to inner direct the suspension wire housing and the compliance screw to their ultimate destiny. You can also be confident that this advise is coming from someone who broke around $500 worth of styli, including a 150MLX.
May the farce be with you,
neo
-
Hmm something strange about where the cantilever meets the pivot point...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93762)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=93763)
David
According to J. Carr, most all carts have the cantilever attached to the suspension with what is called a joint pipe, which is a slightly larger tube. In this case I think the black part - the tube directly in front of the magnets, is the joint pipe. The Jico tube is longer than OEM and seems wider with the grey stuff reinforcing the attachment.
neo
-
Ahh that also explains the ease of replacing an entire cantilever - if you have the right solvent, you simply dissolve the glue, slide out the old one and slide in the new....
Hence people like soundsmith having reasonably priced (relatively) "retipping" which replaces the cantilever rather than do the much more difficult task of actually removing the old needle and putting a new one on in correct alignment....
-
If we revisit the AT link provided by Scotty, we see that the black piece that holds both the magnets and the joint pipe is identified (correctly by David) as the pivot.
http://www.coolgales.com/brochures/AudioTechnicacartridgesbrochure.pdf
It also looks as if the filament (suspension wire) extends down the cantilever. Is that possible with a solid exotic cantilever? Behind the rubber damper the cantilever morphs into the suspension wire housing that is secured in the plug by the compliance screw. I thought I read about someone replacing the pivot/magnets. Maybe that's wrong, but I think it would only be possible if the cantilever doesn't end at the pivot.
neo
-
Maybe that drawing with the suspension wire going into the cantilever, was just showing dimensionality.
Here's a link to further response by J. Carr about tip mass and high frequency resonance:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&openflup&11228&4#11228
"The joint pipe is usually made from aluminum or duraluminum, which although at 2.7g per cubic cm is heavier than beryllium (1.85g) or boron (2.46g), is certainly lighter than diamond (3.5g) or sapphire (4g). Keep in mind that a component that is closer in to the pivot (such as the armature and coils of an MC or the magnet of an MM) will affect the effective mass less than another component farther away from the pivot. The joint pipe must extend all the way back to the pivot, and in many cases it is what the magnet or armature are secured to.
Counter-intuitively, increasing the joint pipe length can raise the resonant frequency rather than lowering it, and this is because a shorter and lighter joint pipe can allow the cantilever rod to flop around at its root, while a longer and heavier joint pipe will result in less overall flexing.
Even among AT MMs, those that use a thin rod cantilever will most likely have the joint pipe, while those that use an aluminum pipe cantilever may be able to do without. This is because the suspension components (wire, dampers) come in specific sizes that need a stepped interface to mate with the significantly smaller diameter of a rod cantilever (a boron rod is 0.28mm in diameter). I don't think that the issue is company practice (AT vs. Jico).
Depending on how you calculate things, cantilever length has a more significant effect on HF resonance than tip mass. And while there are other equations that relate tip mass to HF resonance, these are only relevant if all other things are equal, which usually they are not.
For example, a designer can use a longer diamond tip (with higher self-mass) to extend the vertical reach of the cantilever and reduce the overall cantilever length, and this may increase the HF resonance. On the other hand, doing so will probably result in poorer crosstalk characteristics at high frequencies, as the longer stylus will start to allow torsional twisting in addition to horizontal and vertical movement. IOW there is no free lunch, but if a designer is simply interested in raising the HF resonance point, there are various tricks and tradeoffs available.
Also, HF resonance is affected by the overall cantilever stiffness (as can be seen in the longer joint pipe example above), and by damping. On the surface of things, using more damping to flatten things may appear better, but in practice doing so usually triggers more distortion. Experience shows that a rising HF response is less offensive to the ear (as it is a simple boosting of whatever is already present on the LP, which, given the 1/f spectral distribution of most music, may not be much) than distortion, which synthesizes new HF components that do not exist on the LP, and in the case of IMD will result in inharmonic distortion at lower frequencies that are particularly grating to the ear.
I find that cartridges sound better when the designer puts in a honest effort to increase cantilever stiffness while reducing moving masses, but does not try to steamroller the last few dBs into total submission."
Interesting stuff even if there's no formulas or revelations. He's a hell of a nice guy, kind of reminds me of VDH and his Q&A forum, but that was more basic. That's in a PDF now.
Speaking of VDH, you get interesting specs with his carts, including recommended arm mass and effective tip mass:
http://www.vandenhul.com/products/phono
neo
-
It all sort of makes sense, and is consistent with other bits of testing and analysis....
Ortophase tests showed marked Golden ear preference for low or undamped cantilever - but totally undamped allowed the high end to rise too much - best compromise was light damping.
Cantilever length vs tip mass - the physics are so tightly interwound that I find it strange that he would seperate the two! But yes clearly the multiplying effect of the "lever" on effective mass means that length of cantilever can have a greater effect that the actual mass of the needle at the end (and the longer the cantilever the lower the needle masses proportion of the total)
The point about join pipes not being needed for aluminium cantilevers - and their contributions to rigidity is really interesting - and explains designs like the SAS with quite a long "pipe" telescoping out before the boron rod takes over.
It also implies that a longer attaching pipe could be a positive.... I must investigate my collection of needles and see whether I have a few that are very similar to each other some with longer or shorter or no join pipes and investigate where that then places the cantilever resonance.
And of course the final comment about a balanced design without too much excess...... wise words!
But I still love the Dynavector Karats - and they are definitely an example of excess in one particular direction
bye for now
David
-
The original definition (by Carr) of the joint pipe, included the end of the cantilever. He was responding to the suggestion that AT MM don't seem to have a joint pipe, and a query about the relationship between tip mass and high frequency resonance.
His pointing out the function of a longer joint pipe is something we should have thought of back on page 25 of this thread. We know the benefits of both a shorter cantilever and increased rigidity, we just didn't connect the dots. Unlike a boron or beryllium cantilevered stylus, in the case of an AT-95 replacement stylus, tip mass is of greater concern. We're looking at straight aluminum cantilevers with bonded stylus. How clunky can you get? A longer joint pipe will effectively shorten the cantilever, but will also increase tip mass. I don't see how it could not. These replacement styli seem to track okay, so what's the problem, SQ ?
What is the acceptable range of effective tip mass? Maybe best case 0.2mg to max around 0.7mg ?
I noticed Ortofon stopped publishing eff tip mass. I think that's in response to criticism of their HOMC tip mass.
Later,
neo
-
The later version of the X5-MC is specced at 0.7mg - and I verified that with my measurements.
Seems clunky compared to the svelte 0.3mg of the OM30!
On the other hand it does make one wonder about the potential of a recantilevered Xx-MC fitted with a nice Ruby cantilever.... it might give some of the multimegabuck Ortofons a run for their money...
I concur - decent tip masses seem to max out at 0.7g
-
Remember the thread about Lyra Atlas? To refresh our memories here's the German review:
http://www.fastaudio.com/workspace/uploads/downloads/stp_04_12_sd_atlas.pdf
When I saw that test report I was surprised by the 20KHz resonance, which is nearly identical to Kleos. The close-up at the bottom of page 2 was even more surprising. What's that big mounting platform under the tip? It seems obvious that it's for keeping the stylus and cantilever acting as a single unit - structural stability. A nude stylus is normally glued onto the end of the cantilever and this would help prevent rotation and separate movements.
Next question is, what's Atlas eff tip mass? Atlas is widely acknowledged to be top drawer and that answer might shed some light (or not) on understanding tip mass range and numerical relevance.
Another question is, why can't other modern magazines give us more than the subjective crap we're handed? I'm supposed to take some silly reviewer's word that B is better than A ??
A has a blacker background, but B is more transparent. :duh:
Stereoplay didn't have much but a FR graph. Most of the clown for hire rags print nothing more than mfg. specs. Sad but true.
Back in the day.....
Later,
neo
-
I'll grab my spreadsheet later today and calculate what a 20k resonance works out to in tip mass... it won't be bad, but it won't be great either.
Looks to me like a voicing decision.... With mass control by that funky stylus plate.
-
The Atlas construction looks decidedly less than impressive when compared to the nude square shank diamond stylus mounted in laser bored square hole in the cantilever as seen in the top of the line AT cartridges.
(http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u252/fftulip/audio/AT152_stya.jpg)
Scotty
-
20kHz resonance implies tip mass of 0.54mg...
For comparison -
SAS (res = 28kHz) has tip mass of 0.28mg
Pickering XLZ7500, res=26kHz, tip mass = 0.32mg
Signet TK9e res= 25kHz, tip mass = 0.35mg
Shure V15VMR res=31kHz, tip mass = 0.23mg
Dynavector Karat 23rs res= 50kHz, tip mass = 0.09mg
Digitrac 300SE res=20.5kHz, tip mass = 0.52mg
-
Scotty,
Nice photo.
Is that an ML on an aluminum cantilever, like a 440?
-
Seems like Ortofon left one on their spec sheet, and it's one of those I thought they were trying not to display.
Ortofon MC-3 Turbo = 0.75mg
Tracking ability >70um
http://ortofon.com/hifi/products/cartridges/moving-coil/high-output-mc/mc-3-turbo
-
Yes it is. I also found a picture of the ML 150 stylus with the beryllium cantilever which looks the same except for the gold color.
Amazing technology, I am still planning on transplanting a MLX 150 stylus on to my AT 440 ML body as finances permit. I guess I will have to be satisfied with a Boron cantilever.
Scotty
-
Wow.
I just revisited Miyajima site to check on Kansui specs. That's the one Throwback uses, or I should say, one of the ones. Kansui is 16 ohms and 2.3mV - shibata/aluminum. You wouldn't know it from the specs, but Miyajima carts have nonmagnetic cores! Most MCs with nonmagnetic cores have very low output and high resistance like the DL-S1. They also usually have high inductance for the amount of output. Because you need tons of gain for a cart like DL-S1 (0.15mV, 33 ohm) the relatively high inductance combines with cable capacitance and might cause high frequency overload in extended bandwidth preamps. That causes a particularly irritating intermodulation distortion throughout the mid/treble region. The solution in that case is either load it down like crazy (I think Elison in the Asylum uses 22 ohms) and need even more gain, modify your preamp, or try another cart or preamp.
Today there are carts like the AT ART 7 that have nonmagnetic cores without the unusually high resistance. At Miyajima site there's a 10 minute video illustration of their cross ring design. Highly recommended viewing.
http://www.miyajima-lab.com/e-stereo.html
Later,
neo
Note: The AT Art 7 has an output of 0.12mV, inductance is 25mH. That's a lot more inductance than I thought. MC inductance is usually measured in micro henries.
http://eu.audio-technica.com/en/products/cartridges/product.asp?catID=8&subID=57&prodID=4495
-
Looking at how the specifications have been typed, I would bet that the m in this case is intended to mean micro. Using lower case u as a prefix in front of the upper case H for Henries is counter intuitive. The u in this case comes from the Greek for μικρός (transliterated as mikrós) which means small. There is also no font available for the Ohms symbol which is Omega ( Ω) in the Greek alphabet. I noticed that W was used for the Ω in the published specs.
That's my theory and I'm sticking to it.
If we look at the specs for the AT-F7 we find 12ohms and 25uH which is a little more believable.
http://eu.audio-technica.com/en/products/cartridges/product.asp?catID=8&subID=57&prodID=4028
Scotty
-
I think you're right. It's got to be some kind of mix-up or typo. I don't think it's possible for a MC of that output to have 25mH. A HO Grado has 45mH.
The ART-7 was patterned after the 50ANV which has the same output with a nonmagnetic core. It has 7uH. I have a question in for a guy who has an ART-7, asking if he has a spec sheet.
If you can deal with that output, the 7 is around $1K on Amazon - shipped from Japan. LpGear still has the 50ANV - price reduced to < $1.5K.
Those Miyajima carts are intriguing. Two have compliance similar to a 103 and the other two are about 15 or 16 cu.
neo
-
I'll grab my spreadsheet later today and calculate what a 20k resonance works out to in tip mass... it won't be bad, but it won't be great either.
Looks to me like a voicing decision.... With mass control by that funky stylus plate.
There is/was a poster on VE called Desktop who is a retired speaker designer. He worked for a big company and also designed his own. I think it was about 6 or 7 years ago, he spoke of a movie probably made by Dynevector, of a cantilever in action - while tracking. This video was made using laser microscopy interferometry. I think that's what he said. Magnification was probably minimal <100X ? Interferometers are used for scanning a surface. They're widely used in precision manufacturing, optics, electronics (phase testing), aerospace etc.
Anyway, Desktop's description of the cantilever was nothing short of amazing. It whipped around and wiggled in ways that looked impossible. At one point it looked as if it would fold up on itself. I never saw this video, but I also have no reason to doubt this story.
That clunky looking plate on the Atlas cantilever might be very effective "ground control". I'm sure it's there for a reason. If you look at the photo again, there's a hole that goes clear through the boron cantilever and the structure is secured on top. I don't know what the plate is made of, maybe titanium? but it must cost a bundle. Lyra (Scan-Tech) gets their diamonds and probably cantilevers from Ogura. (Anybody notice stylus price increases lately?) Ogura and Namiki are the high price spread and I would guess that cantilever/diamond costs them more than a 440 costs us, retail. What price glory?
neo
-
Some interesting developments on Agon thread. Turns out ART7 has 8uH inductance. That's good news if I want to try one. I had to use another phono preamp for the DL-S1.
There's also more elucidation about cantilevers, specifically AT. Most of the stuff we already know. J. Carr raised the possibility of misalignment with the pole pieces if compliance (damper compression) is changed. I think AT stylus fitment is self aligning to some degree, but that seems like a real possibility given the size of the gaps. J. Carr has been tremendously helpful. We're lucky to have his input.
David,
What are your thoughts about this?
neo
P.S. I forgot to mention, the stylus mounting plate on Atlas is there to keep the tip in place - from breaking/falling off etc. It's kind of disappointing and points out the advantage of a replaceable stylus. I don't know the warranty or retipping policy, but on a $9.5K cart.....
-
Interesting comment about the AT setup and pole piece positioning - makes sense....
If I was AT, I would have a standard compression - ie a standard production line that pulls that wire/string the same amount for all the styli, but I choose the materials for the doughnut such that it compresses variably - and the doughnut thickness is then based on knowing how much it will compress - which defines where the magnets end up relative to the pole pieces.
The alternative would require variable tension system - so they can define what tension is needed for each stylus - and then the variable of doughnut thickness, compressibility etc... would need to be worked into the design - one more variable to control.
Dunno.... would love a tour of the AT stylus production line, guided by one of their design engineers!
The stylus mounting plate seems a bit of a kludgy setup - perhaps Lyra don't have access to the type of high precision laser tools used by Dynavector? (laser cut hole in the cantilever, press fit square cut diamond into laser cut hole, possibly add a dab of glue at the back...)
The approach with the mounting plate seems to imply a cruder lower tech craft approach rather than precision through higher tech....
The Technics Boron tube cantilevers with laser cut holes and pressure fit needles seem to remain the acme of stylus technology - never to be repeated..... sad really.
Going back to the AT MM designs - I don't think the pole piece positions are quite that critical - given that the stylus mounting is probably thermoplastic made by pressure injection, I would assume that there would be a level of uncertainty in the holder itself.
The more precise metal versions used in the AT25 series have long been discontinued (and there is another possible advantage to that vintage design - the metal mounting might allow for more precise and closely positioned pole pieces - with magnetic advantages in addition to the fact that these are true torroidal designs...)
Looking at how the styli snap into the bodies, and we can actually see the tip of the pole pieces in the opening - I think there is quite wide latitude there.... MC's are probably a lot more sensitive to this type of positional variation than MM's are.
On the other hand the magnetic "system" of an air coil MC is more theoretically "perfect" than the standard MM - probably less eddy current, hysteresis, etc.... That would make for a better midrange from around 2kHz up... (effect should be of less than 2db in magnitude but that is still quite substantial!)
The magnetics are starting to make me come around to thinking that MC might in fact be the superior system ultimately - or at least that low output is the superior system...
When I measured the XLZ7500 and the XSP3003 - both with the same needle - there was a substantially greater trough in the 2k to 8k frequency range on the high output body than there was on the low output body - this puzzled me at the time.... but with many months of further marinating in the back of my mind, I am theorising that the much lower signal levels involved reduce the undesirable effects substantially.
It also makes me wonder whether the only models that had laminations in the Stantering families were the low output ones? - Laminations never seem to have been mentioned in ANY Stantering blurbs - and the midrange troughs on the Stanterings seems greater than on equivalen Shures and AT's.... (Laminations, or perhaps HotPressedFerrite like Technics used?)
bye for now
David
-
I'm not sure if standard compression is feasible or desirable for AT. I haven't really thought about it yet. What we don't see in the diagram is a flexible part of the suspension wire directly behind the pivot. Most of the wire is housed. The length of the flexible part is varied with design criteria. Shorter being more exact, less lossy, but also more prone to response peaks. Less expensive models probably have a longer flexible part - more forgiving and smoother. That in itself might not preclude standardization, but what if filaments vary in flexibility?
Tell you the truth, I have no desire to do any more transplants, at least for now. The 20SS stylus is fine the way it is and I have a NOS spare. If I want an exotic for my 95 and Virtuoso, I can send it to Soundsmith for a ruby/LC or OLC. That would cost about the same as an ATN150MLX, which could go on the 440, but with an ATN140LC on there it's not too bad. I have the 12E/fake Precept wired for mono.... This is kind of crazy. What I really need is a SS level 3 for the 980. :thumb:
neo
-
I was looking up some specs on the Sonus carts and came across this. First a tribute to Peter Pritchard when he passed:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/peter-pritchard
Sonus brochure w/specs:
http://www-f9.ijs.si/~margan/Audio/Sonus_Manufacturer_Specs.pdf
Audio Magazine April 1977:
http://www-f9.ijs.si/~margan/Audio/Sonus_Blue_Label_Audio_Apr_1977.pdf
neo
-
Doing a search for info on older carts is interesting to say the least. Google knows what I'm looking for. This one is in Norwegian. Set your translators on stun, the commentary is rather amusing. I guess expressions don't translate well. Info on Technics MMs:
http://www.hifisentralen.no/forumet/vennetra-der-hifimerker/66200-technics-matsushita-electric-trading-co-ltd.html
Check out post #8. Fig. 15 is freq. response variations due to tip mass. Fig. 14 is tip mass of diff. models. Specs 205C 3 below. Awesome!!
FR 5 - 80K,
15 - 60K +/- 3dB
20 - 15K +/- .5dB
I guess it's not fair to compare a 10 or $15K cart to a vintage MM with a boron tube cantilever. After all, the only tube cantilever they can buy is aluminum or some other rolled sheet metal type. Carbon cantilevers sound like crap so that's not viable. What's a poor high end mfg. to do?
Irrespective of my sarcasm, I think the 7dB rise @ 20K of Atlas, Kleos, is a deliberate voicing decision, which in my mind confirms both David's opinion about MC rising high end, and Ortofon phase theory. It doesn't matter which is right or wrong or both partially, the net result is the same. Like the barkeep said, you pay your money and pick your poison.
Later,
neo
-
I would postulate that the 7db rise is less of a "choice" than it is a compromise....
The options available to limit that rise are:
Heavier damping (with negative influence on sound)
Lower Mass (switch cantilever types, are lower mass cantilevers even an option today?)
Electrical EQ (external to cartridge is outside the manufacturers control, internal to the cartridge can only be achieved by switching to a High Output / High Inductance design - either of these would require fighting against current audiophile fashion.... not very marketable - and electrical EQ also has potential mild/subtle sonic negatives)
There are only a very few contenders today for no compromise....:
Dynavector Karat - ultra short ruby/diamond cantilever leads to low mass, very flat F/R - design is not great for seperation though
Decca London - No cantilever at all ! lots of people swear by this one - I have yet to try it
That's it! - No one else in the low mass cantilever game today...
There are a few that are there in terms of high inductance with loading.... and with a cantilever of Boron or Sapphire - so low-ish mass with the ability to correct through loading.... Audio Technica, Soundsmith/B&O, Nagaoka.... anyone else ?
In the Low output side of things there are lots of Boron and Sapphire cantilevered options (relatively speaking) - but we are back to the compromises with rising high end.
The very best MC's of the early 80's didn't have to compromise as they could (and did ) use Boron or Beryllium tube cantilevers - these are the MC's that led the charge and made MC's the audiophile "gold" standard - but one might argue that current MC's are "gliding" on the reputation generated 30 years ago....
If we go back to the era before ultra-low mass cantilevers were available,high inductance designs were king - for good reasons!
There are other compromises too - magnetic ones, and for those the only real remedy seems to be a combination of specialised construction (laminations, HPF) and low output. How low? - how low can you go before starting to hit the constraints of low inductance designs?
Seems to me that the acme of MM/MI design was in the sub 2V output range.... with inductances of between 80mH and 200mH.... (AT25/TK9, EPC100... others?)
I wonder how much it would cost to set up a boron tube cantilever production line..... the patents are long expired....
-
Well, yes and no. I see it somewhat differently. Lyra response is deliberate. Did you read J. Carr's follow up posts? He talked about different flavors and choices for the end user. Our mistake is assuming that FR accuracy is preferred. It's not.
Look at an example that's been documented on this thread, the MC200. Peak at 27K and + 3.8dB at 20K was the compromise. With additional damping it was virtually flat. Without damping + 7dB @ 20K was considered unacceptable - too bright, unlistenable!! Boron cantilevered MCs with 5/6mm cantilever length typically seem to peak close to 30K.
Exotic tube cantilevers were few and far between. Outside of Technics and Nakatsuka designs, I could only find a few examples. Many were sapphire. If it were feasible, I'd think hollow boron would be incorporated in ZYX carts. Nakatsuka's flavor is accuracy, but it's not for every audiofool, besides, + 7 dB @20K is a good reason to buy some overpriced tube gear that rolls off the high end. How lush and romantic!!
Current Dynavectors are a good example of the relative value of accuracy. Take a gander:
http://www.dynavector.com/products/cart/e_17d3.html
http://www.dynavector.com/products/cart/frame.html
17d3 response to 100K. Look at XV-1S specs. Where's the beef? Maybe it's soy?
I don't know this as fact, but I think it was Namiki that made the hollow boron cantilevers. They made the microridge and Nakatsuka used that exclusively after they became available (early '80s). I suspect Namiki is getting out of the stylus/cantilever business. Everybody seems to be using Ogura now. Maybe Namiki is just fulfilling contracts or is limiting production. Did you notice AT is curtailing the ML, which looks identical to the microridge?
When Axel (German re-tipper) tried to buy inventory from both of those companies, he couldn't even get a response. Most businesses, even audio, think of the vinyl resurgence as a fad that will diminish after a few more years.
David, you and I are out of touch. Accuracy from vinyl, why? Record players are for romance, warmth and sweetness, and to own extremely cool looking stuff. Nothing beats an elegantly appointed table with a cart that looks like a bird of prey or a space module. Mount your gargoyle and align it if you must, I just want to look at it.
neo pterosaur
-
David, you and I are out of touch. Accuracy from vinyl, why? Record players are for romance, warmth and sweetness, and to own extremely cool looking stuff. Nothing beats an elegantly appointed table with a cart that looks like a bird of prey or a space module. Mount your gargoyle and align it if you must, I just want to look at it.
Wow! I was wondering when someone would get around to that. I have often thought the same thing. If one is looking for the lowest noise, lowest distortion, and flattest response, don't look to vinyl. If one is looking for an experience that will give the most musical satisfaction, give vinyl a listen.
-
Hi Jeff,
not arguing with that approach - and it is totally valid for current release material which is available in various formats (digital for neutral & accurate reproduction, Vinyl for euphonic purposes) - that is fine.
But with vintage recordings? Many of which have never and will never be remastered onto digital? - for those you need a Vinyl setup that achieves neutrality and accurate reproduction of the original mastering...
This is what is becoming increasingly difficult to do! - it is also the "higher goal" - in that if you can achieve neutrality, you can achieve euphonia with various adjustments (equaliser, tubes, choice of speakers).
But setting up for euphonia, implies that you wish to make all recordings sound the same in that particular euphonic way. - This is where I have a problem.
Example - I have a Sony XL-MC104P high output MC which I particularly like - it has a very sweet bell like clarity, which goes very very well with small acoustic groups, baroque, violin and such.
It does not do well with large romantic era orchestrations (or stuff like Erich Kunzel etc...) - Analysis shows that it has a pronounced resonance at 6kHz (from memory - I would have to check back on my measurements) - it is definitely not neutral.
Is it euphonic - yes, but as a result of being euphonic, it suits certain types of music and recording and not others.
Also the approach of selecting for a sound one "likes" is one that has no objective touchpoint - being a purely subjective approach, it is like fashion - there are no absolutes, no means of comparing between my setup and yours. Every system set up along those lines becomes by its very definition an individual "fruit" - and there is no way of realistically comparing apples and oranges!
A reviewers article becomes just a whole bunch of hot air under those conditions! - What he/she heard would only be relevant to you and your setup, if you both have at least made some attempt to have the same "fruit". If either the reviewer or the end listener has chosen to build their system based on euphonics - then the review no longer has any applicability to the listener system.
Not that I am saying that various setups aiming at neutrality sound the same - far from it, technology has to date not been able to provide systems that are sufficiently perfect not to have compromises that colour the sound (including the room!).
My own biases.... I love and have owned quad electrostatics for years - knowing their weaknesses in terms of loudness/headroom and bass.
As a contrast I used to love the classic Boston Acoustics A400. (didn't quite get the MicroDetails like the Quads do, but got close, with fabulous tight bass....)
Was impressed by classic Klipsch (Klipschorn, LaScala, Forte) - but never loved them - yeah they have the headroom, loudness and bass - but I never found them able to reproduce the microdynamic detail that the electrostatics did and do (and which I value much more highly).
Speakers I never liked - mid 80's Pioneer and Magnat metal tweeter speakers - they always sounded harsh and edgy to me.
The imperfections are of course 99% in the transducers - speakers and cartridges... but by choosing "neutrality" - I have a measurable and (to some degree) achievable goal.... deviation from that neutrality can then be achieved in a controlled manner, and when reading reviews by authors that have similar aims, I have some hope that the reviews will have relevance.....
Just call me an audiophile trilobite (much older than dinosaurs).
bye for now
David
-
Trilobite eh? a nasty lookin horseshoe crab kinda thing. I'm sticking with the youngsters. Neo Pterosaur has a certain ring to it, like a cheap tonearm. Besides, that was one bad-ass bird or flying reptile whatever. Grew to 50' can you imagine? Like a flying killer whale. That's how Fred Flintstone died. Pete Pterosaur swooped down and that was all she wrote for poor Fred. Yabba dabba.....
And here I thought I was being factious. Jeff, you have a point. "If one is looking for an experience that will give the most musical satisfaction, give vinyl a listen." Well said.
Neo Pterosaur
-
As a fellow dinosaur, all I would ask from a vinyl setup is the lowest possible distortion that the medium is capable of. The irony is that most phono stages claim very good RIAA EQ curve accuracy and by extension a flat response curve excluding the cartridges inherent frequency response. Given this it seems somewhat self defeating to compromise the flatness of system by knowingly building a cartridge with a very large deviation from flat response.
It is obvious that the best available technology is no-longer applied to phono cartridge design, probably for economic reasons. I don't find it hard to believe that a Laser can drill a square hole through almost any material that a cantilever
can be made from, unfortunately the exotic materials technology still available to the industry doesn't seem to be able to brought together with a laser drill.
I think we are lucky to still have cartridges made by Dynavector and Audio-Technica in the marketplace given economic downturn in 1991.
Scotty
-
Trilobite eh? a nasty lookin horseshoe crab kinda thing. I'm sticking with the youngsters. Neo Pterosaur has a certain ring to it, like a cheap tonearm. Besides, that was one bad-ass bird or flying reptile whatever. Grew to 50' can you imagine? Like a flying killer whale. That's how Fred Flintstone died. Pete Pterosaur swooped down and that was all she wrote for poor Fred. Yabba dabba.....
And here I thought I was being factious. Jeff, you have a point. "If one is looking for an experience that will give the most musical satisfaction, give vinyl a listen." Well said.
Neo Pterosaur
My 1 year old has recently been nicknamed "bam bam" after crawling around the house holding a plastic mineral water bottle (empty) in his hand and hitting everything in sight with it... - the spitting image of Bam-Bam....
And yeah the latest info on Pterosaur is pretty impressive....
-
I think we are lucky to still have cartridges made by Dynavector and Audio-Technica in the marketplace given economic downturn in 1991.
Scotty
Amen!
-
I too, am a dinosaur. I first got serious about audio around 1971. To me, CD took a lot of the hobby aspect out of it. I really enjoy(ed) the tweekiness of optimizing vinyl playback. While both formats are capable of excellent reproduction, getting vinyl to that level is much more satisfying and fun.
I found a couple of Art Dudley's recent writings interesting. In one, he stated that playback is best heard on the equipment from the era in which it was recorded. Perhaps that's true.
The other is more controversial. He said that vinyl sounds best because it's the only playback source that generates its own signal. All other sources require a separate power supply. I don't know about that one. It's probably a subject for a long contentious thread.
Then again, the worse a component measures, the more Art seems to like it. :lol:
-
The other is more controversial. He said that vinyl sounds best because it's the only playback source that generates its own signal. All other sources require a separate power supply. I don't know about that one. It's probably a subject for a long contentious thread.
Definitely contentions - especially given that as a line source you have to include the phono stage....
But perhaps he is talking about ceramic cartridges? (or Acoustics!)
-
I'm sure Art means the original signal at the source. The magnet/coil interaction generates that initial signal. There are other power supplies along the amplification chain, of course. In the June issue of Stereophile he writes, "Every other medium in existence - even analog tape - depends on an external power supply to create a source signal."
Check it out. No matter what you think of Stereophile or Art Dudley, it is an interesting column. I'm surprised it hasn't garnered more internet debate.
-
I'm sure Art means the original signal at the source. The magnet/coil interaction generates that initial signal. There are other power supplies along the amplification chain, of course. In the June issue of Stereophile he writes, "Every other medium in existence - even analog tape - depends on an external power supply to create a source signal."
Check it out. No matter what you think of Stereophile or Art Dudley, it is an interesting column. I'm surprised it hasn't garnered more internet debate.
Clever fellow. Take the most heavily criticized aspect of records, the mechanical excitation of the playback source transducer, and declare it an attribute.
He's being deliberately provocative. I wonder if he considered the strain gauge. It must be hard coming up with new and interesting bullshit every month.
neo pterosaur
-
Anthony Cordesman
search for vintage tests
got sonus pdf
that's '79 say you in jest?
luck be with and all the rest
Maybe I should stick to prose.
They're available for $6 a pop from someone who scanned them, and they're listed by month, year, and equipment name. I'll have to try another way, but it's not easy to find the juicy vintage ones. Buy a bunch, and I could have had a VP29. For the moment, in lieu of that, an interesting guy:
"Anthony Cordesman is a former director of intelligence assessment for the U.S. secretary of defense’s office and a recipient of the Department of Defense Distinguished Service Medal. He now holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies."
http://www.rferl.org/content/cordesman-says-obama-made-promise-cant-keep/24995572.html
This thread isn't about politics or US foreign policy, and the interview was about dealing with terrorism, and yes this is the same guy who does equipment reports. That in itself doesn't qualify him to do audio equipment reports, but.....you be the judge:
http://www.stereophile.com/writer/146
Check out the case against show reports and J Gordon Holt's reply. Cordesman is like a breath of fresh air IMO.
You'll also find reports in TAS like this:
http://www.sound-smith.com/cartridges/TAS_Strain_Gauge.pdf
On the other hand, is an entirely different viewpoint, I'd call it the clown dog whores gone wild perspective:
http://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/critic3.htm
neoboposaurus
-
When Tony Cordesman was writing for Stereophile his cartridge reviews were very concise and included a complete set measurements. Ah for the good old days when reviewers of phono cartridges actually produced some facts to balance out their hyperbole.
Scotty
-
When Tony Cordsman was writing for Stereophile his cartridge reviews were very concise and included a complete set measurements. Ah for the good old days when reviewers of phono cartridges actually produced some facts to balance out their hyperbole.
Scotty
I don't remember that Scotty. He talked about carts in other reviews and overviews. Maybe that was with another publication? I don't know of Stereofool ever having cart measurements except mfg. specs, and a full test report? Forget about it.
If you can stand another review, here's Fremer's take on Strain Gauge:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/soundsmith-strain-gauge-sg-200-phono-cartridge-system
Discussion later. By that time I suspect I'll be talking to myself.
neoboplicity
-
That would have back in the 80s before they changed magazine's size format. He was using his own test records and test equipment to measure the cartridges. To my knowledge the magazine didn't own the records or equipment to do these type of measurements.
Scotty
-
Come to think of it, the strain gauge is the ONLY type of cartridge where development can in fact continue unimpeded....
Standard magnetics have reached a dead end, and stepped back from their peak in the mid/late 80's. (exceptions: Dynavector Karat, Decca London ?)
At some point I need to fix up my SG phono stage (which I believe to be the cause of a channel imbalance in my Panasonic SG) - I do recall it sounding quite stunning - but I had only just got it going and listened to one or two records when the channel imbalance appeared - I have been hoping since that it is the phono stage - but it has been in storage waiting for me to get a "round tuit" since...
I have a feeling that although the SS SG has had further development since the panasonic effort (which SS was one of the few to service!) - the key to its achievement is in the phono stage that apparently does some proprietary EQ.... no details have been forthcoming in any of the reviews, nor have I seen any proper measurements of its performance ... which would be of great interest!
As a mad keen electrostatic speaker fan since the mid 80's - the Strain Gauge cartridges seem right down my alley.
bye for now
David
(currently in the process of getting toddler friendly 'stats' operational .... ie: a pair of vintage Stax headphones)
-
Come to think of it, the strain gauge is the ONLY type of cartridge where development can in fact continue unimpeded....
Standard magnetics have reached a dead end, and stepped back from their peak in the mid/late 80's. (exceptions: Dynavector Karat, Decca London ?)
At some point I need to fix up my SG phono stage (which I believe to be the cause of a channel imbalance in my Panasonic SG) - I do recall it sounding quite stunning - but I had only just got it going and listened to one or two records when the channel imbalance appeared - I have been hoping since that it is the phono stage - but it has been in storage waiting for me to get a "round tuit" since...
I have a feeling that although the SS SG has had further development since the panasonic effort (which SS was one of the few to service!) - the key to its achievement is in the phono stage that apparently does some proprietary EQ.... no details have been forthcoming in any of the reviews, nor have I seen any proper measurements of its performance ... which would be of great interest!
As a mad keen electrostatic speaker fan since the mid 80's - the Strain Gauge cartridges seem right down my alley.
bye for now
David
(currently in the process of getting toddler friendly 'stats' operational .... ie: a pair of vintage Stax headphones)
Agreed about further progress via magnetics. All we seem to get is variations on a theme. Titanium bodies are the latest craze - Ortofon, Lyra, AT which is really only vibration control. But I don't see how Dynavector or Decca are doing anything new either. Improvements are from refinements.
Look at Clearaudio, how many magnets can you stick under the top plate? Put 2g of gold on there and it's $15K. I haven't heard it, but most say it's nothing special. I don't care. It's ridiculous. Not sour grapes or envy, it's absurd.
The first cart they imported here (AFAIK) was Veritas, $1K in the '80s as was the Benz (one model). Between those 2 you had a clear choice. The Benz sounded like it was playing next door or from across the street. The Clearaudio was so bright it gave people ear bleed. They should have been made to put a warning label on the box. So now they're much improved, but they do their R&D with the consumer's money. Pricing is based on relative value (whatever you can get) and hype is the game.
neo
-
What's the biggest factor that distinguishes the strain gauge from a magnetic cart, or an electrostatic spkr from a dynamic or magnetic planer?
I think it's transient response - the ability to start and stop quickly and accurately in response to the groove, or the amp output.
My preferred flavor has always been accuracy over "musicality". Not right and wrong, to each his own, but the accurate variety is harder to live with, while mellow or forgiving limits resolution. That could be part of the reason for collecting carts. Back in the day phony tech types would make statements saying, there was no reason for faster transient response when playing a record. Nothing on there that calls for it. Obviously they were full of crap.
Reading the reviews of strain gauge, it seems evident that superior transient response is the most distinguishing feature. My impression is the same, but I never lived with a SG. I heard the Win a couple of times and it too seemed to have that distinguishing feature.
If anyone bothered to read both reviews each made that clear in the beginning. What bothers me is Fremer's main caveat. Is he a moron or liar?
"That stop-and-start ability, that freedom from overhang that audiophiles often confuse with "warmth," are leapfroggings in performance over more usual cartridge designs—yet the SG-200's delivery was so fast and clean that there was little time for harmonic development to unfold before it was off to the next aural event. So while the attack was extraordinary, the sustain was somewhat stingy. The SG-200 could sound somewhat cool and lacking in physicality, and while its top was crystalline and airy and its bottom tight, deep, and well textured, the mids were less than fully fleshed out, making the overall sound somewhat cool and slightly recessed."
What terrible writing. Doesn't he have weeks to write a review? What's confused with warmth, overhang or freedom from overhang? While this is obvious to many of us, it seems deliberately confusing. It's wrong anyway. Warmth doesn't come from poor overhang characteristics, it comes from rolled off amplitude response. The invention of the word leapfroggings is a little comic relief to set-up his defense of vested interest* - "sustain was somewhat stingy", "cool and slightly recessed"
Subjectivism with no explanation. To substantiate this BS, take a look at the amplitude response graph and square wave photos at the end of the report. They seem to be missing. If a cart has superior transient ability, wouldn't it stop faster as well as start? Wouldn't that make his "reference" magnetic carts the ones with excessive overhang and excessive sustain?
* vested interest - a personal reason for wanting something to be done or happen
http://www.stereophile.com/content/soundsmith-strain-gauge-sg-200-phono-cartridge-system
neoboposaurus
-
It should be mentioned that you cannot listen to the Sound Smith strain gauge cartridge without also hearing the companion phono-preamp. The two are an inseparable system. Perhaps there aspects to the partnering preamp circuitry that maybe truncating reverberation times. Without hearing the analogue master tape there may be no way to know if this is the case or if the strain gauge presentation is more faithful to the source than the other magnetic cartridge designs.
I have heard the Sound Smith strain gauge cartridge in an admittedly unfamiliar system, but I don't recall thinking that it sounded dry or lacking a proper sustain to reverberant information.
Scotty
-
The preamp Cordesman used was a full function preamp with dedicated phono stage. Fremer used the newer phono stage only. They also supply power for the cartridge which works on displacement rather than velocity. No RIAA compensation necessary, which is a gigantic plus. Ledermann developed a system to compensate for a minor discrepancy (1dB?) in RIAA curve. I think this is the EQ to which David was referring. I'm not sure of all the details with this, and Ledermann's circuits are proprietary. This discrepancy would be interesting to investigate.
To answer my question in last post, I don't think Fremer is a moron or a liar. He may not be the brightest Christmas light on the string, but I wouldn't say moron imbecile or cretin. I do think he's a lousy writer or deliberately confuses, maybe both. All reviewers have a vested and invested interest in the industry and personal equipment. In the old days of Stereofool the company whose products were being reviewed often gave the sample to the reviewer (nice incentive?), and bizarre of all bizarre, some reported it openly. We can only imagine what goes on that's not reported. People in the industry become friends with reviewers and the inevitable happens, reviewers are biased. How can they not be?
I wasn't trying to deify Cordesman. He's an intelligent guy, but he's out of his area of expertise. When he wrote for Stereofool it was obvious to me, I just enjoyed reading his stuff and his apparent lack of agenda was refreshing.
Today any dilettante can be a reviewer. Look at Tone Audio. Experience in online marketing is what it takes, it doesn't much matter what you say it's how many hits you get. Money for nothin and the chicks are free. What's that Hawaiian.....
neosky
-
The SG's are naturally (serendipitously?) close to RIAA without additional EQ.
But when you chart the F/R you note that it is not in fact flat...
It is a while since I measured my EPC451C straing gauge - but I dug up this F/R plot....
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=100842)
Below 5kHz it is pretty close (within 1db) - but above that the variance can be 7db - which is quite substantial.
SS's version of a strain gauge may be more linear than the older technics/panasonic design - but I doubt it.
Much as they reverse engineered the B&O cartridges to create their own SS cartridge range (with B&O's blessing) - it seems likely that something similar went on with the strain gauge cartridge. Peter was one of the few people worldwide servicing those cartridges....and he clearly used the experience gained there in designing his own SG.
My gut feeling is that the phono stage corrects for the high frequency hump as well as possibly adjusting the slight low frequency discrepancy to RIAA....
But we ain't gonna find out (how linear it is) unless someone measures it!
bye for now
David
P.S. I like Cordesman's articles, his approach and attitude...., Tone audio articles on the other hand are an example of the blind leading the blind - I expect a journalist to do his/her homework a heck of a lot better than they do!!!
-
Thanks David,
That explains it a little. Have you seen this?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/211081-strain-gauge-jfet-pre-amp.html
http://audioinvestigations.blogspot.com/2012/04/equalizing-strain-gauge.html
Could something like this be useful?
http://www.weighingreview.com/2013/06/mantracourt-launches-new-design-strain.html
neo
note: #3 - I was thinking maybe you could eliminate the preamp altogether and correct in the digital domain which seems to have advantages with EQ. It should be relatively easy to make a battery supply for the cart. You would need a real-time output from the converter and I didn't even read the entire description. Seems like it would solve some problems if it's feasible.
-
there was also a lengthy strain gauge preamp design thread on VE....
However at the time I decided to wait, as Lou Dorren (of quad CD4 design fame) was designing and planning to bring to market a CD4 decoder with onboard SG capability. He was a big proponent of the panasonic SG's.
The idea of a new and modern SG preamp designed by a highly respected (legendary in quad circles) designer was very appealing....
He was however doing it in his spare time, and he is not spring chicken either - he has had several bad spells recently and was off sick for quite a while - prototype was built and tested... but actual production has never eventuated....
Thread is here: http://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/showthread.php?9035-Lou-Dorren-A-new-CD-4-Demodulator!!!&highlight=lou+dorren+demodulator
Prototype was completed in 2007.... I think I joined the waiting list for the demodulator/phono stage in 2009....
I'm just not game to do an entire circuit myself... may try my hand at fixing my original panasonic stage though..
-
I took a closer look at that strain gauge/USB device. It can take multiple inputs and supply power to the SG. They also sell boards and other models.
It could be a great analysis tool. I suspect that different models of SG carts have different EQ requirements and one size might not fit all.
I don't know what they cost or even if usable.
neo
-
On page 30 we were talking about voicing, compromise vs. deliberate, possibly both.
This is the link to the 205C forum discussion:
http://www.hifisentralen.no/forumet/vennetra-der-hifimerker/66200-technics-matsushita-electric-trading-co-ltd.html
Post #8 has some interesting info:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=100863)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=100865)
As tip mass increases, resonant frequency decreases while amplitude of peak increases. That's why a boron/ML tames a 440. A beryllium/ML tames it a little better IMO. Beryllium is lighter and a little more flexible, so it's slightly warmer or less exacting, also with less tip mass.
neo
-
Yep - the same data (some of it in colour!) is in the Technics cartridge brochures....
I was going to attach some files here - but although this site allows images, it seems not to have a means of attaching a PDF...
They are all up on VE in any case...
The 1986 review shows that there is a slight (1.5db) trough starting at around 3kHz and ending at around 20kHz - probably the eddy current losses - starting to be offset right at the top end by the gentle rise to the resonance. (this was for an EPC205cmk4)
(alternative theory for the trough is cantilever flex.... but Ortofon blurbs on the "super" OM seems to indicate that this is where Eddy current would become visible, and switching a stantering D7500 from a HO XSP3003 body to a LO XLZ body shows a marked reduction in the trough - which seems to indicate magnetic effects are the culprit)
-
The 1986 review shows that there is a slight (1.5db) trough starting at around 3kHz and ending at around 20kHz - probably the eddy current losses - starting to be offset right at the top end by the gentle rise to the resonance. (this was for an EPC205cmk4)
(alternative theory for the trough is cantilever flex.... but Ortofon blurbs on the "super" OM seems to indicate that this is where Eddy current would become visible, and switching a stantering D7500 from a HO XSP3003 body to a LO XLZ body shows a marked reduction in the trough - which seems to indicate magnetic effects are the culprit)
This bears repeating. For those unfamiliar with the nomenclature, Stantering D7500 is the Pickering 7500 which is the same as Stanton 980LZS. The XSP3000 (3003?) = 980HZS. D__ indicates a stylus designation often common to equivalent models.
This sheds some light on rising high end. We already knew that tip mass and high freq resonance have a direct relationship. [David, what's that spreadsheet - calculator?] The question I have is why does Atlas/Kleos have HFR @ 20KHz with boron cantilevers?
They have a "healthy" output so high moving mass?
Unique damping system lowers HFR ?
All of the above by design? I think so. You don't have to hear these carts to know something about them, if you can find a test report. There's the rub, Macduff.
My apologies for the negative posts on subjective reviews. I think it needed to be said. Matter of fact it isn't subjective, it's observational reporting according to Fremer. See what I mean? I don't want to get started again, but without objective information we're lost in the woods without a paddle? That makes as much sense as subjective reviewing without test data. Like a blind clown leading a parade.....
neo
-
Honestly, a resonance at 20kHz is pretty good...
Typical aluminium cantilevers tend to be around 16kHz - with some a LOT lower (6kHz, 8kHz, heavily damped...)
The Ortofon OM30 is around 19.5kHz (same cantilever on the OM20 & OM40)
But, I would be looking for something more like 28kHz out of a current top flight exotic cantilever... and it is apparent that J.Carr has intentionally increased the mass to lower the resonance - which would of course raise the high end.
If there is a magnetic loss issue causing a trough, bringing down the resonance will tend to "fill out" the trough, as the loss from the magnetics overlaps the gain from the resonance....
In any case the formula for calculating effective tip mass based on resonance is:
(cut and pasted from excel)
1/([@[Res f (meas) kHz]]*1000*2*3.14159)^2)/(0.000000000116343)
Where [Res f (meas) kHz] is the resonant frequency measured in kHz
And the result of the formula is in mg
I have tested this formula with all the older Ortofon cartridges I could get hold of (those where Ortofon had published ETM...) - and it has been very very consistent - I got the formula from a white paper on ETM from the late 60's, but it had a constant that was missing in the formula - using the Ortofon data, I then derived the constant.
There are a bunch of assumptions in that method, but the fact that it remains consistent with all the Ortofon cartridges tested seems to imply that I must have done something right....
On the other hand the Pickering XLZ7500S which is claimed to be 0.2mg ( the best Stantering ever put out purportedly) - measures out using this method at 0.32mg.
According to the white paper I based things on, the constant is related to the "give" of the vinyl compound in use - if the vinyl compound is different, then the constant would be different.... and the ETM calculated would then also be different!! (like I said there are some assumptions in there...)
There was never a "standard" for testing ETM... so quoted figures may well be apples to oranges when compared between differing manufacturers!
In any case my approach makes Ortofon the reference point - and based on that, the Stantering designs are optimistic on their quoted ETM. (Which actually makes sense, as they never moved to exotic materials and stuck with aluminium - they are in the same ballpark as the very good OM20/30/40)
It does make one wonder what a Stantering might achieve with a ruby cantilever in place?
Interesting to note also that Len Gregory (Musicmaker cartridges) is currently preparing to launch a ruby cantilevered variant of the Grado prestige/signature family....
-
P.S. the Ortofon MC200 which was considered a benchmark at the time, has a tip mass of 0.5mg (spec) - even though it has a boron cantilever ... making it heavier than the then current OM40 - the MM equivalent from the Ortofon range.... (Res F 20.9kHz)
-
Thanks for the formula. Fill in the missing factor - nice.
P.S. the Ortofon MC200 which was considered a benchmark at the time, has a tip mass of 0.5mg (spec) - even though it has a boron cantilever ... making it heavier than the then current OM40 - the MM equivalent from the Ortofon range.... (Res F 20.9kHz)
No, you have it mixed up with another model? Check the phase article/graphs again. HFR is clearly just shy of 30KHz. This is almost an exact quote from the PDF:
Typically, the undamped moving coil cartridge has an amplitude response which begins to rise in the 5 to 6KHz region, climbs to about + 8dB at 20KHz and peaks at about 15 to 18dB at 25 to 28KHz, with up to 180o phase shift centered around the resonant frequency.
But this would also tend to support your theory about amplitude response having more affect on imaging, than phase integrity. I think J. Carr knows exactly what he's doing, and this describes aspects of his "flavor". Kleos and Atlas have nearly identical amplitude response and there seems to be lots of love for these. Response @ 20K is similar to an "unlistenable" and undamped MC200 ? An asymmetrically machined titanium body defeats the resonances that mess up perception of aforementioned 20K response ? What about Kleos? Maybe Ortofon was wrong in '82 about listener perception of undamped MC200, or other factors...? The mostly older folks who can afford these, can't hear above 8K anyway?
neo
-
Just quoting the etm from the mc200 spec sheet.... And translating it into an estimated res f...
I have yet to measure one...
-
Just quoting the etm from the mc200 spec sheet.... And translating it into an estimated res f...
I have yet to measure one...
That's unsettling. I wonder if the tip mass/resonance formula is incomplete. The graphs and description in the article were explicit.
neo
-
Formula worked for.the disappointingly heavy ortofon X5MC at 0.7mg... Will get an mc200 measured soon...
-
This brings to mind Kiddman on Agon:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1392385752&openfrom&1&4#1
"Come on, nearly all of these manufacturers make up the specs. Measuring lots and lots of high end analog, I've found the specs are dreams and wishes. MC's that show flat but have a rise of 8db by 14khz. Turntables that quote .01% wow + flutter but are really .3%.
Before you argue with me, buy some test gear and prove it for yourself. Measurrments mean a lot. But manufacturer quoted measurements, in this industry with no accountability, are meaningless."
"What are you using to verify inductance and resistance repeatedly?
I've measured, using state of the art equipoment (with AC test signal, the only way to do it right) 30% differences in impedance with some brands. Yes, "mass produced" ones, if you can call the bigger premium MC makers "mass produced".
A few manufacturers are quite consistent, and very consistent in sound. And with many manufacturers, I've never heard 2 sound close to identical, tested one right after the other."
neo
-
Come to think of it, the strain gauge is the ONLY type of cartridge where development can in fact continue unimpeded....
Standard magnetics have reached a dead end, and stepped back from their peak in the mid/late 80's. (exceptions: Dynavector Karat, Decca London ?)
At some point I need to fix up my SG phono stage (which I believe to be the cause of a channel imbalance in my Panasonic SG) - I do recall it sounding quite stunning - but I had only just got it going and listened to one or two records when the channel imbalance appeared - I have been hoping since that it is the phono stage - but it has been in storage waiting for me to get a "round tuit" since...
I have a feeling that although the SS SG has had further development since the panasonic effort (which SS was one of the few to service!) - the key to its achievement is in the phono stage that apparently does some proprietary EQ.... no details have been forthcoming in any of the reviews, nor have I seen any proper measurements of its performance ... which would be of great interest!
As a mad keen electrostatic speaker fan since the mid 80's - the Strain Gauge cartridges seem right down my alley.
bye for now
David
(currently in the process of getting toddler friendly 'stats' operational .... ie: a pair of vintage Stax headphones)
How is the tracking on your Panasonic SG, have you ever tried it on a test record?
IMO personally I believe Peter Lederman when he says there is no EQ in his SG's phono box. To me he is not one of the BS'ers and designs his cartridges around some objective criteria like measured channel separation. There was a video on Vimeo of one of his talks at an audio show, but I can't seem to find it. I have two of his moving iron cartridges and along with a Shure V15 it is the only one capable of tracking band 3 on the Hifi News+ test record (I had a Zyx and Lyra that couldn't even track band 1), which IME translates to real world performance with really pain in the butt loud cut records.
-
The SG has been packed away for a few years - I had only just started using it when it developed a channel imbalance - I have a feeling that the problem is in the phono stage but I have not gotten back to it since....
It seemed to track fine, given that I always check the tracking when setting up a cartridge, I am quite sure I tested it - but I don't recall the results.... I am sure it wasn't a poor tracker (otherwise it would have stuck in my mind) - but how good I just don't remember.
I consider a reasonable tracker to be one that manages the third track - and a good tracker manages the fourth track on the HFN test record. Doing only the first track is a poor tracker... fail - managing the second track is a scrape through pass.
Like I said I would love to get some measurements done on the SS SG.... Given that the native behaviour of SG's has a rising top end, I would love to know how he tames that - or whether he just lets it through?
-
Apparently no or virtually no EQ.
"Frequency response DC-70kHz with only 10° of phase shift in the audio band (rumble filter built in @ 12 Hz - passive type before single flat gain stage"
"High Compliance design and freedom from low frequency saturation assures excellent tracking ability and performance with any tone arm"
"Low tracking forces with extreme precision"
"Attempts made in the distant past to absolutely correct Strain Gauge cartridges for any amplitude anomaly have required equalization circuits, which not only add circuitry, but also introduce phase or time shifts. It is the Soundsmith’s belief that human hearing is much more forgiving of amplitude errors than time errors, so we have made minimal efforts to correct for any amplitude deviation from absolute flatness."
Cool, it's back to amplitude vs phase. My question is, do all SG carts have the same natural amplitude error? Lets look at the test report. :sad:
BTW, tracking is reported to be excellent.
neo
http://www.sound-smith.com/cartridges/StrainGaugedetails.html
-
The SG has been packed away for a few years - I had only just started using it when it developed a channel imbalance - I have a feeling that the problem is in the phono stage but I have not gotten back to it since....
It seemed to track fine, given that I always check the tracking when setting up a cartridge, I am quite sure I tested it - but I don't recall the results.... I am sure it wasn't a poor tracker (otherwise it would have stuck in my mind) - but how good I just don't remember.
I consider a reasonable tracker to be one that manages the third track - and a good tracker manages the fourth track on the HFN test record. Doing only the first track is a poor tracker... fail - managing the second track is a scrape through pass.
Like I said I would love to get some measurements done on the SS SG.... Given that the native behaviour of SG's has a rising top end, I would love to know how he tames that - or whether he just lets it through?
I will have to look for that 4th track, I thought there were only 3 (third is the last band on one of the sides). I read one comment saying the Panasonic 450 was a poor tracker (AudioKarma forum) and maybe one other on VinylEngine.
Here is Dave Slagle's plot of the 450
(http://i.imgur.com/ScA4sP2.png)
He builds a custom gain stage for the Panasonic 450 and has two filters to get them closer to RIAA. He prefers the sound with no filters.
Here is a review of the Soundsmith SG: http://www.hifinews.co.uk/news/article/soundsmith-sg-200-pound;5200/7596/
Hifi News usually do measurements and there is a link to some sort of measurements on that third party link. But it asks me for a login/password when I try to download.
-
Yeah you need to email them to gain access - not a big deal though....
The F/R plot is a LOT flatter than the Panasonics. With what looks like a slight resonance at around 14kHz... (marked also by a substantive reduction in seperation at that point... a common marker of cantilever resonance - but what it means for an SG I am not sure)
If that is really achieved without EQ or excess damping - it is very impressive.
-
Our moderator Woodsyi has or had a SS SG.
Some people reading this thread (present company excluded) might not be aware of another one around 2 yrs ago. Peter Ledermann showed up and it was interesting if not revelatory.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=106777.0
neo
-
Present company INCLUDED - I seem to have missed that thread!
PL's responses here and on VE, although infrequent, have always been polite, informative and to the point....
Both he and J.Carr deserve a lot of respect for the way they respond on forums.... and their products.
-
In the TAS review, the reviewer says
"the preamp which is integral to the process, delivers a current that flows through the silicon crystals"
Peter says nothing in the follow up to correct him.
-
Still looking for old test reports.
David, this might interest you. D V Karat Diamond collection:
http://www.cieri.net/Documenti/Cataloghi/Altri%20marchi/Dynavector%20-%20Moving%20Coil%20Cartridge%20Test%20Reports%20and%20Reviews.pdf
-
In the TAS review, the reviewer says
"the preamp which is integral to the process, delivers a current that flows through the silicon crystals"
Peter says nothing in the follow up to correct him.
Well... , a strain gauge is a powered cartridge... it does need current to operate....
-
Here's a PDF with 2 cart amplitude response. VDH Grasshopper, CA Concerto
Also some measurements on a few others:
http://www.highend.cz/old/productpages/clearaudio/testy/2006-09ConcertoGrasshopperHiFiNews.pdf
neo
-
Clearaudio has a resonant peak at 10kHz !!
And this is a top flight high end MC...... :o
Also the distortion peak at 5kHz is clearly indicating something else is going on as well....
The restrained amplitude of the 10kHz peak seems to indicate substantial damping - not usually a sonically positive indication - although essential for any cartridge with a resonance that low in frequency.
If that chart is to be trusted - and the resonance is not due to something else - then it indicates a very high (relatively) effective mass - and given the relative fineness of the cantilever, I would have to suspect some fairly porky coils.... so much for the supposed ultra low mass of MC's.
The Vdh is better - the resonance is now somewhere around 17kHz - putting it on a par with designs like the AT440MLa - again the amplitude seems to indicate substantial damping - but it has the substantial benefit of leaving most of the frequency range below 12kHz intact....
Again there is quite a nasty distortion peak before the resonance - I am wondering whether this distortion peak is a side effect of heavy damping needed to control the resonance?
Would be interesting to see the plots for the other carts in that group test...
I own a close relative to the Vdh reviewed here - an earlier generation Empire MC1 - with boron cantilever - the resonance is around 25kHz amplitude max is +4.5db - making it a LOT flatter through the audio range - it never worked well in the ultra low mass Revox - but it sounds very good on the mid to mid-heavy JVC...
The Grasshopper seems to be fitted with an Aluminium cantilever - so the resonance does make sense...
I vaguelly remember paying circa AU$1000 in the late 80's for my Boron cantilever eliptical tip high output MC1. Empire, Benz and Vdh were at the time sharing bodies and core engines.... it is unclear how different the various related Empire/Benz/VdH versions were other than needle shapes - the VdH got the VdH needle on which they built their rep, where the Empire had the eliptical (and was a lot cheaper).
At UKP2000 the grasshopper does not seem to me to be great value compared to Ortofon OM40, AT150MLx, Nag. M500, etc....
EDIT:
Just had another look at my measurements of the Empire/Benz/Vdh MC1 - from 1kHz to 20kHz it is -0.5db and +1db - which is rather excellent by any measure...
And yet this cartridge mounted in the Revox put me off vinyl for years - matching mass to compliance is massively underestimated as a factor in performance!
-
Hi David,
I was beginning to wonder if anyone looked at those old lab tests. This one's from '06 - fairly recent. The Clearaudio was 1700 pounds. At todays exchange rate that's almost $2900. They said it is voiced for rock and the criticism was, it's not airy enough. I guess not. :roll:
Concerto seems like a funny name for a rock cart, but that's marketing.
The lab test said the tip was misaligned which resulted in cantilever VTA being off 10° and the separation was screwed up. Response was off 6 or 7dB by 20KHz and falling like a rock, so in that respect I guess it is a rock cart. Maybe the misaligned tip would explain some of the amplitude response and azimuth error could cause separation problems and the nonsense at 5K ? But I would think high frequency resonance would be unaffected.
If I plunked down nearly 3 large on one of those, I think I might be disappointed.
I don't know what to make of the Grasshopper III. That was available with different compliances and apparently they got a low cu one and tracked it at 1.5g. I'm not sure that 2dB shelf at 12K is resonance. The graph ends at 20K but response is off 8dB at 50K ??
My buddy had the original Grasshopper on his Goldmund Reference. That had more of a medium mass arm and I think the cart tracked at 1.8g or close to that. Its sound was pretty damn good, but the table might have had something to do with that. :wink:
neo
-
My Empire/Benz MC1 also tracks at around 1.8g for good results... seems about the right VTF for most of the VDH & Benz carts...
Luckydogs recent polar analysis of pitch/speed on AK seems to indicate that most halfway decent TT's are fine - the real difference ends up being arm stability / damping !
So as long as there is a decent bearing with low noise/rumble - the focus seems to then need to shift to the arm, and LF damping is the critical bit - once that is right, then you can start looking at subtleties....
So table quality may not be the essential ingredient!
-
My Empire/Benz MC1 also tracks at around 1.8g for good results... seems about the right VTF for most of the VDH & Benz carts...
Luckydogs recent polar analysis of pitch/speed on AK seems to indicate that most halfway decent TT's are fine - the real difference ends up being arm stability / damping !
So as long as there is a decent bearing with low noise/rumble - the focus seems to then need to shift to the arm, and LF damping is the critical bit - once that is right, then you can start looking at subtleties....
So table quality may not be the essential ingredient!
As John Wayne once said, "Contrare mon seur".
It's all relative. Yes, half decent tables are fine, but decent tables are better, and great tables are better yet. :thumb:
Luckydog identified parameters to maximize performance and I'm not denying this valuable contribution. On the other hand, I don't think you would deny ultimate performance gains by having better speed stability, more massive platter, better bearings, superior arm isolation and energy dissipation, etc. etc.
Put a great arm/cart on a half decent table and it should sound good. Put that same arm/cart on a great table and it should sound amazing.
neo
-
I certainly accept that there are gains to be made, it is just a question of diminishing returns....
The old Pareto ratio always applies.... It takes 20% of the effort to get 80% of the way to the perfect 100% completion.... and then the same 80/20 rule applies to the remaining and so it goes....
Same with costs in audio equipment... and performance!
Identifying the key factors the way LD tends to do is hugely valuable in focusing in on the 80% improvements that can be achieved for 20% of the effort....
There are many examples of the 80/20 effect especially in vinyl!
Platform/Isolation is always a quick easy simple one (unless you happen to have a high end TT with it all already engineered into it!)
Cartridge / arm matching - another simple and easy win
Fluid damping ( or it's equivalents)
Obviously speed stability is of great value - but there are examples of economical classic tables with excellent speed stability without getting stratospheric in price, and the link between pitch/speed stability and arm damping - along with the observation that W&F with a record/arm/cartridge is a very different beast to W&F "at the platter" ....
You can have a mega-heavy platter, perfectly balanced, but if the cart/arm aren't matched properly and the arm (or entire setup to be more correct) lacks damping - you will never get a piano to sound right on it!
Gusten's contributions are valuable too - he has achieved a top performing TT, based on starting with a basic SL1200mk2 - the beast looks horrendously ugly - a true frankenstein's monster! - but it performs, as he has focused on the key aspects, and due to the DIY nature of his efforts the cost is relatively negligible. (the time he has spent on it however is not negligible at all!!)
Some of the Boston Audio society articles from the 70's all point in similar directions - including the famous edition with the "paperclip" fluid damper....
I have been somewhat torn between two vues of optimisation for compliance matching of arm and cartridge...
Peter Pritchard, stated in the 70's (when his designs were coming out with compliances of 40 to 50 cu...) that his target resonance was 6Hz....
Obviously this would work best in a properly damped system (as the resonance bell curve would definitely overlap the warp zone, and no records are perfectly flat), and also required a well isolated turntable (footfall and other environmental LF vibrations would also overlap with the resonance bell...).
The more traditional 10Hz target puts one equally distant (1 octave) from the danger zone at the low end (5Hz) and the start of the Audio spectrum (20Hz) - with judicious application of damping and isolation I would have thought that this would still be optimum.
But then there is Peter Pritchards - 6Hz resonance frequency target!? - Was that a compromise, accepting that most arms were too heavy to do better? - Or was there something else going on!?
The ADC SuperXLM (40cu) sounds great on the (damped) JVC, with resonance down at around 5Hz.... even fitted to the super low mass Revox only lifts the resonance to all of 7.5Hz (have not listened to it on the Revox)
A compliance that high forces the setup to work with a low low resonance frequency - so all the other aspects of the system have to be optimised so as to minimise the LF negatives....
But then there are the clarity and dynamic gains of a low mass and low damping cantilever setup.....
Are the mid compliance majority just plain wrong? (the MC1 does sound good, but I seem to prefer the higher compliance lower damping designs...)
-
I certainly accept that there are gains to be made, it is just a question of diminishing returns....
The old Pareto ratio always applies.... It takes 20% of the effort to get 80% of the way to the perfect 100% completion.... and then the same 80/20 rule applies to the remaining and so it goes....
Same with costs in audio equipment... and performance!
Identifying the key factors the way LD tends to do is hugely valuable in focusing in on the 80% improvements that can be achieved for 20% of the effort....
Whoooa there buckaroo. You're applying the Pareto principle to diminishing returns and proving what, economics is a joke? Statistical analysis says that 80% of audiofools think they have a great table and 20% think they will have a great table someday. Maybe I got that wrong and should reverse the numbers?
For those not familiar with this esoterica, Pareto found that 20% of his bean or pea plants produced 80% of the crop. That's about it. Now this principle is applied to just about everything, only the ratio changes according to facts. Perhaps in Italy 20% of the people control 80% of the money, but in the US 2% of the people control 98% of the money. Those figures might be off a little. I have no idea about Italy, it's just where Pareto lived. In the US those figures are close. A tiny portion of the population controls almost all the money.
Diminishing returns - If I apply a small amount of fertilizer I get much better crops, but if I apply even more fertilizer my return is only slightly greater.
Diminishing returns + Pareto - If I apply 20% of my bag of fertilizer I get 80% more crops, but if I apply 80% of the bag I get nothing because I've burned the crap out of them.
Lets try that again - If I apply 20% of the bag I get 80% more, and if I use 22% I get 84% more, but if I apply 30% then I get nothing. I thought percentages are supposed to add up to 100. If it goes over 100 it's a multiple. What's 30% times zero?
I have to go right now. In the words of Arnold, "Ill be back".
neo
-
Methinks this thread has meandered far enough to allow a digression via Pareto....
But I infer from your last post a certain distaste for rules of thumb?
The Pareto principle is very useful in all sorts of places and ways.... Not so much as a "hard" statistical measure but as an often close to the "hard truth" rule of thumb.... The 80/20....
80% of professionals are just in it for the money, 20% care about their work and clients.... Always try to hire the 20 and avoid the 80.... My own most useful variation of the Pareto rule of thumb!
-
I thought I might have gotten back to this thread before you could respond, but alas, it was not to be. In an ultimate sense I think it's kind of silly sticking to a fixed ratio for a "universal" principle like this, but the concept seems valid for all kinds of applications. On the other hand you might want to look at Murphy's law or the Peter principle. I hadn't thought of that before, but it might have greater humor potential.
Murphy's law - Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
Peter principle - In a business or organization people will be promoted to their level of incompetence.
If you hire or attempt to hire exclusively from the 20% of workers that care about work/clients, then your work force will no longer adhere to the 80/20 ratio of those that don't care vs. those that do. This situation will be rectified by Peter Murphy. As your work force is promoted to their level of incompetence (a great sales person might be a lousy sales supervisor) they will eventually stop caring so much and might even look for another less challenging position, or one they're qualified for. Thus Murphy's law and the Peter principle have restored the natural order of things to the work force and proven that Pareto was right all along.
neobop tillyoudrop
-
Regarding the rest of it:
Platform/Isolation is always a quick easy simple one (unless you happen to have a high end TT with it all already engineered into it!)
Cartridge / arm matching - another simple and easy win
Fluid damping ( or it's equivalents) +1
Obviously speed stability is of great value - but there are examples of economical classic tables with excellent speed stability without getting stratospheric in price, and the link between pitch/speed stability and arm damping - along with the observation that W&F with a record/arm/cartridge is a very different beast to W&F "at the platter" .... agreed
You can have a mega-heavy platter, perfectly balanced, but if the cart/arm aren't matched properly and the arm (or entire setup to be more correct) lacks damping - you will never get a piano to sound right on it! True, but if you have the same situation with a tinfoil platter nothing will sound right.
Gusten's contributions are valuable too - he has achieved a top performing TT, based on starting with a basic SL1200mk2 - the beast looks horrendously ugly - a true frankenstein's monster! - but it performs, as he has focused on the key aspects, and due to the DIY nature of his efforts the cost is relatively negligible. (the time he has spent on it however is not negligible at all!!) Of course I haven't heard Gusten's table, but no doubt the 1200 has great potential, but it depends on what you consider "top". It will never be an SP10Mk3 or an L-07D will it?
Some of the Boston Audio society articles from the 70's all point in similar directions - including the famous edition with the "paperclip" fluid damper....
you can buy a ready made trough at KAB and adapt it for most any pivoting arm set-up. John TCG made one out of tinfoil and used a paperclip. Most people have a tendency to overdamp with these so one should listen for dull lifeless sound then back off.
I have been somewhat torn between two vues of optimisation for compliance matching of arm and cartridge...
Peter Pritchard, stated in the 70's (when his designs were coming out with compliances of 40 to 50 cu...) that his target resonance was 6Hz....
Obviously this would work best in a properly damped system (as the resonance bell curve would definitely overlap the warp zone, and no records are perfectly flat), and also required a well isolated turntable (footfall and other environmental LF vibrations would also overlap with the resonance bell...).
The more traditional 10Hz target puts one equally distant (1 octave) from the danger zone at the low end (5Hz) and the start of the Audio spectrum (20Hz) - with judicious application of damping and isolation I would have thought that this would still be optimum.
But then there is Peter Pritchards - 6Hz resonance frequency target!? - Was that a compromise, accepting that most arms were too heavy to do better? - Or was there something else going on!?
The ADC SuperXLM (40cu) sounds great on the (damped) JVC, with resonance down at around 5Hz.... even fitted to the super low mass Revox only lifts the resonance to all of 7.5Hz (have not listened to it on the Revox)
A compliance that high forces the setup to work with a low low resonance frequency - so all the other aspects of the system have to be optimised so as to minimise the LF negatives....
But then there are the clarity and dynamic gains of a low mass and low damping cantilever setup.....
Are the mid compliance majority just plain wrong? (the MC1 does sound good, but I seem to prefer the higher compliance lower damping designs...)
I have to get some breakfast. The rest is an interesting discussion and deserves more than a rushed response. Be back shortly.
neo
-
:D
and at 10pm here, I am about to hit the sac....
-
Peter Pritchard and 6Hz target resonance - taking high compliance to its logical conclusion. I suspect that was a performance principle. It could be seen as a reaction to the popular trend going in the other direction, but I don't think so. A 50cu cart weighing 5.5g will only hit the traditional target resonance (8 - 12Hz) on one arm that I know of, a Black Widow with 2g eff mass. Some Widows were heavier and probably don't qualify. Pritchards own arm, the Sonus Formula 4 has eff mass of 4.1g and with a Sonus Blue should resonate at < 7Hz. Obviously this was by design.
If we look at the consequences of missing the 8 - 12Hz target, the only proven negative one on the low side is warp tracking considerations or possible mechanical/acoustic feedback. Going in the other direction could have dire consequences with intermodulation distortion. Where you get into SQ trouble is with a low cu cart on a light arm. So I think it's safe to say that if res is on the low side and there is no problem with tracking or isolation, it should work okay, but is it optimal?
I think that depends on the particular arm/cart combo. We know of people using med/high cu carts on relatively heavy arms with reportedly good results. My results with mostly ATs (18cu) seem to sound a little sluggish on a heavy arm, but it also seems to vary with different arms. With such a combo fluid damping might make SQ worse. Although you'd lower res peak you'd also impede the arm bearings which could have greater consequences.
Lets talk about modern carts next time. I guess that would be later for me or tomorrow for you.
neo
-
The highest compliance cart I own is 20cu, the 980LZ and I've never even tried it on high mass arm. I guess I could attach the brush and try it with and without, but I went through that years ago when I used to set-up tables and I don't bother. My Unitrac has eff mass of 7g and my modified Sonus is about 5.3g. All the MM/MI sound better on one of those, without exception. Maybe if I had a high mass arm with exceptionally low bearing friction results would be different, but why burden the cart with having to drag around excessive mass when I have something more appropriate?
BTW, I bought those arms specifically for this application. Some years ago a guy on fleabey bought a stash of Pritchard's arms. They might have been defective returns, because I've been fixing it ever since I got it, but it's fun, something to do. I rewired it, made a new arm lifter platform (PIA) and now the ground came loose near the DIN connector. I think Ill solder a copper ring inside above the connector and solder the ground wire to that. Soldering to aluminum is another PIA..... I bought the Unitrac on Mosin's (of Saskia fame) recommendation. He gave me a set of rubber retainer rings for the azimuth weights and set-up parameters. He's a really nice guy. Most of the designers I've met are guys you'd want as friends.
It's a contradiction, but any cart needs both infinitely high arm mass and zero arm bearing friction at the same time. The cart mounting platform should ideally be an immovable object to stabilize cantilever movement relative to the body, and lateral movement toward the spindle should be unimpeded. It seems to be that a MC will impart more vibrations into the arm, or the nature of coil movement makes it more susceptible to reflections back into the cart, or both. A MCs forte is detail, stage and nuance and greater mass requirements facilitate exactitude.
A higher cu MM/MI are generally better trackers with a more straightforward presentation. They're less susceptible to reflected vibrations and results seem better using less expensive, yet appropriate equipment. I think the potential of HO carts is every bit as good as MCs. Because of industry trends in the late '70s, HO became passé. The consumer perception (fueled by the press) was that MC's are better. Their requirement for more expensive equipment suited both the manufacturers and moneyed enthusiasts. Preamp makers had little choice but to follow suit. MM inputs became "standardized" at 47K with usually no capacitance loading options. As we know HO carts have greater loading requirements, not less. Consequently perception was HO is entry level and a little more, but.....
That trend in the late '70s, early '80s spelled the end of 50cu carts. Jillions of MCs came in from Japan and Sonus was all but forgotten. The direct drive table suffered a similar fate. When the Japanese stopped making DD motors, that was it. Then the manufacturers and their partners in crime, the press, had to convince the consumer that belts were better, and they were better for the manufacturers. That was all they could make.
neo
-
I think modern carts are mostly all mid cu for sales considerations. Really, most didn't expect the vinyl revival, look at Shure. They sent some winding machines to Mexico and dumped the rest of their technology. They were once top of the MM heap. I suspect they do well making microphones and headphones, don't you think they would come out with a V15-VI if they thought it was viable?
Where's the money in the current market, MMs or MCs ? If they reemerged they'd have to compete with AT, Ortofon, Nagaoka, Goldring in a shrunken market. I think the prospect of a decent return on investment for reemerging is just too shaky and they don't know if the revival will last or how it might diminish.
Some of the most cited reasons for people jumping on the CD bandwagon, was the PIA nature of setting up a table, matching carts to arms and preamps. Then you need a special shelf or whatever to play a scratched record. Did you damage your record with a worn needle? What happened to the cantilever, it was there yesterday? People thought they would be able to buy a CD player for a few hundred or a thousand which would sound better, if not now then someday they would have perfect sound forever. Sony and Phillips lied. What are you gonna do, sue them for causing ear bleeds or offending your sensibilities?
Entry level tables are now about as plug-n-play as possible. Most are probably sold on the net and thanks to guys like Fremer and his set-up video and U tube tutorials, new enthusiasts can learn to DIY. They come to us with questions. Most new arms are in the 10 to 14g range and top Jelcos come with fluid damping. Everybody who cares has their fingers crossed hoping for continued revival growth.
A cart mfg. just wants to sell carts that's why they're all med cu. They will work in most applications. The vast majority are between 15 and 22cu and arms are part way between an immovable object and implementation with no friction or moment of inertia.
neo
-
Accuphase AC-2 tubular sapphire cantilever:
http://www.accuphase.com/cat/ac-2en.pdf
neo
-
Interesting - some of the Technics literature does point out that Boron tubes (as implemented by Technics) are superior to the same format & proportions in competing materials including sapphire/Ruby...
The comparison on this chart between Boron and Sapphire seems to me to be weighted in favour of Boron...
Only rigidity is in Sapphire's favour....
Less flex, but higher mass...
If the mass is low enough, then the reduced flex would be an advantage....
-
David,
Someone asked me about a replacement stylus for a V15 IV. I assume a Jico SAS is the way to go?
I seem to remember your indicating as much, but I also seem to remember your saying it not quite as good with some models.
neo
-
In my opinion the best alternative is SAS.
But there is someone currently selling Shure Tracer VST styli on ebay, that was the Revox sold version of the V15IV. They are NOS and reasonably priced.
Caveat emptor though, V15IV styli have a poor reputation for surviving the years - perhaps the construction of the central beryllium rod stiffener gives way.... in any case these are NOS.
(I have ordered one)
-
In my opinion the best alternative is SAS.
But there is someone currently selling Shure Tracer VST styli on ebay, that was the Revox sold version of the V15IV. They are NOS and reasonably priced.
Caveat emptor though, V15IV styli have a poor reputation for surviving the years - perhaps the construction of the central beryllium rod stiffener gives way.... in any case these are NOS.
(I have ordered one)
Thanks for your input
P-man
-
Check out this photo of a EPC-305MC boron tube cantilever. It's the last photo in the row:
http://www.audiounion.jp/ct/detail/used/57667/
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=101844)
Be back when I get a chance,
neo
-
That photo of the Technics boron tube cantilever is germane to the discussion on Agon MM/MI thread about exotic tube cantilevers.
Here's some information about the Denon DL-1000A and its cantilever: (activate translator function)
http://www.denon.jp/jp/museum/products/dl1000a.html
According to J. Carr this is probably the lightest moving assembly ever made - 0.077mg. The criticism is the diamond mounting technique is not rigid enough. The bottom wall of the cantilever is removed for tip mounting. Also, output is 0.1mV, so it was difficult to amplify.
It seems obvious from the above photo that Technics kept the cantilever intact, or possibly only drilled through the bottom to mount the tip. The Monster boron tube cantilevers looks different from both of these. It flattens out at the end and angles to be more parallel to the record surface like many aluminum cantilevers and the flat mounting surface appears to be the thickness of 2 tube walls. Of course I never measured it, but this was obviously by design
This whole discussion of tube cantilevers makes me wonder about priorities. I never heard a DL-1000A, but I wonder if detail is compromised by the tip mounting. J. Carr said that if anyone knew of boron tube availability to please let him know. This technology was available 30 yrs. ago, but can't be reproduced today?
neosaurus Rex
-
On page 30 we were talking about voicing, compromise vs. deliberate, possibly both.
This is the link to the 205C forum discussion:
http://www.hifisentralen.no/forumet/vennetra-der-hifimerker/66200-technics-matsushita-electric-trading-co-ltd.html
Post #8 has some interesting info:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=100863)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=100865)
As tip mass increases, resonant frequency decreases while amplitude of peak increases. That's why a boron/ML tames a 440. A beryllium/ML tames it a little better IMO. Beryllium is lighter and a little more flexible, so it's slightly warmer or less exacting, also with less tip mass.
neo
I noticed a photo was missing from this post:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=101896)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=101897)
neo
-
Here's a Stereoplay MC survey with 5 MC amplitude plots at the end. They all have that characteristic rising high end.
http://www.fastaudio.com/workspace/uploads/downloads/stp_08_10_sd_tonabnehmer.pdf
neo
-
Yep, and none of those are lower end catridges....
I consider it the mark of success of subjectivity over objectivity...
Fashion also plays a part!
EQ became a dirty word in the days when the circuits were often cheap and nasty (unless one got an upper end unit) - never mind the fact that 95% of recordings use it in mastering....
So most audiophiles today do not even have a treble knob to adjust with!
(I still miss the Quad preamp "Tilt" control... brilliant!)
My (oft stated) opinion is that many people either like the rising top end, or have come to associate it with "audiophile" sound and therefore a good thing..... perhaps a bit like food with too much salt and sugar.... after a while you cannot do without it?
-
Guys I have tried to follow the entire thread but got lost in more than one occasions... I would love to try transplanting an exotic cantilever on my virtuoso (v1 wood), but as you can imaging I am a bit worried I might screw everything up :)
I am now using a trimmed at95e stylus
Getting the SS ruby upgrade sounds awesome, but I really do not want to wait 2-3 months for something like that...
Anyway, for now I am contemplating the shibata (ATN95SA ) or the vivid line (AT95VL ) upgrades from lpgear. I will probably go for the VL. And once I have a working cartridge I will continue experimenting with other more exotic stuff on my current AT95 plug.
Any other suggestions?
I am using a slightly modified SL1200MK2 and I plan on getting a Jelco 750D for it
Thanks a lot for an awesome thread
-
We have indeed meandered a long way from the original topic...
The VL and the Shibata have the exact same specs for major and minor radius - either the VL is in fact a Shibata (with LPGears' proprietary name attached) or it may be a very similar cut shape, much like the Audio Technica LC/LP needles which used a modified shibata ...
In any case, I would expect the two to be very very comparable.
The one strange thing about Shibata's is that their contact patch is slightly curved, and not a straight vertical line (later LC designs are all a linear vertical patch).
I believe that the curved patch somewhat softens the imaging, and may also make it easier to align... but I have no confirmation for that theory.
Definitely grab one of those... easy upgrade!
For the harder upgrade you will need to find an Audio Technica needle with one of the exotic cantilevers (boron / Beryllium / Sapphire/Ruby ).
The down side of the exotic cantilevers are that all the AT exotics I can think of off hand are high compliance (or high-ish) - and your arm is best suited to mid-compliance.
The Jelco 750 is also best suited to mid compliance BUT - because of the fluid damping, it will probably cope with it fine. (have you considered fitting the KAB fluid damper rather than replacing the whole arm? - you may well achieve 90%+ of the benefit of the upgrade with that alone).
If you decide to go ahead with the cantilever transfer - there are a few of us here that have done a transfer.... so we can help with some instructions and warnings...
hope that helps
bye for now
David
-
Hi Dimkasta and welcome to the monkey house,
Seems like you understand your options. Performing a transplant is a hairy operation. It takes persistence and more than a bit of patience. Exotic cantilevers break easily and it can be expensive, as I can attest. A new ATN150MLX costs nearly $200 (Amazon) and because that stylus sounds so good on a 120/440 or I assume a 100E (same generator specs as a 150) I'm not going to attempt another exotic transplant.
The vivid line seems like a best buy for replacement styli. I think the shibata sounds a tad soft/sweet on the high end, which can be a nice thing depending on preference. With the 1200 arm I think you could use a 3472 series stylus and track at 1.5g or so. These are P-mount styli, the ones with the tall sides. You can cut off the wings and it will fit just like the ATN95E. Compliance seems about the same as a regular 100 series, but you can try a .3 x .7 for around $20 by buying an AT92E(CD) for the stylus.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/664497-REG/Audio_Technica_AT92ECD_AT92ECD_Turntable_Cartridge_for.html
At some place like LPGear you can buy the same series of replacement styli, some original AT, but they're all bonded tips just like the all the 3472 series.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATN3472VL.html
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATN3472ML.html
I wouldn't recommend any of these P-mount replacements for use on a 750D. Are you planning on using a DL103 ? The 750D is a 20g arm and is more suitable for lower cu carts. I guess it would be good with a stock 95/CA stylus of 15cu, but I think a couple of mods and your 1200 arm will outperform a 750D, depending on cart preference. KAB sells a fluid damper kit for adjustable damping. The big difference is you'd be damping a 12g arm instead of a 20g arm. If you replace the 1200 arm I'd be interested in buying it from you.
neo
-
Thanks a lot for the quick response guys :)
About the arm, I also have a Shelter 501MK2 in its box waiting for me to fix my phonoclone... I understand it is a quite different animal though...
The oil damper is something I was considering, I was just postponing it in case I replaced the arm altogether. Adding the 750D as a second arm is a thought too...
About the ATN150MLX in a 100E or a 440MLa do you reckon it performs better than the virtuoso ?
Thanks again
-
Dimka,
If you mean is it better than a stock Virtuoso, or one with a 95E stylus, yes it would be better IMO. It will have more detail/resolution and harmonic information, but also more fussy about set-up and loading. I used to load down my 440 to 32K, and with a boron/ML went back to 47K. The 100E (150) has a lower inductance generator which might be slightly more transparent or extended, and also a little touchier.
The Virtuoso has the same or similar generator as the 95. It's very neutral sounding and the wood top seems to go a long way toward vibration control, buts needs a better stylus to compete on that level. If you had a "better" aftermarket stylus like a VL, I think it would be a matter of opinion. The 440/150 would still be more detailed, but the CA might have more of a natural presentation.
With all of these it's important to have < 200pF shunt capacitance, 150pF seems ideal. That's arm wire + cables + preamp.
neo
-
Yeah I need to measure my cabling.
My interconnects are low capacitance. Something like 15pF per foot. But I have no specs for the cardas litz or the plugs/sockets.
I always assumed I am somewhere around 100pF
-
RE: MC rising high end
Yep, and none of those are lower end catridges....
I consider it the mark of success of subjectivity over objectivity...
Fashion also plays a part!
EQ became a dirty word in the days when the circuits were often cheap and nasty (unless one got an upper end unit) - never mind the fact that 95% of recordings use it in mastering....
So most audiophiles today do not even have a treble knob to adjust with!
(I still miss the Quad preamp "Tilt" control... brilliant!)
My (oft stated) opinion is that many people either like the rising top end, or have come to associate it with "audiophile" sound and therefore a good thing..... perhaps a bit like food with too much salt and sugar.... after a while you cannot do without it?
If you subscribe to the notion that analog EQ (tone controls) compromise preamp performance, then it seems to me that a phono cart should be accurate.
How is it that an undamped Ortofon MC200: +7dB @ 20K, was considered so bright it was unlistenable, yet Atlas: +6dB @ 20K is the best thing since sliced bread? Perception has changed with an aging audiofool population?
I think J. Carr's design is deliberate and yes, the rising high end emphasizes the overtones which tend to diminish with frequency on a phonograph record. This augmentation combined with 20K high frequency resonance will net a double whammy of forward phase and amplitude response. Carr designed the 3D phono cart. I never heard Atlas, but I can see what it's doing by the response. Phase performance will be more like a MM, extending down to the upper midrange. The phase nonlinearity is +, the image goes forward.
One thing Atlas doesn't do is extend the rising response to +18dB @ 27K. It ends at 20K and that's the difference between way too bright and 3D.
There seems to be two basic schools of MC design, "accurate" and "other". Maybe "forgiving" should be another alternative and you could make a notation on the inner sleeve as to which cart type a particular record should be played.
neoboposaurus
-
Perhaps that was why Raul liked loading his MMs so high? So that they have that nice bump on the highs ? :)
-
Yes indeed!
-
Perhaps that was why Raul liked loading his MMs so high? So that they have that nice bump on the highs ? :)
You might have nailed it. Look at Sonus Blue loaded at 100K:
http://www-f9.ijs.si/~margan/Audio/Sonus_Blue_Label_Audio_Apr_1977.pdf
All measurements were done at 100K, 100pF for 4-ch reproduction. The amplitude rise extends to 28K. Maybe that's why it wasn't one of the preferred carts. With a resonant frequency like the Ortofon MC200, loaded at 100K it would sound like an undamped MC200. Capacitance was added to taste, but cart inductance is probably too low (100mH) to lower the resonant frequency sufficiently. Most MMs have more inductance so the resonant frequency is easier to manipulate.
Which brings us to another issue. There isn't much you can do with the response of a MC. Frequency response is pretty much unaffected by loading. MC loading affects soundstage vs focus and amplitude response stays the same. A MM is tune-able to some extent, you just have to figure out how.
neo
-
With all of these it's important to have < 200pF shunt capacitance, 150pF seems ideal. That's arm wire + cables + preamp.
neo
I measured the capacitance from the tags and got ~107pF at 1KHz
You think it is worth trying to add 40pF ? I think I have some nice ceramics
-
By the way, I got that same "trembly" sensation from the VdH Colibri too...
At some points at a friend's place I kept feeling that there was a huge riding cymbal in the middle of the room and someone was banging it hard with a huge drum stick...
Smooth and crystal clear, but still huge :)
-
I had some time to kill so I thought I might play a bit with the AT95...
I guess one of its problems is resonances, so first thought was to damp it with some veneer :)
It kind of can be done, but it requires a lot of work to look pretty... more than I m willing to spare at that point anyway...
So instead I decided to get it out of its metal housing which is probably the source of the resonances, and get her some new nice copper clothing...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=102259)
Unfortunately I do not want to have to resetup the Virtuozo from scratch, so I cannot test it, but I cannot think of why it should not work :)
BTW I installed the 39pF caps in my phono... very nice improvement :)
-
By the way, as neo said, the microline 3472 sounds really interesting for the Virtuoso...
And I loooooove the lower VTF...
Although 100 bucks steeper than the vivid line...
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATN3472ML.html
You guys think it is worth it?
-
Hey Dimkasta,
You fit right in around here. Where have you been hiding?
I've been looking at the 3472ML for years now. It's tempting cause it's trim, plug-n-play, but it's not a very good value considering the price of an ATN440MLa is $25 less. The 440 is tapered and has a nude sq shank. The P-mount is bonded on a straight cantilever.
A poster here, Don Griff tried most of these and says the VL is the best value, but a transplanted 440 is the best to his ears. I think I would prefer a transplanted 150 which should be the same as a Maestro, but with a wood top only instead of a full wood jacket. Seems like it's hard to go wrong with the CA and replacement styli.
I have a couple of low mass arms and I had a 92E (same motor as a 95) sitting around cause it was $20 and I have an old Technics P-mount table I thought I might fix. Anyhoo, the CA/92E sounds nice on a low mass arm. It tracks at 1.5g and has that .3 x .7 combo of resolution with forgiveness.
I read a post on Karma by Luckydog. He said something to the affect of considering how much it costs to play per record. That's pretty much what this thread was originally about. How does one get good performance without spending a million dollars. An ATN7V sounds good on a med/high mass arm. It's a nude .2 x .7 on a tapered cantilever. BTW, those P-mount styli have similar compliance to the 100 series styli, about 10cu @ 100Hz.
neo
-
Yeah i remember the thread. He was claiming something at around 100usd per week just for his MC usage.
Anyway, I would love to try the transplants, but prices get a little steep for the risks...
-
Goldmine!!
Click on the link below each group:
http://www.classic-audio.info/tonabnehmer/tonabnehmertestaussagen.php
neo
-
Goldmine indeed..... wish my German was better though!
-
I've only had a chance to glance at these graphs and the square waves looks mighty interesting. I must say though, the frequency response looks a little too good to be true.
Maybe the small scale makes them look that way. I'll have to look further. Seems like it's enough to keep busy for awhile.
neo
-
I bought a Panasonic 451 with the matching phono box. I noticed it was distorting on loud peaks on some reissues cut quite hot, for example Kenny Burrell/John Coltrane Analogue Productions 45 rpm reissue. I've had other moving coils struggle with some of these reissues. Putting it on the HFN test record it passed the first tracking test on side 2, but caused some minor buzzing on the second and failed the third. I haven't tried it on the side 1 bias tests yet. My current Soundsmith passes all the tracking tests on side 2.
Perhaps all it needs is a replacement stylus? Though the owner I bought it from at our local hifi group said he was the first owner and didn't use it much. I could understand that as it doesn't sound phenomenal.
-
If it's been sitting for years you might have to break-in the suspension. Sometimes a little extra VTF helps.
If you need a new needle I think Turntable Needles might have them.
neo
-
It is a strain gauge cartridge.... not a standard cantilever/suspension setup - I would suspect the phono stage....
Those are very nice sounding cartridges - but the original phono stages are so-so, and the caps probably need replacing...
-
A strain gauge tracks a record groove like a regular cart doesn't it? Would the preamp cause poor tracking performance?
It buzzes at high velocity (only?). How doe it do on more normal records?
This device could be 35 years old and seldom used. I wonder why. If the caps aren't leaking I'd first look at mechanical performance. If you can't track the record the thing is useless. If it's still set up you might want to leave the preamp powered up 24/7. Old power supply electrolytic caps take awhile to reform. Maybe the preamp needs some TLC too, but .....
Is there something I'm missing here?
neo
-
The old panasonic SG's do have a rep for taking a little while to loosen up after being out of use for years.... so it may be the cartridge too...
But it is definitely worth persevering...
For years SoundSmith were one of the few places that serviced these SG's, then they released their own Strain Gauge design - worth looking up reviews of strain gauge cartridges...
The Panasonics were apparently based on Sao Win's designs - another famous cartridge making legend.
I strongly suggest persevering with this one....
-
I'll crack open the box when I have some free time and have a look and I'll continue to break it in on a record I don't listen to.
The distortion I'm hearing is most definitely a tracking error. It sounds like the "post-echo" crackling after a really loud transient of say a trumpet. Surprisingly many people do not notice this, aren't bothered by it or think it's normal with vinyl.
-
Apparently VTF should be 2.5g:
http://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?topic=4113.0
neo
-
Test Report - Stanton 881S
This is 12/77 Popular Electronics. The entire magazine. Test report is about 1/3 of the way down. Don't stop at frequency response graph. Go through a couple of ads for square waves.
http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Poptronics/70s/1977/Poptronics-1977-12.pdf
neo
-
There is currently an original NOS DTL4-S stereohedron stylus on ebay - to fit 680 series and the equivalent p-mounts - I picked one up, then he increased the price 50% on the other (!)... still an original NOS Stantering stereohedron is not to be sniffed at....
(Should be only a marginal step down from the 881...)
-
There's a poster on Asylum who seems to have a lot of experience with Stantering. He says at one point they had serious QC problems and many styli are defective. Hope yours is good.
I was told that the 681 stylus won't fit a 881. The suspension wire housing (or whatever it's called) looks smaller on the 681.
Maybe I have an erroneous impression, but I never liked the 681. It always sounded like an M97x - rolled off and dull.
I don't know what the price is, but for $250 you could send your old stylus to Soundsmith for a ruby/LC. Seems like a good investment to me, especially considering you're taking a chance with fleabey. I also don't like the Stanton vertically oriented plastic stylus holder. They never seem to fit tight and it just seems like a stupid way to secure it. The Pickering stylus holder is much better IMO. Maybe that's just me as well. I don't remember anyone else complaining.
neo
-
Does anyone know about the Signet MR5.0 series?
The MR is supposed to mean maximum resolution. According to the databank impedance is 790 ohms with 5.0mV. I'm guessing that's DC and the same generator as the 440/120, but I'm not sure.
The ML version has a beryllium cantilever and I'm also wondering if it has a round plug?
neo
-
I purchased the ATN-7V as a replacement for the MR5 basic. It take the newer rectangular plug.
-
Thanks Don. I saw an MR5.0ML for sale. I looked it up and saw that it has a beryllium cantilever so I bought it. It's supposed to have minimal use. I'm keeping my fingers crossed as I await delivery. Hopefully it will replace the ATN152ML that I broke. Because it's beryllium I thought it might be an older round plug.
The ATN7V seems like a good choice for the generator. I think all MR have the same motor with 790 ohms and 5.0mV out.
neo
-
Nice find!
-
Hi there everyone!
I'm a newbie here so bare with me and forgive hijacking;)
So it took few days but I did read all 35pages :roll:....originally because I was going to buy maestro with broken stylus and replace it with atn95 with atn150mlx needle. But I didn't :cry:
Now I'm thinking of buying AT100e and ATN150mlx to go with it (210euro) or AT150mlx (250euro). Which would be better bang for the buck for my Satisfy arm (9g effective)? And how would they compare to Maestro/ATN95/150mlx? I know the AT100e/150 combo would be lighter (better for my arm, right?) and low inductance (no clue if it's better or not). Please help
Are there any other cartridges I should be looking at at 250euro price range?
Thanking you in advance
Jacob
-
Well, the MR is such a pretty little cart - all silver and gold trim with a black stylus holder. It's metal yet weighs slightly less than a 440/120. To be honest I was expecting a little better QC from a Signet. Both channels measured > 800 ohms but one is around 830. That's about 5% more than the 790 ohm spec, so the generator is the same as the 440ML/OCC (5mV). This is the same motor as in the 132, 142, 152, 160, 120, 130. The 170 and 180 have a little less inductance/resistance. I think their (170/180) impedance is 2800 ohms opposed to 3200, and the output is slightly less.
I set it up on the Unitrac and mistakenly set VTF at 1/2 the value - 0.85g. It seemed to track perfectly well, but bass was lacking and I realized my mistake. I have a feeling this is going on my 440 body. Maybe I'll even get a 100E, but I don't feel like breaking in a new AT.
I take some photos later. Maybe I can show you how pretty it is.
neo
-
I saw a couple of carts on Agon that look interesting. First a Grace Ruby:
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-grace-f-9-ruby-reduced-price-again-2014-07-07-analog-92845-garden-grove-ca
You might be able to get it for less. Apparently it's not selling quickly at the former price.
This is an auction:
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-pickering-xsv-5000-with-stereohedron-stylus-and-dustamatic-brush-2014-08-02-analog-98178-tukwila-wa
neo
-
Here's the Signet:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=103342)
I had it running into a 50K phono stage. I think capacitance was 220pF. So I switched to an old NAD and set capacitance at 100pF. It sounds excellent.
I obviously have this in a secondary room, but it's good enough to tell. I don't know if I could hear the channel imbalance or the difference from the 440 body, if I did a comparison.
neo
-
Hi there everyone!
I'm a newbie here so bare with me and forgive hijacking;)
So it took few days but I did read all 35pages :roll:....originally because I was going to buy maestro with broken stylus and replace it with atn95 with atn150mlx needle. But I didn't :cry:
Now I'm thinking of buying AT100e and ATN150mlx to go with it (210euro) or AT150mlx (250euro). Which would be better bang for the buck for my Satisfy arm (9g effective)? And how would they compare to Maestro/ATN95/150mlx? I know the AT100e/150 combo would be lighter (better for my arm, right?) and low inductance (no clue if it's better or not). Please help
Are there any other cartridges I should be looking at at 250euro price range?
Thanking you in advance
Jacob
Welcome Jacob, and welcome to this monkey house thread. [BTW, "Welcome to the Monkey House" is a book of short stories by Kurt Vonnegut]
Sorry for missing your post. Guess I got caught up with a new cart, a rather infrequent event for me lately.
I can't believe you read this entire long winded thread. You have the patience of a saint, and must be thoroughly confused by now.
Maybe it's just as well you missed the Maestro sale. Did you realize the ATN150MLX would require a transplant? Some say the wood body of the Maestro is over-damped. It might be better to find a used series 1 Virtuoso, Beta or whatever with a wood top. If you find one that needs a new stylus you can get a 3472 series that's higher compliance, tracks at 1.5g and will match up with your arm. Like this:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/LPGATN3472HE.html
http://www.lpgear.com/product/LPGATNSERIESVL.html
If you wanted to do a transplant you'll need an aftermarket carrier. The stock styli have no compliance screw.
The other option is buying an ATN150MLX and a body to go with. The 100E is the same basic generator as the 150, but whether you'd like that better is hard for me to answer. I think it would give a little better detail/resolution and maybe a little less musicality. You could get a 120 body to go with and have the same higher inductance body of the 440. The 120 comes with a nude elliptical and you could try it out like that, but the change with an ATN150MLX is rather dramatic.
There's another option if you're going to look for a Clearaudio, or if you're unsure. You could buy an AT95E and replace the stylus. Maybe you remember seeing my potted 95? It sounds too good to be true and you can use one of the styli linked to above. I bought an AT92E for $20 and used the stylus from it. I just took it off my Unitrac - sounds good.
Maybe David or Scotty have a suggestion or something to add. I'll have to think about this a bit.
neo
-
Yeah the title fits alright :)
Thanks Neo, that's more than I can chew right now:)
I was ready for the transplant in the maestro but didn't know about it being over-damped...I'll be hunting used Virtuoso then but they are very rare here.
So Maestro can be replaced with atn95 carrier and Virtuoso with 3472/atn92, correct?
Yeah, maybe I'll just buy at120 it will get me going for now and maybe n the future I'll replace it with ATN150mlx...
So AT120 motor is better than AT100e/AT150mlx :?
...AT95e with ATN3472 sounds good too :scratch:
Thanks neo, I'll have to think about it...
Jacob
-
Yeah the title fits alright :)
Thanks Neo, that's more than I can chew right now:)
I was ready for the transplant in the maestro but didn't know about it being over-damped...I'll be hunting used Virtuoso then but they are very rare here.
So Maestro can be replaced with atn95 carrier and Virtuoso with 3472/atn92, correct?
Yeah, maybe I'll just buy at120 it will get me going for now and maybe n the future I'll replace it with ATN150mlx...
So AT120 motor is better than AT100e/AT150mlx :?
...AT95e with ATN3472 sounds good too :scratch:
Thanks neo, I'll have to think about it...
Jacob
Hold on a second Jake. The 120/440 motor isn't better than the 100/150 motor. It's a little different and might be easier to get flat response, depending on the stylus. In theory the 150 generator is better. It has lower inductance - 350mH, opposed to 490mH. So the coils in the 150 are smaller and it has less resistance/impedance. Thinking about this a bit, in an ultimate sense if you get the 150 stylus I think the 100/150 body will have greater potential.
Loading is critical for either of these and it's important to have total capacitance (wires + preamp) less than 200pF. It's also nice to be able to adjust your input impedance, but with the 150 stylus either should settle in nicely at 47K.
All the Clearaudio MMs use an AT 3400 series plug (the plastic part that holds the cantilever and fits into the body). This is the same plug on the low compliance AT95 replacements and the higher compliance 3472 series P-mount styli. All the Clearaudio bodies use the same motor. It's virtually identical to the 95. The wood top seems to make a difference, but in all honesty my modded 95 sounds very close. The Aurum, Aurum Beta etc. all have the same motor. Tolerance might be slightly better with the more expensive models. If you got either a 95 or a Clearaudio I think you'll have better results with the 3472 series P-mount styli. An ATN150MLX has compliance similar to the P-mounts.
Although you've read the entire thread it's a little different for us, being familiar with all of this. I don't want to discourage you, but doing a transplant is a little hairy and an exotic cantilever is easily broken. All the stock and aftermarket 3400 series styli are bonded. None are nude, but you can get good results with the better ones. If you can transplant a 150 stylus into an aftermarket plug, you'll have the equivalent of a Maestro. If you get any P-mount stylus a re-tipper can give you an exotic cantilever/stylus for around the same money.
AFAIK, all the Clearaudio stock styli come without a compliance screw. The aftermarket ones like the Jico or Vivid line have the screw. This is necessary for a transplant. It's not necessary for a re-tipper to replace the cantilever/stylus, although you'll wind up with the original compliance.
If any questions come up as you're mulling this over, don't hesitate to ask.
neo
-
The more basic Aurum Beta was also available in both Aluminium mounted and wood mounted... and would be easier / cheaper....
The ATN92 and ATN95 have the same identical plug - so once you par away the rest of the excess plastic - they are the same (as are any other members of the respective families such as ATN3472, ATN311, etc...)
The 92's are intended for arms of circa 7g and the 95's for arms of circa 16g... damping hugely widens the scope of mass to compliance matching - sufficiently so to make the AT92 sound very good on a 16g arm.
The AT100/120/440/150 family (those being the members currently in production!) - are all the same format body - although there are higher inductance models (120/440) and lower inductance models (100/150) - the two inductances currently being produced are 490mH and 350mH.
The 3 lower cartridges have all plastic/resin bodies whereas the 150 has a metal body
The plastic bodies have the advantage of being lighter, and as this family of cartridges are highish compliance, this can be an advantage with many arms.
The advantage of the 150 is that it can make a more positive firm connection to the headshell, transferring vibration to the arm - this is an advantage only in cases where the arm has good internal damping.
A number of people have also observed that the 150 and some of its earlier metal bodied relatives (AT15/20) sound better when mounted on a wooden headshell - possibly a similar effect to the wood mountings on the CA cartridges.
The differing inductance of the various bodies does not make them either better or worse, but it does alter the adjustments to the voicing. - If you are willing to play with cartridge loading, then you can further adjust either type to taste...
I like to have both up my sleeve, as sometimes it is easier to lower inductance than to lower capacitance.... and vice versa....
There are also other members of the family which have been discontinued with inductances ranging from 630mH down to 350mH.
(I hesitate to call the ATML180 a member of this family as I don't think its stylus is interchangeable with the non ATML models.... it had inductance of 240mH)
You can also fit the Audio Technica "211" series styli on these bodies - those styli were designed for the now discontinued AT1x2 series of p-mount cartridges - and in most cases are slightly higher compliance than the equivalent AT1x0 model...
Just watch out for capacitance - AT's like very low capacitance loading - so your phono stage needs to cater to that for best results.
bye for now
David
P.S. heheh as I was typing this, Neo snuck in and stole my thunder.... great minds think alike (and fools seldom differ...) still I will post it as written given I covered some ground a little differently!
-
WOW :o
Thank you both kindly - this is a lot to absorb...and to choose from :)
I'm using ifi iphono and i can adjust both capacitance and impedance. The clearaudio tonearm is the old one with rca connectors and I'm using some old Ultralink I/C lying around but don't know their capacitance. I'm going to do low capacitance I/C from klotz ac110:)
You see, I was thinking about getting AT150mlx and almost bought it but then I red this article:
http://dagogo.com/audio-technica-at150mlx-dual-moving-magnet-cartridge-review
and if I understand correctly (english is not my native language) AT150mlx would be better on heavier arm (mine is 9g effective mass).
Also it says that AT150mlx is very detailed but not too musical:? Will I get it to be more pleasant/warmer with my tube amplifier (Mingda MC34a)?
Then I red something else on other audiocircle thread that I could put ATN150mlx on AT100e body (being lighter) and it would match my tonearm a bit better...
OK now I'm getting dizzy :wink:
It's kinda obvious that I'm new in spinning records and learning all that will take some time so forgive me all silly questions and derailing this thread
Jacob
-
As far as transplanting the 150, be extremely careful. The 150mlx cantilever doesn't seem to take the same abuse as the 140s. Not saying it can't be done, just use care. IMO, the 150mlx is worth the extra cash.
Don
-
Jacob,
The guy who wrote that article doesn't understand 100Hz compliance. He doesn't know what he's talking about.
Because compliance/arm matching uses 10Hz compliance the figure must be converted. The equivalent 10Hz compliance is 18cu. This is a little less than an Ortofon 2M (22cu) and the same as the 440 or 120. If you used screws weighing 2g, with a 9g arm, you would resonate at approx. 8.53Hz with the 150 body. With the 100 body it would be approx. 8.96Hz. That's right in the recommended range.
The bit about going out of alignment with different records is bullshit. It will be sensitive to vertical orientation, SRA. That's the vertical angle of the needle in the groove. There's no getting around that except with a spherical stylus. Most people find one position that sounds right with just about everything. There could be a few records that need a minor adjustment. Everyone is different in their sensitivity to this, but the more extended the contact, the more this could matter.
I agree with the assessment about neutral/detailed sound. Some people would call it analytical and others might say accurate. The 95/Clearaudio is a little more musical, but won't have quite the resolution without the more advanced stylus.
I'll come back a little later after I think about your dilemma. It would be good to start breaking in a body.
neo
-
Hi guys,
thanks to you now I have second thoughts about transplants - I would go bananas if I broke 170 euro stylus;)...so maybe I'll hold on with that for a while, maybe one day :thumb:
@neo
Of course it has to be converted, why didn't I pick that up :duh: I had nagaoka mp110 before and their specs are in 100hz as well...
Anywho, I'd love to create my own Virtuoso/92 monster but there's no second hand cartridges from clearaudio on ebay.co.uk nor .de nor other websites I'm fallowing:( so I think it's the time to pull the trigger and buy AT150mlx...it's gonna be grand sure :lol: worst case scenario I'll stick some wood on top of it;)
I'm still open for suggestions
Jacob
-
Jake,
I have the impression that you're looking for one good cart, and are not really into cart swapping. In which case I think you made a good choice. No other company offers the bang for the buck as AT. I also think you have a good idea of what to expect. I don't know what phono stage you're using, but capacitance loading is critical. I also don't know about those cables you mentioned. Blue Jeans cables is on the net and has an interconnect that's 12.1pF/ft. It's stiff and unwieldy, but I wanted to mention it as an option.
Good luck and let us know what happens,
neo
-
worst case scenario I'll stick some wood on top of it;)
I'm still open for suggestions
Jacob
Get it, try it, then try it in a wooden headshell....
-
@neo
Yep thats about right
Im without a cart now and I need to buy something decent...AT150mlx it is then:)
Don't think i'm gonna stop there :nono:
I'm still on a hunt for virtuoso or other clearaudio cart to mess with :)
@David
Ill try to fiddle with it as much as possible within my manual capabilities:)
Thank you very much
Ill let you know about my findings on at150mlx
-
Interesting test reports - Ortofon Cadenza Blue, Bronze. Notice the 2 amplitude graphs for each:
http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/index.php/vinyl-lp/25-cartridges/86-ortofon-cadenza-blue-a-bronze-mc.html?showall=1
This one is 7 MCs from 2012:
http://www.bm.rs/Micro%20Benz/Benz%20Micro%20Ace%20-%20HiFi%20News%20July%202012.pdf
neo
-
Hmm I look at those group test plots, and then I look at my own plot of the DV23RS, and something smells wrong.
My DV23RS measures flat as can be with a very minor rise starting at 18kHz... they are showing the 17D3 with an amplitude drop?!
Makes me wonder whether they are using the HFN test record pink noise track to test with? (it is flawed above 15kHz)
In fact all the cartridges are showing a similar high frequency drop of starting around 15kHz .... I suspect a systemic error in the testing!
The Cadenza plots are what I would expect...they are really nice right up to around 10kHz - very little midrange trough - do the magnetics are good with minimal losses drops around 1db very gradually from 1kHz to 6kHz before the resonance takes over and pulls things up.
Aluminium cantilevered Bronze seems to have marginally greater losses at 6kHz than the ruby cantilevered Blue ... more cantilever flex maybe? difference is small enough that it could be test error/variability.
Don't have specs for effective tip mass, and the plots don't extend further to check where the peak is... would need to get plots out to 30kHz (I doubt the peak would be above 30kHz)
-
I think you're right. It's a little strange seeing all those MCs with no extension on HF response. I remember a few years back Werner Ogiers EE posted that both the HFN and Analog Productions test records frequency sweeps were miscalibrated. Must be the case here.
neo
-
Makes me wonder whether they are using the HFN test record pink noise track to test with? (it is flawed above 15kHz)
Hi dlaloum. This may have been mentioned earlier in the thread, but what test disk could be used for this if the HFN disk is flawed?
-
The old CBS test disks are excellent, also the test disks put out by Denon (even better but much rarer!)
There is rumour of Denon re-releasing some of their test disks - apparently they kept the masters... but I have yet to see them available anywhere...
The CBS disks come up all the time on ebay.
There is quite a range of test disks from both Denon and CBS (as well as others of course) - some of them are specialised with tests designed specifically for one aspect of performance. So you do need to check that the record has the tests you want.
A Square wave test record won't be much good for frequency response.
Some records have pink noise tracks, others use a swept sine, still others a series of spot frequencies - all are valid test methods for frequency respons, but they all required slightly different interpretation - Pink noise will include harmonic distortion as part of the measured signal, swept sine may do the same (depending on how you measure it) where spot frequencies are purer in terms of signal response, but require more work as you need to measure each of 20 (or more) spot frequencies to plot the chart....
Yosh in Japan maintains probably the most comprehensive data page on test records and associated data:
http://www7a.biglobe.ne.jp/~yosh/recspecs.htm
bye for now
David
-
Great info. Thanks! :thumb:
-
I still have the stylus on the Signet MR5.0ML It sounds very good at 47K. I got the 790 ohm spec from the database. I checked the spec sheet for some of the other Signets. I think it was the 5, 7Ea, and 7LCa were 800 ohms, 550mH. My inductance meter won't go that low. I wonder if this could be the same generator. The database has all the MR series being the same - 790/490.
I'll have to try the stylus on the 440 and see if I can hear any difference. This makes me want to get a 100E and compare. I'll have to listen exclusively to the stylus for awhile to get a handle on it before I order a 100. I wonder.....
neo
-
Interesting calculator posted by J. Carr on Agon.
http://sim.okawa-denshi.jp/en/RLCtool.php
Electrical modeling including phase response? I'll have to see if I can figure it out.
neo
-
If you are comfortable modelling in Microsoft excel, I have been using a cartridge model including phase originally built by LuckyDog and modified by me...
It is a tangled web of interrelated calculations across a series of worksheets - but can be very useful
No instructions though - other than what I can help you with online!
The downside of the calculations (which I do not believe will be any different to the link you just posted) is that they only include the electrical aspects, there is no model for cantilever behaviour - that aspect has to be measured! (and due to the difficulties with measuring phase, phase response has to be assumed based on principles... ie: that phase/amplitude behaviour in cantilevers is minimum phase and therefore symmetrical and equal to the same effect on the electrical side)
You are welcome to the model if you want it...
-
Hi David,
Taking a look at that calculator I'm not sure what I'd use it for. Could come in handy if you're designing a cart.
I had a feeling you already had something similar.
Here's a couple of cool links for the Accuphase AC1 and AC3. Check out the cantilever/tip design at the bottom:
http://www.accuphase.com/cat/ac-1en.pdf
http://www.accuphase.com/cat/ac-3en.pdf
Here's the AC2 from the same site:
http://www.accuphase.com/cat/ac-2en.pdf
That completes the original Accuphase carts designed by Nakatsuka. They were released from the late '70s to 1982 I believe. The Monster carts were from the mid '80s to early '90s. Accuphase now has a new cart designed by someone else. It weighs 11.5g and max VTF is 2.5g. It has a solid boron cantilever and a microridge.
neo
-
About a month ago I bought a Panasonic 451 which was having some tracking issues. I replaced all the electrolytics in the phono box with Nichicon and Panasonic caps. It's now playing with a completely black background, there used to be a slight amount of hum audible when the stylus was in the lead in and lead out grooves. I let the suspension break in for 20 hours on a clean thrift LP. Still having the tracking issues, it won't pass the last band on side 2 of the Hifi News+ test record. Sound quality wise I can hear some promise, it's a "clean" sounding cartridge. Sort of reminds me of when I upgraded from a Denon DL-103 to a Zyx R50, more vivid tonal color (not as grey) and a reduction in groove noise.
My tonearm is a Nottingham Ace Space, which should be around 11g effective.
dlaloum do you still have your strain gauge to see how it tracks?
-
Hi J-Pak,
yes I do, but I cannot help you as my phono stage for it needs a good working over....
Which is why I put it away pending "getting a round tuit".
My recollection is that it is not a tracking champion but it was OK (but not great) for tracking....
I may have recorded the tracking results from the HFN record - need to search my records.
I'll have a look and see if I can find it
bye for now
David
-
Thanks David.
Anyone know who makes the sylii for LP Gear: http://www.lpgear.com/product/PAS451QD.html
I could not find a line contact or Shibata replacement stylus on the Jico website, so it seems unlikely that it's made by them.
-
Vivid line is made by another Japanese company. Gear won't say who. I think it's Nagaoka, but I really don't know. People seem to get good results.
If you want a shibata made by Astatic:
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Needle-672-DQ-copy_p_1278.html
neo
-
Ever notice that the outer part of a record sounds brighter than the inner grooves?
Sometimes it's more noticeable than others, especially when an album starts out with a bang (lots of high frequency info). Check out the graphs at the bottom of this test report:
http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/index.php/vinyl-lp/25-cartridges/86-ortofon-cadenza-blue-a-bronze-mc.html?showall=1
neo
-
It think we are hearing a bit of misunderstanding there!
It tells us more about the chosen manner of testing frequency response...
As the tracing gets worse, and the needle starts to marginally mistrack - we start seeing more distortion artifacts creeping into the sound.
If the F/R is tested with spot tones, the distortion is excluded from the measurement, but if the measurement is taken with a single sweep and averaging methods, or with pink noise tracks, then we would expect to see exactly what is shown by those charts - an increase in the high frequency content driven by increased distortion as tracking worsens.
There is an interesting thread on IGD currently on AK...
The tip mass is unchanged so it is not related to the cantilever/tip mass resonance - the only thing that changes is the density of the signal, which makes tracking harder.... the difference in F/R between outside and inner grooves might be an interesting measure of cartridge tracking ability! That had not occurred to me before... but one would need a test record with identical test tracks on the outside and inside tracks.... I don't believe I own such a beast.
bye for now
David
-
As the tracing gets worse, and the needle starts to marginally mistrack - we start seeing more distortion artifacts creeping into the sound.
If the F/R is tested with spot tones, the distortion is excluded from the measurement, but if the measurement is taken with a single sweep and averaging methods, or with pink noise tracks, then we would expect to see exactly what is shown by those charts - an increase in the high frequency content driven by increased distortion as tracking worsens.
But there was a decrease in high frequency content further into the record. I don't think this has anything to do with inner groove distortion which seems completely related to density and groove width (pinch effect etc.). Temperature could be a factor. I seem to notice it more with a cold cart on the first record of a session. I've been hearing this for years only never seen it in a test report before.
neo
-
You're right I was reversing the plots, the rising top end is the outer grooves...
I do know that many (most?) records were mastered with reduced HF content on the inner grooves (to reduce IGD) .... but this should not be the case for a test record...
Assuming the needle is tracking correctly (and most test tracks are recorded at -20db so there should not be a problem in theory) why would there be a difference? :dunno:
-
J. Carr mentioned it on the MM thread. In fact he posted the link. He said it as if it was fact - temperature effects amplitude response and the outer grooves vs inner thing.
I was about to pursue it when Nandric started up with some nonsense. Maybe I'll see if I can get some more details from Carr. Groove width might have something to do with it?
neo
-
Yes, it's groove radius and temperature. Check out Jcarr post 8/11/14
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&openflup&11348&4#11348
neo
-
I really need to spend a few quality hours catching up on that thread...
-
The thread has degenerated and J. Carr's posts are about the only thing of interest. Most of that has been repeated here, and I posted there most of the lab test links I posted here. I think he and I were the only ones who looked at them, and I also think you could be very affective at getting more info or opinion from J. Carr. He provided the Accuphase sheets, BTW.
A couple of pages back he was commenting on the stylus mounting of the boron tube cantilevered carts - DL-1000a, EPC 305MC. I found a photo of a Genesis 1000 tip, but I don't know if the link still works. After commenting that the 1000a stylus was only mounted to the upper wall of an extremely thin tube, he proceeded to say the 305 was worse because the tip was too long and could rotate. I thought his assessment was self-serving, especially comments about increasing tip mass. Where does he get off talking about tip mass on a Technics cart like that, when.....?
Anyway, relations were somewhat strained but civil. Somehow the conversation got onto phase and I didn't pursue the Ortofon papers. He insists there's a phase shift at electrical resonance. I still don't think that's possible based on the measurements. Maybe I'll look at those MM graphs again.
I took a look at the inner groove thread on Karma. Maybe I missed it, but it seems like nothing new.
neo
-
The inductance of the MM cart alone with give you electrical phase shift, it's unavoidable unless you cancel the inductance out. The inductance plus the cable capacitance forms a second order filter which results in even more phase shift. One of the advantages of the MC design is the vastly lower inductance figure which results in less phase shift in the audio band.
Scotty
-
Like Scotty said - it is physics, phase shift is unavoidable in an LCR circuit...
BUT that phase shift is identical in properties to cantilever resonance phase shift, and if you balance one vs the other, a flat frequency response is an indicator of neutral phase as well.... Hence achieveing flat frequency response using minimum phase methods is critical.
Cantilever resonance can also be modelled as a circuit I believe, at some stage I should add that to my cartridge model...
-
Like Scotty said - it is physics, phase shift is unavoidable in an LCR circuit...
BUT that phase shift is identical in properties to cantilever resonance phase shift, and if you balance one vs the other, a flat frequency response is an indicator of neutral phase as well.... Hence achieveing flat frequency response using minimum phase methods is critical.
Cantilever resonance can also be modelled as a circuit I believe, at some stage I should add that to my cartridge model...
The LCR phase shift is NOT separate from the that of the cantilever. If it was, there would be a shift at electrical resonance in each of the 5 MM plots in the test report. Even though we don't know what those MMs were, there is only one shift and it coincides with HFR.
You can look at it as combining the 2 circuits, mechanical and electrical, because that's exactly what happens. The LCR circuit has the net effect of lowering HFR. It's just as CarlosFM (EE) stated on the VE thread. We can see the physical lowering of HFR in Werner's TNT article Load the Magnets. Resistance and capacitance are manipulated to augment treble response. That lowered frequency (16K or whatever) is where the shift occurs.
Gentlemen, we must go with the evidence we have. The Ortofon tests are the only known measurement of phase vs. amplitude with phono carts.
For years better phase linearity was used as an argument for the superiority of MC. Why then does Atlas, widely acknowledged as one of the best carts ever, mimic MM phase response? With HFR @ 20KHz, phase would look more like one of the MMs in the test than the MC200. Perhaps the strain gauge has better phase characteristics than magnetic carts, at least that's what is claimed. But I suspect many records don't sound "right" with them. The mastering is checked with magnetic carts and the imperfections of that playback might be built-in the record. It's probably sort of the way it is now with some records better served with a forgiving set-up.
neo
-
Hmmm yes - we do know that where the Frequency/Amplitude (as the sum of LCR and cantilever F/A) goes off from "flat" neutrality there is definitely associated phase variance.
Given that it is a minimum phase system, it should even be calculable...
But if the response in frequency terms is flat, the then associated frequency/phase will also be flat - with the notable exception of anomalies generated as part of hysteresis, eddy currents and other such - all of which tend to be in the very small scale categories (definitely less than 3db, and in the better cartridges less than 1db) - and well below the phase anomalies caused by even relatively "perfect" phase speakers (eg pure electrostatics) - Which is why I tend to ignore these effects... (also none of the test records claim to be accurate to within 1db... so effects on this scale are not measurable with our current tools)
I have to read JCarr's postings on the effects of imperfect coil shapes, etc... and mull on that particular set of parameters...
I definitely have measured substantially reduced upper midrange losses in switching from a high inductance body to a low inductance one - while keeping the same needle (Pickering XLZ7500 & XSP3003) - so I tend to think there is definitely something that is gained in going to lower inductance.
Eddy currents and hysteresis are both heavily driven by signal strength which in turn is the level of change within the magnetic field (ie how motion is turned into electric signal)... fewer turns of the coil seems to improve things - at least in the case of my example - quite measurably.
BUT - in exchange, you have that rising top end, and the associated phase variance.... sigh.... (which can be corrected by adding more damping.... but the damping has known negative impact on the sound too.... )
Later this year I am going to try the XLZ7500 with digital minimum phase filtering to see how it sounds with flat Frequency/Amplitude as well as Phase/Amplitude response.... (one of those "round tuit" exercises I mean to get to!)
bye for now
David
-
David,
"we do know that where the Frequency/Amplitude (as the sum of LCR and cantilever F/A) goes off from "flat" neutrality there is definitely associated phase variance."
Looking at the MM plots, there is a small rise in amplitude response at, or just beyond the point of maximum phase shift. (note: it's difficult to tell exactly, as the phase plot goes off the scale) Past that bump in amplitude response it either rolls off or continues relatively flat.
"But if the response in frequency terms is flat, the then associated frequency/phase will also be flat"
I don't think this follows. Just as in the MC plots, phase shift is maxed out at that peak of cantilever resonance (or combined with MM LCR). On either side of that peak of maximum phase shift there is quite a bit of phase nonlinearity that extends through areas of flat response. In the case of the MC200 the peak was @ 27K and phase shift didn't reach zero until approx. 7-8K. Some of the MM phase shift extended down to 1-2K.
Another problem - we didn't pay much attention to phase shift on the far side (higher frequency) of the peak. In the case of the MC200 this is beyond 27K so it's way beyond audibility. If the peak occurs @ 16K, then phase shift @ 17K will be just as bad as 15K.
For years phase performance has been used as an argument for MC superiority. "They" said that LCR determined phase shift frequency and that many MCs had no shift until way into the ultrasonic region based on MC inductance. This could be way beyond the response of the cart. MC inductance is measured in uH. We know this is BS - HFR determines MC phase shift.
What about MMs when LCR can be lower than HFR ? We don't have enough evidence to prove LCR is meaningless like in the MC case, and we know that increasing capacitance will lower HFR, and because of this the user has another feature to manipulate amplitude response. Is the downside to this also phase performance beyond HFR ?
Some of the MMs in the test had HFR or primary shift around 20K. How is this any different from Lyra Atlas/Kleos ? It might extend a little lower due to increased MM damping? So, if we're thinking purely in terms of amplitude/phase, the Atlas is a second rate design. +6dB @ 20K, where HFR occurs? It shows how much importance this phase business actually is in the ears of audiofools.
Lets forget their ears and look at "superior" carts. How about some Dynavectors or Nakatsuka designs that have far better HF response and resonance in the stratosphere? They're not perceived as better because of Carr's magic. Emphasis is on tracing exactitude and excess energy dissipation. Have you noticed that Anna, Atlas and AT50ANV have titanium or titanium in the bodies? This is for energy dissipation - send it to the arm instead of messing up the signal in the cart. Clean up the resonance mess and you have better sound.
neo
-
I was about to go off half cocked as usual without giving this due thought...
had another look at those plots, and indeed the 5 MM's show relatively flat F/R with quite widely varying P/R.
So I took another look at the MC plots....
Look at plot 1 and plot 2
1 is textbook minimum phase resonance - amplitude varies with a gentle bell curve and phase has a sharper bell curve with the peaks coinciding.
2 however is strange... for damping, the curves should both become wider and lower, with the peaks still coinciding.... but they don't.
A shift in overall phase peak should imply the addition of another resonance which is summing - this does not make sense...unless the damping mechanism is introducing something else... presumably it is not a "pure" damper - and may use another mechanism to provide a damping effect on amplitude.
Either something is wrong with the measurement method, or someone played rough and ready with some of the plots (perhaps measurement ended at a lower frequency than shown on the plots?) - or I need to review the physics of this effect..... :?
Maybe I should go ahead with my square wave based phase testing of some cartridges to get some rough experimental results....
-
Interesting observation. The MC graphs extend out to 50K and the plots with damping peak somewhere beyond 50K.
The amplitude of the undamped phase peak is +17dB (approx.). The damped peaks are higher in both amplitude and frequency. The MC phase curves with damping more closely resemble the MM phase curves, except not as steep. Remember, an undamped MC is probably a nonentity, so a real world MC actually has phase shift that covers a wider range of frequencies, except most of it is ultrasonic.
I think the implication is clear. Damping doesn't just cause the phase curve to extend further in either direction, it also increases the amplitude. In other words, the curve gets bigger in all directions.
There's another unknown here and that's the identity of the MM carts. It looks as if response is falling off beyond 20K in all of them. I think that's the suspicious factor here. I suspect a low inductance MM cart with a boron or beryllium cantilever could equal or surpass the MC200 in phase performance.
neo
-
I'm gonna have to study some more physics to understand what could cause that rising phase/frequency plot...
Or review some formulae....
-
Followers of this thread may have heard of the AT33PTG II (a favorite amongst some "famous" needle droppers) MC cartridge. One of my friends added one to his system and I heard it over the weekend. Probably the best tracking I have heard/experienced from a moving coil, though may fall slightly shy of the V15. Stunningly clean on known problem records like some MFSL reissues of Bob Dylan which can have headache inducing vocal sibilance (particularly bad on their 45 rpm reissue of The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan). Sound quality was very good, but a touch too dry and clinical for my taste.
-
Hi J-Pak,
There surely is much love for the 33PTG II. They say it digs a little deeper than the OC9II and not as aggressive. I don't think it was ever a US model, but you can get it direct from Japan.
http://www.joynetmall.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&path=60_64_267&product_id=4124
Joynetmall has a 100% reliability rating. Still, I don't know about warranty or exchange if it's defective. That seems like an excellent price.
Many people like an accurate cart, as opposed to romantic, especially those who use tubes might want a "dry and clinical" sound.
neo
-
The inductance of the MM cart alone with give you electrical phase shift, it's unavoidable unless you cancel the inductance out. The inductance plus the cable capacitance forms a second order filter which results in even more phase shift. One of the advantages of the MC design is the vastly lower inductance figure which results in less phase shift in the audio band.
Scotty
The notion of more or less phase shift is erroneous. It's the frequency of primary shift that is affected. I can't prove that this occurrence isn't at electrical resonance because the test carts are unnamed, but it looks highly unlikely. A MC shift frequency is 100% mechanically dependent. We know that MM response peak is lowered by increasing capacitance, or using electrical resonance. I think this combination of mechanical and electrical resonance defines the frequency of the shift.
Be that as it may, I remember your showing us how you hook up another identical cart body to cancel inductance, but it was a long time ago. In order to cancel inductance, two identical inductors have to be directly connected in parallel.
Here's a link to Werner's TNT article with an electrical diagram.
http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/load_the_magnets_e.html
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=104914)
Could you please explain it again? Inductance is in series with the output.
neo
-
You need to start with a phono-cartridge and a cartridge body with identical inductance values. The 47 kohms series resistance is removed from the phono-stage input. It is replaced with a 5kohm series resistor,and a 5kohm resistor to ground. The phono-stage input is connected to the junction of these two 5kohm resistors.
The portion of the circuit connected to ground starts at the junction of the two resistors. The non-series connected 5kohm resistor is connected
to one of the positive pins of the cartridge body and the ground pin for that channel is connected to ground. The other channel is a duplicate of this.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=104949&size=large)
Basically half of the cartridge's output is taken to ground from the junction of the two 5kohm resistors through the inductor in the cartridge body. This leaves on average 2.5 to 2 millivolts output which seems to be plenty for most phono-stages to work with.
Assuming that the two cartridge bodies have virtually the same inductance, the inductance of the phono-cartridge on the tonearm is cancelled out by the inductance to ground of the identical cartridge body. This gives you the same operating conditions as a MC with any phase shift in the upper mids and high frequencies a function of the mechanical resonance with zero phase shift due to electrical RCL phenomena.
In addition there is a degree of electrical damping applied to the stylus mechanical resonance due to the 10kohm load the cartridge sees instead of the 47kohm which is standard practice.
In order for this circuit to function properly the basic input impedance of the phono amplifier stage circuit before any resistive loading network is added must be intrinsically above 100k ohms. Some Bipolar and most FET and Tube based phono-stages have this inherent impedance characteristic.
Cables connecting the TT to the phono-stage should be fairly low in capacitance per foot. If the capacitance does not get excessive the simple 6db/oct. filter pole could be above 100kHz. This would make the cartridge's high frequency extension primarily dependent upon the cartridge's mechanical characteristics.
Scotty
Edited for clarity
-
There was also a lengthy thread on VE, started by Luckydog, that looked at using a secondary cartridge body (not matched to the primary) but to use the circuit to cancel/neutralise capacitance - The focus was on all those people out there with phono stages having 220pf or more onboard and cartridges (like AT) that work best at 150pf or less...
The end result was very good and the associated cartridge performance model was then developed to become what I now use as my means of modelling cartridges...
Somewhere in my kit bag I still have my prototype capacifier using a p-mount as a means to plug in the desired "inductor" for the circuit...
The other interesting phono stage / loading setup for cartridges that differs substantially in behaviour is the Transconductance amp.... There was I believe another thread on VE on that topic, which I never joined.... at some point I need to get myself up to speed on transconductance amps - there are quite a few people out there that swear by them for phono stages, including some very well regarded engineers...
bye for now
David
-
Fascinating stuff. For those who don't really understand basic loading considerations, read the TNT article. Separate sets of graphs for varying capacitance and resistance show exactly how this works on a relatively high inductance cart with limited high frequency response. With a low inductance cart with extended response and is overly bright, decreasing the resistive load value is the "normal" approach, like loading a 440 at 32K, as some do.
Scotty,
Most of us are not EE's or circuit designers (myself included), so some electrical theory explanation if you don't mind. Here's a link for a parallel inductance tutorial:
http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/inductor/parallel-inductors.html
Your drawing looks like the dummy cart is in parallel to the operational one, but from the above link:
"Inductors are said to be connected together in “Parallel” when both of their terminals are respectively connected to each terminal of the other inductor or inductors."
Then we have:
"One important point to remember about inductors in parallel circuits, the total inductance ( LT ) of any two or more inductors connected together in parallel will always be LESS than the value of the smallest inductance in the parallel chain."
So, we're not talking about mutually aiding or opposing inductors, but do the 5K resistors make a difference? The inductors aren't connect together directly. Have you measured resultant inductance? I'm wondering about final inductance value.
More considerations later.
neo
-
The cartridge exhibits a rising source impedance with frequency and the cartridge body exhibits a rising load impedance with frequency so that no change in voltage division occurs, therefore no high frequency rolloff occurs.
Because the cartridge body to ground effectively compensates for the changing source impedance the high frequency rolloff and phase shift are mitigated.
Of course these questions would be academic if you couldn't hear the difference, but you can. It sounds a whole lot better with the circuit than without it.
The 5k resistors together load the cartridge with about 10 to 11k which includes the cartridges DCR component. This is a compromise which preserves the signal to noise ratio and allows for an adequate volume level from most phono-stages.
You have virtually eliminated the contribution that the phono cartridge's inductance can make to the sound you hear from the cartridge. Electrically speaking you are good to about 100kHz. With the circuit in place, the cartridges mechanical limitations determine the upper limit of your high frequency response.
The circuit has a 6dB insertion loss because you have halved the amount of useable output voltage from the cartridge.
Scotty
-
Scotty, how closely does the cancelling cartridge need to be to the main cartridge?
How critical are other parameters, for example:
Could a Shure 1000e body (530mH) be used as the cancelling cartridge for a V15III (also 530mH), DC resistance for both is very close (1350 vs 1380ohm) but the V15III has a laminated core ... so it will behave differently at higher signal levels, due to eddy currents and any other magnetic effects that are reduced by the laminations...
Also, how does this differ (pragmatically in actual useage) from dropping the capacitive load to a very low level (eg: 60pf)?
Dropping the C, although awkward in many setups will also push the resonance/roll off above the audio range along with its phase effects... and if (big if!) the phono stage has little or no C loading then this can be a VERY easy option... as long as you use ultra short low C cables to connect to the TT.
The trouble I see with these alternatives, is that you are turning your MM/MI high inductance cartridge into something that behaves like an MC (low inductance) cartridge.
Along the way you sacrifice the tuning ability that a high inductance setup provides....
And although I really focused on these approaches a few years back - ultimately I think that these approaches don't tackle the phase issues properly - you need to look at the total phase shift of the system, that means both electrical and mechanical combined.... and it is possible that the mechanical and electrical will partially (or with design/tuning completely?) offset each other....
just thinking out load as usual....
bye for now
David
-
David, if you have the basically the same inductive values it would certainly be worth trying out. In the case of AT and Grado cartridges, identical cartridge bodies are used in many instances in a given line and the unit to unit variation is very small. I neglected to mention that the circuit, by minimizing the impact of the inductance also minimizes the impact of the magnetic non-linearities in the cartridges generating system.
The improvement in the cartridge's overall linearity due to the circuit might obviate the need for tunability. The cartridge's inductance unless nulled out will cause smearing of the highs as well as the upper midrange. I don't see this problem going away even if the magnitude of the parallel capacitance is reduced to an impractically low value.
There are many sonic rewards to implementing the circuit and the loss of tunablity might be a small price pay for the benefits that are to be had.
Scotty
-
Thanks Scotty,
It takes a little time to try to figure this out.
Losing half your output voltage shouldn't be much of a problem, especially for high inductance carts, but knowing preamp impedance w/o load resistors, might.
It seems that designers use LCR to tune response and w/o inductance you could be left with mechanical response that is less than ideal. Loading down is a cure-all for mechanical response nonlinearities?
I wonder what results you would get with 2 - M97 carts. Even add 1 - SAS stylus to the mix.
Well, on another topic the Signet MR-ML won't seat on the 440 body. The plastic sides are too tall, like trying to use one of those P-mount (92E) with the big sides, on a 95 only not as extreme.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=105058)
You can see how the front of the Signet is taller. The stylus guard makes it look worse, but there's still at least a 1mm gap. The top on the 440 extends to the front of the cart and even without that I'm not sure if it will fit without trimming. I was hoping to avoid that, but the best laid plans.....
neo
-
I'm happy to report the plastic reduction surgery went well. I removed the stylus guard and used 2 different size wire cutters to trim about 1mm off the sides. I was thinking of a plastic-ectomy CA style, but this plastic seems a little thicker and I was a little tired and didn't want to get near the magnets and cantilever.
I only played 1 album with the 440/MR-ML, but the difference seems substantial. Output is louder, more dynamic and more like the 440/ATN152ML.
I'm a happy camper, but I wonder about the old Signet body that's supposed to be the same. Maybe it suffered some sort of trauma? For some reason it didn't age well. I suspect it was fine when new?
It makes me wonder about differing results with the "same" cart. One person gets a good one and another gets a dud. Maybe age has more to do with it.
neo
-
I doubt it is age... JCarr may have it right in pointing out the difficulties of getting perfect evenly laid coils in a high inductance design..... Hence the hand picked at20 bodies, and the "reject" 13/14/15?
-
It could have been trauma - cores and coil misalignment. Here's what Carr said:
Regarding coil impedance, my general experience is that the fewer the components comprising the coil bobbin, and the fewer the number of coil layers, the more consistent the coil shape and impedance will be. Using more components for the coil bobbin (as in a laminated coil) increases the likelihood of bobbin mis-shaping and non-flat surfaces, while each coil layer added results in a less flat surface for the next coil layer to be wound onto.
So it's conjecture on our part, but the resistance measures a larger than normal discrepancy between channels. I know Signet division had a facility in the US, but I don't know if carts were assembled there. If so, that could explain it, or maybe part of the internal design is different, but I doubt that.
Signet was the high end line and QC should have been at least as good.
Hence the hand picked at20 bodies, and the "reject" 13/14/15?
The 13 is a higher inductance cart (1200 ohms, 4.2mV) - not one of those. The DC of my 15 measures within an ohm or 2, not only ch to ch, also the spec.
Who knows, the hand picked 20 could have been BS like Grado Gold/Silver. Maybe there were only so many they matched up with a stylus and "calibrated". More likely they weren't calibrated at all. The bodies were probably measured and the stylus was checked for alignment.
You know those little amplitude response graphs that come with some high end carts - why are they all identical? "They" run them off on a copy machine and throw them in with the paperwork. Maybe not every company, but remember Kiddman's Agon post?
I don't know about the Signet 5.0ML, but my experience is that AT is one of the better brands for QC.
neo
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&openflup&11348&4#11348
-
This may explain Technics' choice of HPF for the core of the EPC100 & EPC205 - fewer components, more consistent and precise forming?
The EPC100 adds to this by being lower inductance and therefore having fewer coils.... interesting...
The AT25/TK10 family might have similar advantages...
This may also explain some of the variability in very well regarded designs like the Shure V15 family...
Here is some data for the AT25 / TK10 family (my own measurements of several samples)
Ind Bal Imp Bal Ind L Ind R Imp L Imp R
4.8% 5.0% 81 85 235 247
2.4% 7.7% 84 86 249 231
0.1% 0.2% 88 88 228 228
0.6% 2.1% 87 88 241 236
1.1% 4.7% 88 87 251 239
and the AT20/15/14/TK7 family
1.1% 5.5% 453 448 489 463 AT20
0.0% 0.6% 453 453 474 477 AT20
4.7% 2.7% 437 458 493 480 TK7
0.9% 0.3% 456 460 455 453 AT14
A few Shure groupings (sticking to the top end):
V15V
1.6% 1.1% 312 317 855 846
2.5% 1.9% 328 320 796 811
4.5% 0.7% 349 334 817 811
ML120/140/Ultra300/400
1.3% 1.3% 380 375 1,073 1,059
2.6% 0.1% 394 384 1,012 1,011
4.4% 1.2% 379 396 1,009 1,021
4.5% 1.3% 382 399 1,016 1,029
V15Vx/M35/SC35/V15RS
2.3% 1.4% 401 410 989 975
0.2% 0.6% 424 425 993 999
1.0% 1.1% 434 429 967 978
V15III/IV
0.4% 0.2% 499 497 1,394 1,397
2.1% 3.1% 496 506 1,349 1,392
0.4% 1.1% 531 529 1,398 1,413
3.3% 3.5% 548 530 1,412 1,363
My sole TK7 does not fare so well - one AT20 is really excellent, and the other is just OK
The V15V's are in the OK territory but not really in the same league as the best matched bodies...
Keeping in mind that I have limited sampling (all my samples in each category are quoted here..) - this appears to be quite a problem area in manufacturing.
It may be one of the few (quantifiable) justifications for megabuck cartridges.... To get a TOTL body you may need to manufacture 10 cartridges for each 1 that makes the grade....
My best AT215/Tk10 family body is a lower end TK9, and my best V15Vx body is a low end M35 ....
I would have assumed AT to have better QC than Shure.. but then there is that TK7 sitting among the very tightly specced AT20's and AT14.... is an outlier? or was Signet a marketing brand rather than a TOTL attempt?
bye for now
David
-
My sole TK7 does not fare so well - one AT20 is really excellent, and the other is just OK
The V15V's are in the OK territory but not really in the same league as the best matched bodies...
Keeping in mind that I have limited sampling (all my samples in each category are quoted here..) - this appears to be quite a problem area in manufacturing.
It may be one of the few (quantifiable) justifications for megabuck cartridges.... To get a TOTL body you may need to manufacture 10 cartridges for each 1 that makes the grade....
My best AT215/Tk10 family body is a lower end TK9, and my best V15Vx body is a low end M35 ....
I would have assumed AT to have better QC than Shure.. but then there is that TK7 sitting among the very tightly specced AT20's and AT14.... is an outlier? or was Signet a marketing brand rather than a TOTL attempt?
bye for now
David
Actually, most of them are pretty good. That errant AT20 has inductance within 1.1% I would guess that impedance or DC whatever, would be much less critical.
"It may be one of the few (quantifiable) justifications for megabuck cartridges.... To get a TOTL body you may need to manufacture 10 cartridges for each 1 that makes the grade...."
If dreams were wishes come true, dream on. But they're not, and while a couple of high end MC companies are quite consistent, many are worse. Some of the priorities might change a little. Inductance matching might not mean as much for a LOMC, but it might reflect on output balance.
What about that test report on the Clearaudio Concerto with the tip misaligned 10° ? That cart went out the door an wound up on a test bench, but it could have been bought by a consumer who wastes hours scratching his head trying to figure out what's wrong. This is after paying $3K for the privilege of doing CA's QC work. We're also dealing with magnets and their inconsistencies.
In my last post I referred to Kiddman - he tests this stuff. For those who missed this post:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1392385752&openfrom&1&4#1
"Come on, nearly all of these manufacturers make up the specs. Measuring lots and lots of high end analog, I've found the specs are dreams and wishes. MC's that show flat but have a rise of 8db by 14khz. Turntables that quote .01% wow + flutter but are really .3%.
Before you argue with me, buy some test gear and prove it for yourself. Measurrments mean a lot. But manufacturer quoted measurements, in this industry with no accountability, are meaningless."
I've measured, using state of the art equipoment (with AC test signal, the only way to do it right) 30% differences in impedance with some brands. Yes, "mass produced" ones, if you can call the bigger premium MC makers "mass produced".
A few manufacturers are quite consistent, and very consistent in sound. And with many manufacturers, I've never heard 2 sound close to identical, tested one right after the other."
eek!! This is a painful subject, but it's a business and sometimes reality rears its ugly head, but it ain't necessarily so. Maybe you'll get lucky and pick the right brand or that gem among the duds. I bet that AT20SS with 1.1% inductance match, sounds pretty good.
neo
-
You need to start with a phono-cartridge and a cartridge body with identical inductance values. The 47 kohms series resistance is removed from the phono-stage input. It is replaced with a 5kohm series resistor,and a 5kohm resistor to ground. The phono-stage input is connected to the junction of these two 5kohm resistors.
The portion of the circuit connected to ground starts at the junction of the two resistors. The non-series connected 5kohm resistor is connected
to one of the positive pins of the cartridge body and the ground pin for that channel is connected to ground. The other channel is a duplicate of this.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=104949&size=large)
Basically half of the cartridge's output is taken to ground from the junction of the two 5kohm resistors through the inductor in the cartridge body. This leaves on average 2.5 to 2 millivolts output which seems to be plenty for most phono-stages to work with.
Assuming that the two cartridge bodies have virtually the same inductance, the inductance of the phono-cartridge on the tonearm is cancelled out by the inductance to ground of the identical cartridge body. This gives you the same operating conditions as a MC with any phase shift in the upper mids and high frequencies a function of the mechanical resonance with zero phase shift due to electrical RCL phenomena.
In addition there is a degree of electrical damping applied to the stylus mechanical resonance due to the 10kohm load the cartridge sees instead of the 47kohm which is standard practice.
In order for this circuit to function properly the basic input impedance of the phono amplifier stage circuit before any resistive loading network is added must be intrinsically above 100k ohms. Some Bipolar and most FET and Tube based phono-stages have this inherent impedance characteristic.
Cables connecting the TT to the phono-stage should be fairly low in capacitance per foot. If the capacitance does not get excessive the simple 6db/oct. filter pole could be above 100kHz. This would make the cartridge's high frequency extension primarily dependent upon the cartridge's mechanical characteristics.
Scotty
Edited for clarity
I was thinking about this hook-up. Since the cartridge body is in parallel to the working cartridge, wouldn't the impedance of the body be part of the load?
In other words, 3200 ohms + 5000 ohms would be in parallel to whatever the preamp input impedance is.
neo
-
Only the DCR of the cartridge is add to the 10k sum of the two 5k resistors. Because this same impedance is mirrored by the cartridge body to ground it ceases to be an independent factor that needs to be dealt with.
Scotty
-
That makes sense. Reactance is grounded with inductance.
Finding the input impedance w/o the load resistors will be a problem for many. Why not replace the preamp load resistors with 100K or whatever ?
neo
-
Its not the same thing as the characteristic input impedance that the transistor or opamp might have. All FET and tube phono-stages with work just fine as will most bi-polar stages including opamp based circuits. If the intrinsic input impedance is not a minimum of 100k or higher the circuit just won't sound as good as it should, nothing is going to be damaged. Most manufactures brag about the circuitry used in their products and if they don't, an email, phone call or look at a service manual will provide the information.
A lack of this specific knowledge is not a deal breaker.
Scotty
-
There might be some op amps that have lower than optimal impedance, but I'm not sure. I was reading about that in DIY audio and it seems there are some that have impedance best suited for LOMC. I'll see if I can find the numbers.
Anyone interested in downloading the Ortofon phase paper, it's here:
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=33679&p=259517&hilit=phase#p259517
You have to be a VE member to download.
neo
-
The Ortofon 2M mono cart is 2 channels connected in parallel.
http://ortofon.com/hifi/products/cartridges/2m-series/2m-mono
Internal impedance, DC resistance 700 Ohm
Internal inductance 350 mH
http://ortofon.com/hifi/products/cartridges/2m-series/2m-blue
Internal impedance, DC resistance 1,3 kOhm
Internal inductance 700 mH
Why doesn't inductance cancel or approach zero?
neo
-
The fact that this is a phono cartridge doesn't change the behavior of inductors. They have shown us that they have strapped the two generators together internally thereby having the inductance value. There is no mechanism present to cause the remaining inductance to drop any further.
Scotty
-
I found it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_and_parallel_circuits
" For two equal tightly coupled coils the total inductance is close to that of each single coil. If the polarity of one coil is reversed so that M is negative, then the parallel inductance is nearly zero or the combination is almost non-inductive. It is assumed in the "tightly coupled" case M is very nearly equal to L. However, if the inductances are not equal and the coils are tightly coupled there can be near short circuit conditions and high circulating currents for both positive and negative values of M, which can cause problems."
It has to do with the magnetic field of the coils. In a loudspeaker crossover with multiple coils, they have to be oriented a certain way to retain proper value.
Scotty,
Have you measured the inductance of your cancelling scheme? I believe most stereo carts have 4 coils. Your parallel coils aren't tightly coupled, so parallel inductance applies?
neo
-
The basic electrical behavior of the circuit was verified by injecting an appropriate level signal through the cartridge and conducting a frequency sweep, which showed a 3dB down point of about 100kHz which indicates that the cartridge body to ground is compensating for the cartridge's normal high frequency roll off. The point in the circuit where the measurement is taken is at the junction of the two 5k ohm resistors which corresponds to the input of the phono-stage.
If you were to measure the inductance of either the cartridge or the cartridge body while they were in the circuit there would still be measurable inductance. It is the complex behavior of the circuit as a whole that produces the desired result.
The uncompensated cartridge exhibits a rising source impedance with increasing frequency which produces the characteristic high frequency rolloff. It is the matching increase in the load impedance with respect to ground prevents the high frequency rolloff.
It is perhaps my choice of descriptors which has engendered some confusion as to how circuit functions. I said that the the inductance is canceled out when I should said the the effects on frequency response and phase shift caused by the cartridges inductance is mitigated.
I am afraid my original description invited an overly simplified interpretation of what takes place when this circuit is used.
In the wiki example of tightly coupled inductors, the tight coupling is achieved by the inductors sharing a common core. A loudspeaker crossover generally does not have inductors that share a common core. In the course of my DIY speaker projects I have not encountered a case where the polarity of a single inductor has made any difference to how the crossover performed.The Goertz inductors I used were also unmarked as to polarity.
Scotty
Edited for clarity
-
When you have multiple coils in proximity on a circuit board, orienting the coils is usual. They are often put at 90° to each other and might be on their side. This is a 2-way 24dB/octave:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=105766)
It's usual to see some laying flat and some on their side. Also proximity to driver magnets could be a factor. But that's not what this is about.
This is interesting. Please excuse my remedial electronics, but exactly how did you "inject" an appropriate level signal and measure frequency response?
It seems to me total inductance should be 245mH (490/2). If there were no inductance wouldn't - 3dB be much higher?
neo
-
You remove the stylus assembly from the cartridge and attach the signal generators leads to the hot pins on the cartridge attach the 5k resistors to the ground pins. You measure the resulting frequency response at the junction of the 5k resistors.
The injection of the signal through the cartridge duplicates what the cartridge's inductance does to the stylus generated signal's frequency response.
Scotty
-
You remove the stylus assembly from the cartridge and attach the signal generators leads to the hot pins on the cartridge attach the 5k resistors to the ground pins. You measure the resulting frequency response at the junction of the 5k resistors.
The injection of the signal through the cartridge duplicates what the cartridge's inductance does to the stylus generated signal's frequency response.
Scotty
Cool.
The electrical resonance of a LOMC with 50 uH is 1.4 MHz. 50 uH is actually quite a bit for a MC. Many are lower. Here's documentation. The phase part is BS, but the electrical resonance is what it is:
http://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html?forum=vinyl&n=856288&highlight=
That's why I suspect you've lowered inductance, not cancelled. Still, a great achievement.
neo
-
Neo, excellent link to the audio asylum post. It beautifully illustrates the reason for the inductance mirror circuit. With an AT 150 MLX stylus assembly and inductance effectively taken out of the equation, flat frequency response well beyond 20kHz might be possible without phase shift problems in the audio range. There is no electrical resonance peak near the audio band and the mechanical resonance is damped to a degree by the approximately 11k ohm resistive loading. I have been very happy with the results I have had from my AT440ML using this circuit.
He is referring to phase shift due to purely electrical LCR phenomena, no BS, however mechanical resonance phenomena are not dealt with in his analysis.
Scotty
-
Neo, excellent link to the audio asylum post. It beautifully illustrates the reason for the inductance mirror circuit. With an AT 150 MLX stylus assembly and inductance effectively taken out of the equation, flat frequency response well beyond 20kHz might be possible without phase shift problems in the audio range. There is no electrical resonance peak near the audio band and the mechanical resonance is damped to a degree by the approximately 11k ohm resistive loading. I have been very happy with the results I have had from my AT440ML using this circuit.
He is referring to phase shift due to purely electrical LCR phenomena, no BS, however mechanical resonance phenomena are not dealt with in his analysis.
Scotty
Not sure exactly what you mean by "phase shift problems", but it's those mechanical phenomena that determine MC phase shift. In a MC, they are the sole determinant. That's the mistake Ellison made, assuming electrical resonance determines frequency of phase shift.
Remember the MC200 ? Phase shift occurred at 27KHz and was only extended out by mechanical damping. Unfortunately, that damping also extended the lower end of the shift to 7 - 8KHz, well within the audio band. The only way to have no shift in the audio band is to have an undamped boron/beryllium cantilever or one that resonates at a much higher frequency.
I now think we're making more of this phase business than it warrants. Look at Lyra carts. Atlas best case HFR is 27KHz and double damper system makes it look like 20K. Worst case - it is 20K. Either way phase performance should be no better than MC200, maybe worse.
Most audiofools prefer this to carts with "superior" phase performance like some Dynavectors or carts with short tubular boron cantilevers that are flat to 100K and beyond. Personally, I like the more extended variety, but I'm the exception.
neo
-
If you have a large collection of cartridges with duplicates you could try the mirror circuit and see what you hear.
Scotty
-
The Ortofon phase article remains interesting....
It is not clear that phase is in fact the key... what is clear in that article is that the golden eared panel preferred an undamped setup, and the the optimum balance was achieved using light damping to bring the voicing back to a more neutral response while keeping things as lightly damped as possible.
Pragmatically speaking it seems to me that very light damping is in fact the key to optimum sound - and achieving neutrality should be attempted outside the cartridge ... (electrically/electronically/digitally)
Avoiding a resonance under 20k is also important as it has other impacts on tracking ability, harmonic and intermodulation distortion - but phase may not be the key factor - IF the resonance is above 20kHz.
If the resonance is down around 12kHz (like many basic pfanstiehl styli) then you have a major phase shift in a frequency range where there is a lot of critical musical material and where the ear is sensitive....
Using a circuit like Scotty's will effectively lower the inductance, making a high inductance MM/MI design behave much like an MC.... this absolutely implies giving up on cartridge loading as a method of achieving neutral response, and I would be hesitant to recommend it for any but the best cantilevers.
But it might be an ideal setup when mated with very high quality digital EQ....
-
I agree, except for one little detail. The listening panel only preferred the imaging of the undamped MC. He said it was so bright it was unlistenable. I think they settled on +3dB @ 20K and imaging wasn't as spectacular.
Which brings up an interesting point about the Lyra carts. With that high end response why don't they make your ears bleed?
If you remember the curve the rise stopped abruptly at +7dB @ 20K and didn't continue to +18dB @ 27K like undamped MC200. That's about the only explanation I can come up with other than test variations.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=91012)
I was thinking of trying this X-induct, but I doubt if I have two appropriate candidates. The Signet MR is out of spec and I'm not sure if I want to mess with it. The Virtuoso and 95 are probably identical, but I don't have the right stylus any more.
The 440 has a tapered/ML. Doesn't that resonate below 20K ?
neo
-
neo, for what its worth I have been using been using an AT 440ML with this set up for about 18 years and have very happy with the sound.
You do have to be sure to dial in the VTA to the correct angle. With the recently purchased AT 150MLX stylus I am going to have to figure the VTA out all over again. Unfortunately while I can easily adjust the VTA on my arm I cannot do it on the fly.
Scotty
-
Anecdotally, all of the Sheffield Labs, Crystal Clear, RR, and Sweet Thunder direct to disc records sound wonderful as do the Denon and Telarc records. The Mobile Fidelity Half Speed Master recordings are a mixed bag.
Scotty
-
yes the MLa resonates around 16kHz hence my running it at 32k....
-
neo, for what its worth I have been using been using an AT 440ML with this set up for about 18 years and have very happy with the sound.
You do have to be sure to dial in the VTA to the correct angle. With the recently purchased AT 150MLX stylus I am going to have to figure the VTA out all over again. Unfortunately while I can easily adjust the VTA on my arm I cannot do it on the fly.
Scotty
18 years - then I guess you haven't tried your x-induct with other carts?
Like David, I used to load the 440 at 32K, that is until I got an ATN152ML (beryllium) Then back to 47K I wonder if you'll have to change the value of those 5K resistors.
Speaking of which, it still looks to me as if they are the load, but no. One 5K resistor is in series with the cart. That adds to the cart DC of 790 = 5,790 ohms.
Then you have an identical load in parallel. That changes the cart resistance to about 2800 ohms. That number looks close to the impedance of 3.2K. Is that coincidental? I wonder what new impedance is. Reactance should be much lower, approaching zero or is parallel inductance 1/2, like resistance?
I have a couple of arms with VTA on-the-fly and I find myself using them all the time, but I don't think you'll have much of a change going from a 440 stylus to a 150. Let us know how it works out.
neo
-
Remember that original 47kohm resistor, the cartridge DCR would be added to that for the grand total resistive loading in a conventional circuit.
The mirror circuit total load has the cartridge DCR added to the 5k series resistor and the 5kohm resistor to ground plus the cartridge body DCR. The cartridge has all of that resistance to ground as the loading. Nothing is in parallel. You could lay the components out on a table and measure them with an ohmeter and get the approximately 11kohm value I referred to in my earlier post. Resistively speaking everything is daisy chained together with respect to ground.
Scotty.
Scotty
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=104914)
The cart is already going to ground with the green/blue wires. In series with that inductance (above) you insert a 5K resistor. The dummy cart and an additional 5K resistor is also going to ground in a parallel leg of the circuit. The 2 - 5K resistors are not in series, they're in parallel. The wire in between them labeled going to phono stage in your drawing, puts them in parallel. At least that's how it looks to me. The phono stage load resistance is > 100K. The cart DCR (including dummy) is 395 ohms and the inductance is coils in parallel.
What am I missing here?
neo
-
'neobop' your schematic looks like a reasonable representation of the circuit. I don't understand the hand drawn sketch at all.
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=104949&size=large)
Hi Speedskater,
The sketch is of a duplicate cart body intended to cancel inductance of the cart in use.
To combine the drawing and the green one above, first eliminate the preamp load on the right and substitute >100Kohm.
Then, on the drawing where it says To T.T. insert the drawing in the green circuit right after L1 the 650mH inductor. Our values on the green, change to R1 = 790 ohm and L1 = 490mH. They would be the same on the sketch, but they're not expressed.
I'd make a drawing, but my scanner is down at the moment.
neo
-
I managed to confuse the situation yet again by mentioning trivialities like the cartridge DCR. Its value is immaterial to the functioning of the circuit. Something to think about though, is the cartridge DCR in a regular circuit in series with the 47k loading resistor or is it in parallel with the cartridges DCR? If it is in parallel, how far below the stated cartridge DCR will the sum of the two resistances be? Likewise how can the cartridge be properly loaded if the combined resistance is far below the target 47k ohms?
The Inductance mirror circuit only shows the signal hot from the phono cartridge as it is assumed that the circuit is implemented internally inside the phono preamp. Cartridge signal ground is taken care at the input RCA jacks. I did not make clear where the circuit was to be implemented when I initially posted it. My bad.
Scotty
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=105853)
I believe this represents the complete circuit we are talking about?
-
Scotty,
The preamp load is in parallel to the cart. When you make a loading plug you hook it up between the hot and ground, and it becomes a parallel load to the preamp resistance. An old rule of thumb is the input impedance should be at least 10 x the source impedance. It doesn't always work out that way, but if the input resistance is the same value as the cart you lose output voltage. Like if you load a 30 ohm MC at 30 ohms you'll have less output.
You removed the load resistors from your preamp and the qualification is that it has to be >100K, so that's the preamp input resistance. Here's the x-induct circuit:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=105854)
This is basically the same as David's, but adapted for your 440/x-induct. The physical ground connection location doesn't matter as long as they go to ground.
neo
-
Yes I removed the 47kohm loading resistors from the preamp and directly replaced them with the combination of the 5kohm in series with cartridge body to ground. The intrinsic input impedance of my phono-stage amplifying circuit is a great deal higher than that 100kohm minimum resistance so that this resistance doesn't impact the behavior of the circuit.
Once again, due to the rising source impedance of the phono cartridge any high frequencies that the cartridge might produce beyond a certain point are lost at predictable rolloff rate. The inductance mirror to ground has a rising load impedance with respect to high frequencies therefore the high frequencies produced by the cartridge have no choice but to go on into the input of the phono preamp thus there is no roll off and there is no longer any phase shift due to phono-cartridge LCR related phenomena.
-
How do I go about measuring the intrinsic impedance of my phono stage? ....
It is hard wired at 500kOhm to allow easy plug and play of resistive load plugs.... but I have no idea beyond that of its own intrinsic impedance...
-
I would go ahead and use it with the 500kohm resistor in place. However if this is a grid resistor on a tube, the 2000 to 3000pf miller capacitance will be the problem that has no solution. If this is solid state phono stage based on an opamp then you could remove the 500kohm resistor. If it is a solid state non-negative feedback design then you would be better off leaving the 500kohm resistor in place.
Scotty
-
Why remove the 500K input resistor at all? Seems to me it's high enough value, and David has the option of using shunt resistors to experiment with load.
How was the value of those 5K resistors chosen? Are they needed? Any resistor in series with the signal (R2) isn't going to help SQ.
You could look at the 2nd leg of the circuit as the load, replacing the removed load resistors. It's parallel to the cart and preamp so it really is, only the resistance value is 2.5K because of the parallel 5K resistors. Isn't parallel inductance calculated like parallel resistance? I guess you could look at it as dropping the cart inductance in half, or having the preamp load as 2.5Kohm, 490mH, _pF ?
The thing is, the circuit must be connected at the input and not somewhere further down the line.
2.5K is like a LOMC load. Scotty, have you tried it without R2 ? I think you might have better results w/o it, and just change preamp input resistance to a value you like. You might want to do it anyway with the 150 stylus. I think it would be much better w/o R2.
neo
Edit: Now that I think about it Scotty, you've invented an LCR loading scheme for HO carts that reduces the dreaded inductance, but there's still capacitance to consider. 1/2 the inductance is admirable, but it's not a LOMC or a TK9, 10. Maybe David can figure out how to apply it to different carts and preamps.
-
We are dealing with the phono cartridge's impedance behavior. While with respect to the input of the phono stage the resistors and the cartridge body are indeed in parallel with respect to ground, the phono cartridge on the tonearm sees the resistors and the cartridge body's inductive value as being in series. This is what influences the phono cartridge's high frequency charateristics. We have a tracking change in high frequency impedance by the cartridge body that mirrors the effect that the phono cartridge's inductance has on high frequency response and counter acts the roll off that normally occurs. The 5k resistors shunt half the cartridges output to ground leaving about 2.5mv to work with which is a gives an acceptable 6dB lower output which won't kill the phono stages S/N ratio in most cases. The circuit would sound better without the 500k resistor, but without knowing the circuit design of the phono stage up stream you are better off leaving it in place.
By essentially nullifying the inductive effects on the phono cartridges high frequency response via the mirror circuit, the capcitance of the connecting cables now has about the same effect as it would on a LOMC.
Remember, electrically the circuit has flat responese to 100k verified by testing with a signal generator.
The MM phono cartridge now behaves like a LOMC but with 2.5mv output. Its high frequency extension is now determined by the stylus mechanical characteristics such as moving mass and the mechanical resonant frequency. Altering resistive parts values will not improve the circuits high frequency 3dB down point or response curve flatness.
Scotty
-
This is a little complex. Impedance is resistance with reactance figured in. What happens to impedance if you reduce inductance? It lessens.
Do those 5K resistors somehow make the circuit work, do you need to cut output? Seems like you could eliminate those resistors (R2, R3) and just use load resistors, whatever you like and you'd have full output from the cart. The dummy cart to ground would still give you parallel inductance and resistance for that matter. This should also cut cart impedance dramatically. I don't understand the need for R2, R3. They seem like the SQ limiting factor.
neo
-
Remember only the effects of inductance on high frequency extension are counter acted, the actual individual phono cartridge inductance and that of cartridge body remains intact, they interact with one another through the mechanism of their high frequency impedance characteristics which offset one another resulting in improved high frequency extension and zero electrical phase shift effects in the audio band.
Scotty
-
Think of the dummy cart as a parallel load. You could put it right at the preamp input just like loading plugs. In fact, loading plugs would be great for experimentation. Solder 4 wires out of your plugs and hook them up to the dummy. You can load it wherever it sounds best.
I'm pretty sure it will sound way better without the 5K resistor. Why don't you try it w/o the resistor in series with the cart (R2). R3 becomes the sole load resistor and just vary that one. I think all the stuff about preamp native resistance being >100K, is rendered moot by R3. That's preamp load resistance. Because it's in parallel with the cart and R2 it's confusing, but preamp load is shunt (parallel) resistance and capacitance.
neo
-
Wow! From such a humble beginning, this thread now has 781 posts! And I've only read two of them!!
Post away...
Paul
-
The circuit topology as I have outlined it, with the parts values I have specified, functions in the manner I described, and provides a correction that results in a flatter high frequency response and a freedom from electrically induced phase shift.
Guaranteed.
Neo, as an experimental starting point I would implement the circuit as specified and acclimate to the sound the system has with the correction applied. Then one could short to ground the signal that would be passing through the cartridge body to ground by jumpering around around the cartridge body, thus removing the applied correction. The difference in sound between the two conditions should be easily heard. You could then remove the jumper which shorts the signal around the cartridge body restoring the corrected condition. The next step would be to try shorting the signal around the 5k ohm resistor that is on the side of the junction towards the phono cartridge. The volume will have to be adjusted before a meaningful comparison can be conducted but if the sound remains the same with and without the resistor in the circuit then it isn't necessary.
The resistors value was chosen to minimize value of the resistor in the legs of the circuit towards the phono stage which reduces the impact of the resistor on the sound. They could have been made 2.5kohm each but that would have cut the cartridge output voltage to 1.25mv which would have impacted the S/N ratio adversly. Occam's razor was applied when choosing to make the values of the resistors the same. If they are equal to one another the voltage stays the same in both legs, this may or may not matter. Both legs of the circuit need to have identical impedance behavior across the entire range that the circuit covered and it seemed logical to make both values the same to avoid the possibility of any variance between the source impedance and the load impedance.
The ability easily change loading resistances makes putting this circuit into place much simpler. The combination of the cartridge body and 5kohm resistor can be substituted for the 47kohm loading resistor. Then all is that necessary is to put the other 5kohm resistor between the RCA jack and the input side of the 47kohm load resistor position.
If R2 and R3 in your rendering of the circuit are eliminated almost all of the cartridges generated signal will go to ground and there will not be enough signal present to use with the gain available from a MM phono stage.
Scotty
-
I'm not going to try this right now. Maybe I'll get a Vista, but I think you're looking at the cart and dummy as a circuit and the preamp as separate. It's part of the circuit.
"Both legs of the circuit need to have identical impedance behavior across the entire range that the circuit covered and it seemed logical to make both values the same to avoid the possibility of any variance between the source impedance and the load impedance."
The load impedance is usually much higher than the source impedance - it's supposed to be. Look at the circuit as having 3 legs in parallel. The first is the cart with a 5K resistor in series. The second leg with the dummy is no different than the preamp load except for that 5K resistor R2 that's in parallel.
The preamp load resistance and capacitance is in parallel. The only difference is you're adding inductance - also going to ground. You could lose R2 and change R3 to 2.5K and have the same circuit without the voltage drop. Adding 5Kohms to the resistance of the cart serves no useful purpose. Change the value of the load resistor R3 to what sounds best. The dummy cart is almost identical to the voltage source anyway, so what useful purpose does R2 serve?
neo
-
The source impedance is the phono cartridge, it provides the signal therefore it is the source. The load impedance is defined by the cartridge body to ground.When the phono-stage input impedance is greater than 100k,the complete chain of components in the circuit including the phono cartridge on the tonearm is in parallel on a resistance basis with input restance, 100kohms or greater. The resistive sum of the components in parallel with the 100k changes very little from the that of components themselves which is why we want 100k or higher. The 500k resister in dialom's preamp allows him to change out load resistors without impacting their value due to parallel summing, it also allows him to change load resistors when the preamp in on without also unloading the input which a BAD THING. The load resistance is usually much higher but in this case we want the source impedance and load impedance to be the same and precisely track one another as frquency increases.
Scotty
-
Why don't you try removing both 5K resistors and selecting a resistance load for the preamp? If the 2 carts are identical there's no need to make the impedance the same. The impedance is already the same. :thumb:
As I see it the 5K resistors have 2 functions.
1. cut output in half
2 degrade the sound
neo
-
As I said in an earlier post, the 5k resistor in line with the cartridge may not be necessary, and the circuit should be intially built in the configuration that is known to function correctly before experimenting with untested variations Within the audio band the cartridge to ground will have a low enough impedance that most of the phono cartridges signal will be shunted to ground as I pointed out in an earlier post.
Scotty
-
It should be noted that the inductance mirror circuit is an AC circuit. It functions in the impedance domain and cannot be analyzed or understood applying simple DC circuit concepts. With impedance comes frequency dependent behavior of both components used in the circuit and the overall circuit itself.
How the circuit operates is rendered slightly more difficult to understand because instead of a single component, we now have two components with the same impedance characteristics, the phono cartridge with an impedance characteristic that causes a HF rolloff and concomitant phase shift,and the cartridge body which, due to its position in the circuit, counteracts the first components HF and phase behavior.
Scotty
-
A couple of things to note. All phono carts and power amps produce AC. Preamp loads, resistance and capacitance are in parallel and go to ground. I never loaded an inductor in series with the resistor so I don't really know.
The phase behavior of a low inductance cart is a shift at mechanical high frequency resonance regardless of electrical resonance. That shift will only be higher in frequency if you use a boron cantilever.
Loading a low inductance HO cart often requires more severe resistance loading. All carts have a naturally rising high end. Much of it is tamed by mechanical damping. Such things as cantilever resonance and LCR interaction all figure in.
Maybe David is trying this? I imagine it will take some time to sort it out.
neo
-
I experimented with this concept a couple of years back before deciding that instead of trying to turn an MM into a MC, I should experiment with the EQ possibilities and their impacts (both phase and amplitude)....
Here is the Capacifier circuit:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=105963)
This really is a "rif" on the same principle - set the capacifier R and C values to the same as Scotty's and you have Scotty's mod (some of them would be set to null value)
To go with this diagram I also have a spreadsheet that models the electrical behaviour - it can also be further tweaked by measuring the actual behaviour of a cartridge, cancelling the theoretical electrical behaviour from the measured to provide a "raw mechanical" (+ non linearities) baseline, that can then be used to model what will happen with various parameters.
These circuits do as advertised - you can (with the right values on the components) effectively get the same results you would have were your capacitance far lower - so it is a means to attach Audio Technica cartridges that work best at low C loading, to standard phono stages with loadings of 220pf (+interconnect of 100pf or more...)
This is very flexible - if you use a p-mount adapter in the circuit setup, you can quickly and easily switch cancelling cartridge bodies to experiment further with tweaking the voicing.
There is a long thread on this topic here:
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=33929
bye for now
David
P.S. please ignore component values on this diagram... I just threw it together to show the outline... values would obviously vary wildly based on what you are using it for and with which cartridges.... the two cartridges involved need not match. - For best results, as in all things audio, the two channels should be matched as closely as possible.... this is the trickiest part given variation in cartridge inductance between channels on many exemplars!
-
David, I suspect that if the inductive values between the cartridges were within 5% all around you would achieve the desired results. The setup tested with the signal generator did not have a specially selected pair cartridges with perfect matching.
The Grado family of cartridges is another good candidate for this circuit as the Prestige series has the same inductance and resistance throughout the entire series. One could buy a higher line model replacement stylus and purchase a pair of Grado Blacks for the matching cartridge bodies.
Scotty
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=105963)
You mentioned the Capacifier before, but I didn't check it out. This is very similar to Scotty's circuit except no series resistor after the cart, but there is one on the dummy (R4), and an additional one R5 and a cap in parallel to the dummy but not R4. I believe there's a downloadable calculator?
This is a 35 page thread on VE. It's designed to null input capacitance? Could you cut to the chase and tell us what happens to inductance? It seems to me without inductance the net amplitude response will be defined by mechanical performance. In many cases without the inductance in the original design amplitude response could be less than ideal.
I plan on reading the thread, but that's what I said before. If someone can load their MM with specified capacitance is there any benefit from this Capacifier?
neo
-
If you can load your cartridge with any desired capacitance from (say) 50pf up, as well as opt for a reduced inductance (which may not be needed if the C is low enough) then the circuit is redundant.
The whole idea was to overcome the limitations imposed by most phono stages which start out with too high a capacitance.
The additional bits of the circuit allow tweaking/adjustment of the electrical resonance, and the rolloff slope and turnover frequency...
So it not only allows one to "expose" mechanical behaviour but also to voice the system by choosing how much compensation / EQ to put into the system.
Ultimately I found it easier and simpler to use traditional loading combined with a fully flexible low Capacitance and high resistance phono stage (ie: I can set up for R from 500k down and C from 50pf up)
It really is just a fancier version of Scotty's circuit - courtesy of LuckyDog who developed it - I did a lot of testing of it, and helped convince him to also publish the associated calculator.
If you take that calculator and "mess" with it, it can be a very useful tool in modeling cartridge behaviour, and as I mentioned, with additional work you can also incorporate the mechanical behaviour allowing you to more accurately predict what a cartridge optimum load might be.... (it hugely speeds up optimising a cartridge!)
bye for now
David
-
Thanks David. Does inductance change or is it more complex than that? Electrical resonance is an LCR circuit so resistance figures in. Interesting stuff.
On another thread the Grace F-9 carts came up. In VE library is an F9 manual. These were 2.4K impedance, 3.5mV (similar to 150MLX).
In the manual is a response graph taken at 100K load. There's a gentle rise from around 8K and peaks at 30K. It's up a few dB at 20K w/100K load. This is a sweet cart. Wish I bought one back in the day.
neo
-
Sorry - what do you mean by "does inductance change?" ?
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=105963)
This really is a "rif" on the same principle - set the capacifier R and C values to the same as Scotty's and you have Scotty's mod (some of them would be set to null value)
To go with this diagram I also have a spreadsheet that models the electrical behaviour - it can also be further tweaked by measuring the actual behaviour of a cartridge, cancelling the theoretical electrical behaviour from the measured to provide a "raw mechanical" (+ non linearities) baseline, that can then be used to model what will happen with various parameters.
These circuits do as advertised - you can (with the right values on the components) effectively get the same results you would have were your capacitance far lower - so it is a means to attach Audio Technica cartridges that work best at low C loading, to standard phono stages with loadings of 220pf (+interconnect of 100pf or more...)
This is very flexible - if you use a p-mount adapter in the circuit setup, you can quickly and easily switch cancelling cartridge bodies to experiment further with tweaking the voicing.
There is a long thread on this topic here:
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=33929
bye for now
David
P.S. please ignore component values on this diagram... I just threw it together to show the outline... values would obviously vary wildly based on what you are using it for and with which cartridges.... the two cartridges involved need not match. - For best results, as in all things audio, the two channels should be matched as closely as possible.... this is the trickiest part given variation in cartridge inductance between channels on many exemplars!
Sorry, I didn't read the thread. "the two cartridges involved need not match" Do you mean just channel to channel? Those are two of the same cart?
Do you change the values of R5 and C3 to tweak? What about R4 ?
How is overall inductance affected? I don't think either Scotty's or this circuit nulls inductance. Looks to me as if inductance is diminished so electrical resonance can be manipulated.
neo
-
I can't say I would blame anyone for not wanting to tackle a 35 page thread on one of these forums, especially when the conclusions could be summed up in a couple of paragraphs. Our time is a precious gift, and it's not recoverable.
Parallel inductance is calculated exactly like parallel resistance. We know that putting 2 identical resistors in parallel results in 1/2 the value of the original resistor, so while inductance isn't cancelled by the capacifier, it's significantly reduced. We talk about electrical resonance and significance, but I suspect many of us are fuzzy about exactly how this works. Here is Hagerman's calculator - just before the first graph. Plug in some values and see what happens:
http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html
If someone has a 681 (900mH) w/200pF = 11.9KHz electrical resonance.
Reduce capacitance to 50pF = 23.7KHz
Lets go the other direction. Signet 10ML = 85mH w/200pF = 38.6KHz, w/600pF = 22.3KHz
With most med/high inductance carts, electrical resonance is used to augment the mechanical response which is the primary determent of overall amplitude response. That is movements of the cantilever including mechanical damping. If you read the TNT article you saw how capacitance is used to move high frequency resonance to a frequency that compliments response. The conclusion was, an M97 needs 250pF to avoid severe mid-treble droop.
A word of caution about Hagerman page. Most of it is about electrical performance only and is near useless for loading purposes. The calculator can help you figure out what's going on, but most will need amplitude response tools that few people have.
I invite anyone with questions or observations about particular carts, or situations, to join in. This thread has come a long way from its practical beginning of Clearaudio stylus replacement. MM vs. MC is now up, so please divert us.
neo
-
Are you looking for different cart models? Okay, how about AT 0C9ML/II? I haven't bought a pre for it, but have the Collins PCB and a lot of the components.
-
Are you looking for different cart models? Okay, how about AT 0C9ML/II? I haven't bought a pre for it, but have the Collins PCB and a lot of the components.
Hi Hank,
Do you already have the OC9II ? Collins is a DIY phono pre? Head amp or phono stage? The OC9II is generally considered a bargain. It's a great tracker, has a healthy output of .4mV and a boron/ML. I think DC is 12 ohms. It's a highly detailed cart, but in some systems can sound forward, even bright. Others say it's just about perfect. A long time ago I read that someone loaded it at 20 ohms. I think usually that's around 100 ohms.
I've only heard it a couple of times and it sounded great, like a $1K cart. This guy had it worked out with the right cables (cable capacitance doesn't matter with most LOMC), and broken in, but I don't remember what resistance he was using. It might have been 80 ohms.
neo
-
Hi neobop. December 2007 I bought a used Wilson Benesch Circle turntable. It has an RB300 arm with Incognito re-wire mod and an Audio Technica OC9ML/II cartridge (supposedly only 100 hours on it). For many reasons, including upgrading my electronics and acquiring a fantastic pair of Acoustat Model 3's, and procrastination (which I have down to a fine art), I have not mounted the cart and put the TT into service. The Collins design is based on his article in Audio Express. He sold the circular PCB and matched JFETS which I bought and then bought Vishay foil resistors and need to buy the caps, switches and pots. Very versatile with switchable loading. I'll finish it "some day". I had not heard of the OC9ML/II, but found a review of it which makes me wonder why it's not extremely popular.
Sounds Like Review:
"Sonically, I found the OC9 to be a pure delight. This is without doubt one of the cleanest- sounding phono cartridges I have ever had the pleasure of using and the OC9s significant achievement in this regard added greatly to my enjoyment of the music.
The truth is, you could easily spend twice the OC9s asking price and still not equal let alone surpass its level of musical involvement, accuracy, or purity.
In all, the Audio-Technica OC9 provides most of the performance characteristics of the best of the breed, but without the heroic price, and without having to worry whether the sample you buy is a good one."
-
Hank,
Wonder why it's not extremely popular? I think it is. AT is known for offering great value and the OC9II is no exception. AT probably sold a ton of them.
http://www.soundstage.com/vinyl/vinyl200711.htm
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue52/audio_technica.htm
Some people have it mismatched and this can result:
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=27629
You should be okay with the RB300. Have an arm height adjuster? Maybe the arm is already at a good height, but the ML stylus is sensitive to SRA - angle in the groove. I'd consider an aftermarket adjuster if you don't already have one. There's an outfit in England, Audiomods that reworks these arms and results are said to be stunning. Maybe you should get it going first.
neo
-
Thanks neobop. I'm actually considering that Audiomods re-do, with adjustable arm height.
-
Phase.....
On another thread Toni linked to an interview of Michel Reverchon of Goldmund. Some interesting stuff here, some about structural grounding/stability and some about resonance immune transistors. The part about bandwidth and phase integrity in amps got me thinking again about phase.
http://www.symmetry-systems.co.uk/Images/pdfs/Michel-Reverchon.pdf
The contention is that maintaining phase integrity in an amp or pre requires bandwidth of 2 to 200KHz. I think this is widely accepted even if the need for such is disputed. Further, an amp requires a bandwidth out to 2MHz to insure correct arrival time from the speakers. Lots of energy storage from an amp and low output impedance makes the speakers play and controls diaphragm movements, but most amps are limited by their current/voltage capabilities.
Interesting stuff, but what's this have to do with your source?
Much of this thread has been about phase integrity in carts. Ortofon claimed that phase was responsible for spectacular imaging in an undamped MC. Increased high frequency amplitude response might have contributed, but now I think they're mostly right.
In an old thread about phase (the one in which Scotty introduced his inductance canceller) we site examples of the importance of phase/arrival time on location clues - hearing research supports this along with our inability to hear relatively greater amplitude errors.
We know that mechanical resonance/damping defines phase performance of MCs, not electrical resonance. It's my contention that mechanical also defines it in MMs, only it's modified by electrical resonance. If we look at the world's only known measurement of phase in carts, why is there no MM resonance (phase) peak at 10 or 12KHz ? Were all 5 test carts low inductance models? Not likely. EE's tell us it's impossible not to have a phase shift at electrical resonance, so where is it, why doesn't it show up on the test? If you use a SUT why isn't phase hopelessly compromised? A SUT is nothing but a big inductor with a ton of capacitance at the output, plugged into a MM input. :duh:
If worst case MM phase nonlinearity extends down to approx. 1KHz, and MC200 is to approx. 8KHz, what's the big deal? 1KHz is a critical upper mid frequency and 8KHz is above the primary frequency of musical tones. Increased amplitude combined with + phase response above 8KHz adds sparkle and can compensate for high frequency losses. Put a very short or boron/beryllium cantilever on a low inductance MM, and MC200 phase response can be equaled or bettered, depending.
neo
-
You don't have to be extreme about the inductance... you just need to have an inductance/capacitance/resistance combination that doesn't generate a resonance in the audio band - if the rolloff is below critical (ie no resonance just a gentle roll off) - then it can even be within the audio band without generating a big phase change peak.
With 150pf the AT MM's will do fine, as will a range of other MM's.
And the MC200 cantilever is a solid boron rod so pretty similar to the AT150MLx, and the MC200 does not sport a particularly short cantilever.
I think something like the ATML series with the shorter cantilevers might be superior to the MC200....
The fly in the ointment is perhaps damping - at this point I don't properly understand the interaction between phase and damping - if it is minimum phase, then no big deal, but I have a sneaky suspicion that the reason damping has such a negative impact on sound is due to its phase behaviour being something else....
-
When you dampen a tonearm what happens to low frequency resonance? Amplitude of resonance is diminished, but spread over a wider frequency band.
Amplitude of a phase shift is still going to approach 180° but affected area increases.
When the MC200 was damped, the phase discrepancy peak went higher in frequency, but spread over a wider band. Undamped, the peak was narrow and stayed above the audio band. Carts must be dampened to control cantilever movement and amplitude response, and the article said that MMs are more heavily damped. But MM damping was already built into those plots.
What about carts with tubular boron cantilever or little or no cantilever? There are some carts with response to 100KHz and even with damping should have no phase shift within the audio band. Carts with 6mm aluminum cantilevers are going to have phase response similar to the MMs in the report, regardless of whether MM or MC.
neo
-
Here it is - lowest tip mass in the known world, so low it's in negative numbers. :roll:
Faster than a speeding bullet.....
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-technics-epc-100c-mk-iv-cartridge-king-of-mm-mega-rare-spu-2014-10-25-analog
neo
-
TOTL AT MM specs:
AT-ML140, 150, 170
impedance 2.5K ohm
inductance 380mH
output 4mV
AT180
impedance 1.4K ohm
inductance 240mH
output 4mV
150 is beryllium/ML
170, 180 is boron/ML
Curious thing about the AT23, 24 etc. They all had elliptical tips and were never considered top. I guess inductance was too low to be practical.
Thanks to Timeltel (Agon) for the specs.
neo
-
Interesting that the top models were Boron rather than Beryllium.... (were they tubes rather than rods?)
On the subject of the AT22 to AT25, although they were all eliptical, their upmarket signet twins had ML's at the top of the line...
The AT22-25 and TK9/10 were a generation earlier, they were more expensive to make due to having true torroidal construction... all the rest of the VM series have always used para-torroidal design - so the earlier generation were magnetically superior - but the difference may have been very minor.
The shorter cantilever on the ATML series made a bigger difference I think, than the torroidal structure on the earlier series...
Seems to me the ATML180 is up there as one of the all time greats.
My own measurements of the TK9 show a noticeable midrange trough (not a bad one, but not the best I have seen either) - which is caused (I think) by a combination of magnetic losses and cantilever flex losses - the low inductance is reflected in the high end rise to a resonance beyond the audio range (cannot recall right now the frequency - would have to look up my measurements).
The higher inductance of the ATML allows it to achieve a flatter frequency response at the high end - would love to get my hands on one to measure - and see what the midrange trough looks like... I have a feeling it will/would do better than the earlier series or the AT150 - mostly due to the shorter cantilever.
In the Stantering family, the D7500 stylus shows a 3db trough when fitted to a high inductance body, and a 1db trough when fitted to a low inductance body... so magnetic differences can be quite substantial (and get worse as signal rises - the test tracks are at -20db) - the trade off is the flatter overall frequency response with reduced high end rise.... But given the greater importance of the midrange, the XLZ body ends up sounding better than the high inductance XSV... although on the chart, the XSV looks better/flatter.
-
Sorry, I get the Pickering designations mixed up. XLZ is low output, low inductance and XSV is regular output like the 3000 or 4000 ?
Is there another series with 3000, 4000 etc ?
I was looking at the specs (what there is) of the 22 - 25, and was thinking there's no way these could be 85mH. A toroidal coil is just a more efficient coil with less field? Inductance should be appropriate value for magnets and output. Did I remember this wrong?
neo
-
Neo,
I haven't heard much about your explorations with the Signet. Have you abandoned this one?
-
Hi Don grb,
You mean the MR 5.0ML ? The body turned out to be a dud. It'd decidedly uninvolving. The stylus sounds great on my 440. Those two have the same specs, but the Signet was too far off. I got it for the stylus anyway. I'm thinking of getting a 100E to play with a 350mH body. I've been using the 15/20SS and the Genesis, so it's not urgent.
I'm waiting for a settlement to purchase a few things. What I really want is a Teres Verus motor/controller for my Sapphire. It needs a new subchassis and I waited this long so I can wait some more. If I get the Verus I'll probably have the subchassis machined out of steel or aluminum. I'll add MDF and lead sheet. I'll have to incorporate the motor and redesign the armboard and support. If and when I get to it, I'll post it.
Get any new carts lately?
neo
-
Neo, I've been away from the hobby for awhile.I've an obstacle with the drive system on my Scout, and I can't seem to get it solved to my satisfaction. I don't listen much, but I do try to keep tabs on the forums.
Grb
-
Sorry, I get the Pickering designations mixed up. XLZ is low output, low inductance and XSV is regular output like the 3000 or 4000 ?
Is there another series with 3000, 4000 etc ?
I was looking at the specs (what there is) of the 22 - 25, and was thinking there's no way these could be 85mH. A toroidal coil is just a more efficient coil with less field? Inductance should be appropriate value for magnets and output. Did I remember this wrong?
neo
XLZ is low output low inductace, XSV is regular and yes it is an XSV3000.
I measured the 22-25's and TK9/10 at very close to the 85mH spec (Tk9 was 87.6mH)
Impedance spec was 240ohm, and I measured 227.8 ohm.
Yes it is a more efficient magnetic system, which mean reduced eddy currents, hysteresis, increased linearity - all the good things... also possibly improved wire/coil consistency as per the previous discussion.
-
Neo, I've been away from the hobby for awhile.I've an obstacle with the drive system on my Scout, and I can't seem to get it solved to my satisfaction. I don't listen much, but I do try to keep tabs on the forums.
Grb
Sorry to read that. Is it the motor, platter wobble or main bearing? Aren't you using a recording tape belt? Why don't you tell us about it? I have a friend who's a VPI dealer. Maybe I can get you a part or something (I get a discount). If it's speed stability there are some new AC motor controllers that might be a hair cheaper than SDS. Sometimes there are little tricks to figuring out, or solving problems. If you feel like it, we're glad to possibly help.
neo
-
Neo, I'm struggling with the capstan that I'd made in the machine shop at work during lunch. The piece was fabricated fairly quickly, and it hinted that I was on the right track. The runout is unacceptable, and subsequent attempts have been disastrous. The motor has been changed to a Premotec which has much lower torque compared to the Hurst which was OEM. I've added mass to the platter to give it more of the flywheel effect. I just don't have access to equipment which would allow me to fabricate the capstan to acceptable specs. I prefer the new system to the motor that came with the Scout!
Grb
-
With regard to the controllers, I'd agree. I'm not happy with the prospects of the SDS. I think you really need to do more than lower the voltage to the motor to really optimize the system. But, I have to solve the runout problem first!
-
What material are you using to make the capstan ....?
-
I'm using Delrin. I should add that the lathes and mills were given to our department because they were unsuitable to the other departments!
-
Yes i suspected it was delrin , its too soft hence it wont true up , there is a certain hardeness required the one you have is too soft, i do recall different levels of hardness with delrin for machining ...
Regards
-
Grb,
I don't know much about fabricating capstans, but I saw that Premotec makes some motors designed for turntables. Couldn't you buy a capstan the appropriate size? If you increase platter mass you might need the extra torque, depending on how much mass.
I saw a few companies like Newark Electronics that sell these motors, but I didn't find capstans.
neo
-
I don't think that there would a capstan available off the shelf. It would have to be based on my turntable, specifically the outer diameter of my platter. I just need to find better equipment or a shop that would fabricate it for me.
Grb
-
Yes i suspected it was delrin , its too soft hence it wont true up , there is a certain hardeness required the one you have is too soft, i do recall different levels of hardness with delrin for machining ...
Regards
Thanks for the heads up. I think I'll try aluminum or brass.
Grb
-
Grb,
I don't know much about fabricating capstans, but I saw that Premotec makes some motors designed for turntables. Couldn't you buy a capstan the appropriate size? If you increase platter mass you might need the extra torque, depending on how much mass.
I saw a few companies like Newark Electronics that sell these motors, but I didn't find capstans.
neo
Neo, I'm pretty sure that I'm ok with the torque. The motor will never start the platter without a nudge, but I anticipated that. It's the wobble that I can't stand. LOL
GRB
-
Wobble? That's often caused by the platter seating askew on the spindle. It could also be the main bearing attachment to the plinth.
Do you have an acrylic platter? I think they're more likely to have problems at the spindle attachment. Does the Scout have a conventional or inverted bearing?
I think it's conventional, but I never fixed a Scout. I saw this on a couple of HW-19. We usually sent them to VPI, but sometimes the problem was obvious. You might see the platter or bearing isn't seated right. Sometimes you can tell by putting a light object on top of the platter edge and another near the spindle. Spin the platter and observe, level with the platter. If the bearing is tilted on the plinth it will have to be reseated, but more likely it's the platter seating. I don't think it's likely that the bearing has to be replaced.
Not sure if this is a separate issue. I think it's unlikely that an out of round pulley would cause wobble. More likely wow and flutter.
neo
-
Neo, I'm sorry, I've been speaking of wobble of the capstan. The platter is fine.
-
No problem. Why don't you machine one out of aluminum and put a rough finish on it so the belt won't slip?
I'd think many machine shops could accommodate you if the job is big enough for them to bother. You might have to order a thousand. :wink:
Did you see the plinth Sonny made (on the new thread)? Maybe he could advise you.
neo
-
I'll probably try brass or aluminum. There is an outfit here in Detroit that allows access to all kinds of equipment, but the membership cost is pretty high! I think I saw the thread on the new plinth. I'm pretty sure that I'm close to maxing out the Scout. I'd like to try a setup plinth. I'm thinking it would be nice to have a plinth with a cutaway to allow a closer view of the stylus. I have a couple of dreams ahead of that one :D
-
Interesting that the top models were Boron rather than Beryllium.... (were they tubes rather than rods?)
On the subject of the AT22 to AT25, although they were all eliptical, their upmarket signet twins had ML's at the top of the line...
The AT22-25 and TK9/10 were a generation earlier, they were more expensive to make due to having true torroidal construction... all the rest of the VM series have always used para-torroidal design - so the earlier generation were magnetically superior - but the difference may have been very minor.
The shorter cantilever on the ATML series made a bigger difference I think, than the torroidal structure on the earlier series...
Seems to me the ATML180 is up there as one of the all time greats.
My own measurements of the TK9 show a noticeable midrange trough (not a bad one, but not the best I have seen either) - which is caused (I think) by a combination of magnetic losses and cantilever flex losses - the low inductance is reflected in the high end rise to a resonance beyond the audio range (cannot recall right now the frequency - would have to look up my measurements).
The higher inductance of the ATML allows it to achieve a flatter frequency response at the high end - would love to get my hands on one to measure - and see what the midrange trough looks like... I have a feeling it will/would do better than the earlier series or the AT150 - mostly due to the shorter cantilever.
In the Stantering family, the D7500 stylus shows a 3db trough when fitted to a high inductance body, and a 1db trough when fitted to a low inductance body... so magnetic differences can be quite substantial (and get worse as signal rises - the test tracks are at -20db) - the trade off is the flatter overall frequency response with reduced high end rise.... But given the greater importance of the midrange, the XLZ body ends up sounding better than the high inductance XSV... although on the chart, the XSV looks better/flatter.
Regarding boron vs. beryllium: AT stopped using beryllium sometime around 1982 or 3. Prior to that I think all high end ATs had beryllium rods. The TK9 had tapered beryllium. The ML150 was obviously produced prior to that change and the 170/180, after. I had a TK10ML II and the cantilever was boron. I bought that new in the mid '80s. I think the original 10ML was beryllium. AFAIK AT never used a tube cantilever other than aluminum or possibly titanium.
Beryllium is less rigid than boron so in that respect it sounds more like tapered aluminum. It's also lighter than boron so resonance is higher than the audio band. A downside of beryllium - it's brittle, more so than boron and breaks easier (as we found out). I think beryllium is the ideal material for most AT carts. It's less analytical sounding than boron, but the difference seems slightly more than minor. Sometimes when listening and comparing, it's hard to separate perceptions from expectations. I'm pretty sure about this one.
neo
-
I was reading a review of the Transfiguration Proteus, a $6K MC. Gee, it sounds swell. Wish I had one, and while we're at it Ill take an Atlas, an Anna, and a DRT XV-1t.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/transfiguration-proteus-mc-phono-cartridge
I must say, Mikey's good with those comparative descriptions, but I wonder how that might change with a different phono stage an especially SUT. More importantly, I wonder if my record collection is worthy of such extravagance. I'm afraid this thought is inspired by a recent purchase of a Sonny Rollins reissue, a new Spanish OJC (Original Jazz Classics) pressing - 180g. It's noisy. I wonder if the noise will subside with subsequent plays, like some modern Blue Notes that were horrible and went to barely acceptable. I guess it takes around $50/per to get a good copy these days. Sad. Have to spend more time at used record bins. I'm not looking forward to replaying the Sonny Rollins. I'm afraid the noise is there to stay and Rollins was never a favorite of mine anyway. I would have passes on this record if it was in a bin. I guess I'll know better next time, but I digress.
This is from the review:
Then I looked at the specs. The Proteus has a claimed internal impedance of 1 ohm! Not as low as the 0.4 ohm of Dr. Kubo's Haniwa HCTR01-6T, which is close to a short circuit, but otherwise as low as I've seen. Ultra-low impedance and inductance produce less phase shift, which improves transient performance, while the coil's lower mass should improve overall speed and mechanical responsiveness.
I wonder how Mikey's misunderstanding of phase and transient response affects his perception of these carts. Does he really think low impedance and inductance means less phase shift? Even though he doesn't know what he's talking about, I think he reports what he hears, and he does say, "The cantilever is of 0.3mm-diameter solid boron, to which is affixed a PA (3x30µm) stylus of solid diamond."
Why can't these Stereophile clowns buy a couple of test records and give even a cursory test report? It won't tell us much about transient response, but high frequency resonance would give us an idea of phase. I think a frequency response graph might scare off perspective sales - read advertisers.
neo
-
Mikey Fremer is not really a test and measurement kind of guy... (my own analysis of him)
With regards to the noisy record, are we talking vinyl roar or pop/click type noise?
The first is friction related - which is why it can improve with time as the needle "polishes" the groove, the second is cleaning related...
For friction related vinyl roar, there are alternate solutions:
1) GruvGlide (processed tallow as a lubricant - it works, and can be cleaned off easily)
2) Last treatment/preservative (Fomblin synthetic lubricant, but in very low concentration, used as per instructions it will not reduce vinyl roar, but used in much higher amounts, I would conjecture that it should)
3) Armorall (this and similar automotive vinyl treatments have been shown to reduce vinyl roar by 20db !!! - Jury is out with regards to long term impact, but quite a few well respected audiophiles use this)
4) Wet Playing (done correctly this is water acting as a lubricant, measured noise reduction is also circa 20db - there are however risks to the "guts" of cartridges, especially risky with megabuck MC's - but used with MM's this is less an issue as the stylus is replaceable. If done correctly, there is very little water used, and very little risk to cartridge/stylus, but it is finicky - also if water used is not high quality purified, then there will be deposits form the water that need cleaning out)
I have briefly explored the LAST formulation (patent is published) - there is a good reason that so little Fomblin is used in it - the stuff is seriously expensive!
In the back of my mind I continue to have a nagging thought that there might be alternative synthetic lubricants with similar results on vinyl to Fomblin, and without the high cost.... every so often I spend some time doing further research on that.
ArmorAll is the simplest easiest, cheapest and perhaps the obvious answer - the only question is long term impact.
I suggest you try Gruv Glide - it does the friction reduction job well and can easily be cleaned off (if desired) - if you use too much of it, the excess will collect on the needle - also easily cleaned off.
Another interesting side effect of some of these products, is that the lubricant can gradually creep under dirt that is firmly stuck on, gradually releasing it (another reason why Gruv Glide can bring up small wads of rubbish under the needle).
Gusten on AK is using an ArmorAll like product (European brand) - and thought that the needle was collecting excess treatment - but on inspecting the wad under the microscope he found it to be dust/garbage.... in other words the lubricant was releasing firmly stuck on dirt, up to 10 plays after the treatment....
So there you go - a few thoughts.... as you know I am currently focused on vinyl cleaning and treatments...
bye for now
David
-
As I reread my last post I was wondering why I'm so tough on Mikey. Some other reviewers are worse with technical matters and most of what he said seems intuitively correct. I guess it's because he is one of the few I read sometimes, who seems to be able to describe in words those differences I've heard on the same equipment, not that I've kept up with the megabuck review items. Other reviewers copy his descriptors. I guess I'm personally embarrassed to give credence to someone on a subjective level who writes such technical garbage. Maybe I'm jealous of his toys.
The noise on these new popularly priced pressings is transient - click and pop scratch types. Imperfect cleaning might have something to do with it, but it only seems to go away with repeated plays. Years ago this was attributed to not de-burring the stampers in the pressing plant. You would think a burr on the stamper would cause a pit in the vinyl, but the vinyl is soft when it's pressed and the pit tends to fill in while leaving a tiny raised bump.
Disclaimer: I never worked in a pressing plant and if this description is inaccurate, please contribute.
David,
Interesting post. Thanks. More on this later.
neo
-
I have in the past, complained(stereophile) about the lack of measurements in regards to TT's and cartridges, it does seem many are willing to plunk down thousands on a cartridge without caring if it meets manufacturers specs or not, business as usual ....
As to noisy vinyl , Neo are you saying some of these new wonder presses and re-issues are noisy compared to old used presses, considering the low volume done today , sad ...
Regards
-
A Wayne,
I think record pressing today is like regaining a lost technology. Back in the day records were it. Your only alternative was tape. Records were pressed in the millions, literally, and certain procedures were automatic. That's not to say defects weren't plentiful, but with so many copies available it didn't seem as disappointing. It was more easily rectified.
Some defects like warps are usually caused by removing the record from the press before it cools sufficiently. This wasn't uncommon in the past. They had to meet production schedules. The sort of noise I got on the few relatively inexpensive LPs I've bought recently, seems to vanish on subsequent playing. That's why I suspect the stampers weren't de-burred properly.
One of the $12 Blue Notes I spoke of had white goo on the surface, only noticeable after I picked up the stylus during play because the SQ was so bad. I already cleaned the record with Pure II and this never happened before using the same cleaner. Was this mold release?
I use a combination of regular RCM type cleaning and Wayner's dry vac super suction. I think I'll get a ultrasonic cleaner some day, but I don't think it will knock off those little bumps like a stylus does. On the other hand, most of these records are replacements and while the cheaper ones don't match the SQ of my former collection, they're not that bad and it's nice to have a copy. The more expensive copies are generally close or even better and it's good that records are being pressed once again.
neo
-
I played the Sonny Rollins (Spanish OJC) again last night. All the noise was gone, quiet as a mouse (almost). I guess the noise could have been from imperfect cleaning, but I don't think so. The OJC sounds excellent. The SQ seems every bit as good as those issued in the '80s, which is very good. The only thing that visually denotes this pressing is the bar code on the back cover. OJC is highly recommended in general, popular price, original cover and liner notes, and good SQ.
I was getting frustrated, to the extent that I said Rollins was never my favorite anyway. That was sour grapes. While Rollins isn't my very favorite sax player, he is one of the most influential and readily listenable players. I have over a dozen Sonny Rollins albums and I bought this as a duplicate, something I almost never do. This copy is mono. I have a Prestige copy from the '70s (I think) in stereo, to compare. It doesn't say electronically rechanneled stereo like some Columbia records, but I'm not sure. The recording is from the '50s. It might have been remastered and issued in stereo.
I want to get a mono cart to see how much difference there is. I also have a bunch of other mono records. Now I'm trying to figure out which cart. AT has a Mono3 LP HOMC that's supposed to be true mono. I think this goes for a little over $100 at Amazon. The DL 102 seems to get much love. It has a higher output and vertical compliance with no vertical output. I guess that's true with any mono cart. Recommendations anyone?
I like to think it's all about the music and that's what I try to base record selection on. But it's about enjoyment. That's why we do all this in the first place. No need to preach to the choir.
neo
-
Hi Neobop,
I've just installed my first mono cartridge...the AT33MONO which may be more than you wish to spend....but is a LOMC true mono and not a HOMC like the AT33LP.
With only about 6 hours on it so far.....the differences this cartridge makes over a 'mono' button on the phonostage or preamp are significant..not so much with the Beatles mono set (perhaps because they were cut with stereo heads).....but with all my other mono recordings, I sit in disbelief..
-
I've had the Denon 102 for several years. It offers a warm and much more musical option than my stereo cartridges. An added bonus is that it plays old mono LPs much quieter.
-
Hi Halcro,
"With only about 6 hours on it so far.....the differences this cartridge makes over a 'mono' button on the phonostage or preamp are significant..not so much with the Beatles mono set (perhaps because they were cut with stereo heads).....but with all my other mono recordings, I sit in disbelief.."
Pertinent comment. Right now I have one preamp with a mono switch and for the other room I have an AT-12E with the phony Precept stylus, and the channels strapped. Outside of impedance considerations they're effectively the same type of summed mono. There's still vertical output mixed in.
I almost never use the 12E. I don't use it for stereo so it requires set-up.
I saw the 33MONO listed. I think it has the same .65mil stylus as the MONO3LP. How do you load it? Specifically, 100 to 275 ohms?
I have mostly "modern" jazz reissues, pressed in the '70s and '80s. Some are Japanese and I'm not sure if they will be better with a cart with more advanced tip like the Ortofon Cadenza Mono (fine line). In other words, pressed with a stereo cutter like the Beatles mono? Cadenza is around $1K. They also have a Quintet Mono (elliptical) - $525.
I'll have to think about it awhile. There are also preamp considerations.
neo
P.S. Nice photo. 3 armed Denon?
-
Hi S Clark,
I remember you mentioned your 102 on an old mono thread. With 2 output pins there's no doubt it's true mono. Is the polarity marked?
It has a hefty output (3mV) for a HOMC. Do you load it at 47K ? Do the instructions say > 1000 ohms?
AFAIK, this is another broadcast classic for heavy arms, but all the mono carts seem to be heavy trackers. Do you have old pressings (before 1960) or mostly newer pressings?
neo
-
Is the polarity marked?...
It has a hefty output (3mV) for a HOMC. Do you load it at 47K ? Do the instructions say > 1000 ohms?...
AFAIK, this is another broadcast classic for heavy arms, but all the mono carts seem to be heavy trackers. Do you have old pressings (before 1960) or mostly newer pressings?
I happened to have a used 102 that is sitting on the shelf, so I took a quick look at it. No +- markings. I'm using it on an old Syntec 220 tonearm. Definitely old broadcast stuff... heavy. I'm tracking at just under three grams. I'm not sure how it's loaded :oops:. IIRC, I had Boris make a Vista pre for it, and he seemed familiar with the cartridge, so I left it to him. I'd bet it's at 47K. Instructions???? What are those? Actually what came with it is in Chinese.
Most of my mono listening is jazz LPs pressed from 1954-1966, so it's old stuff. If you'd like to try a 102, let me know and I'll send my extra to you.
Scott
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=108453)
Hi Halcro,
"With only about 6 hours on it so far.....the differences this cartridge makes over a 'mono' button on the phonostage or preamp are significant..not so much with the Beatles mono set (perhaps because they were cut with stereo heads).....but with all my other mono recordings, I sit in disbelief.."
Pertinent comment. Right now I have one preamp with a mono switch and for the other room I have an AT-12E with the phony Precept stylus, and the channels strapped. Outside of impedance considerations they're effectively the same type of summed mono. There's still vertical output mixed in.
I almost never use the 12E. I don't use it for stereo so it requires set-up.
I saw the 33MONO listed. I think it has the same .65mil stylus as the MONO3LP. How do you load it? Specifically, 100 to 275 ohms?
I have mostly "modern" jazz reissues, pressed in the '70s and '80s. Some are Japanese and I'm not sure if they will be better with a cart with more advanced tip like the Ortofon Cadenza Mono (fine line). In other words, pressed with a stereo cutter like the Beatles mono? Cadenza is around $1K. They also have a Quintet Mono (elliptical) - $525.
I'll have to think about it awhile. There are also preamp considerations.
neo
P.S. Nice photo. 3 armed Denon?
Hi Neobop,
Victor TT-101 actually....
Fully nuded in custom stainless steel cradle with 25lb custom cast bronze arm-pods.... 8)
AT33Mono is less than $400 and is loaded at 220 Ohms. Ortofon Cadenza Mono is over $1,000 but should be even better... :P
-
Sorry Fleib,
If I played the AT33MONO thru the MC input of the Halcro DM10 phono stage....it would be loaded at 220 Ohms..but of course now I use my Kondo KSL-SFZ SUT into the MM input which I load at 47k Ohms and 70pF...
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=108453)Hi Neobop,
Victor TT-101 actually....
Fully nuded in custom stainless steel cradle with 25lb custom cast bronze arm-pods.... 8)
AT33Mono is less than $400 and is loaded at 220 Ohms. Ortofon Cadenza Mono is over $1,000 but should be even better... :P
Lets take another gander at that table. As Jackie Gleason said, How sweet it is!!
Is that a delrin mat? The arm in the back looks like a FR64S? the one on the left a DL 308 maybe? What's the straight one on the right?
You have lots of people drooling around here. :drool: Thanks for the cart info.
Scott,
A most generous offer, thanks. I send you a PM.
It has become abundantly evident that a mono cart can be very beneficial, depending on the pressing. I don't know if the majority of my mono records were cut with a mono cutter. Most mono carts have a spherical stylus which varies from .7mil to 3mil for 78s. The Ortofon Cadenza was obviously designed to extract the most from "modern" mono pressings. The 2M mono has a spherical stylus and I believe the new Quintet mono has a .3 x .7 elliptical. It will take awhile, but I'll let you know what I can figure out.
Lots of stuff to sort out here including your available inputs, arm mass and the rest of your physical set-up considerations.
neo
-
Sweet looking rig ................ :thumb:
-
Thanks for the compliments guys.... :D
That's actually a white record on that first image Neobop.... :singing:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=108487)
On this image....that's
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=108489)
the Micro Seiki Cu-180 copper mat...
You're right Neo....that's a FR-64s arm at the back...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=108488)
whilst it's a Micro Seiki MA-505s arm on the left 8)
The straight 12" arm on the right is the SAEC WE-8000/ST
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=108490)
One of my favourite all-time arms... :rotflmao:
Regards
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=108491)
-
:thumb: :green: :drool:
-
In case some haven't been following the Agon thread, the latest and greatest MM is the JVC X-1.
There was also a Z (1&2) and there are SAS styli for the Z only.
There's limited info in the database. The X is beryllium/shibata and is 2.7mV with response to 60K.
The Z is 4mV with response going an octave lower. Two of the Z variants have 2.4K impedance.
It's the X getting the raves - apparently a rare beast. The specs on the Z look like they might be similar to the Jico SAS MM1 cart they sold a few years back.
neo
-
I have an original x1mkii stylus and have been trying to get a body for more than 3 years.... Each time one comes up, it goes for more than I am willing to pay......
It is a heavily laminated core in a very shure like design, and was made after JVC's extensive phase and CD4 research... yes it should be good
-
I have an original x1mkii stylus and have been trying to get a body for more than 3 years.... Each time one comes up, it goes for more than I am willing to pay......
It is a heavily laminated core in a very shure like design, and was made after JVC's extensive phase and CD4 research... yes it should be good
You should go on Agon and give Nandric a PM. He has three bodies and one original stylus. I believe Don Griff has one of the other ones. Maybe if he doesn't want to sell he would loan you one to try with your stylus. I'd like to see some objective data on this. It's one thing for someone to say it's the greatest MM ever, and another for it to be true. All those carts of the month were the best at one time. In reality they were all the best and none were the best, a contradiction in terms based on subjective reality.
Seems the X1 is 470DC, 2.7mV and tops out at 60K (Sounds like an AT12S w/beryllium, or a 20SS)
The Z1 is 510DC, 4.0mV and goes to 50K Probably a combination of stronger magnets and slightly bigger coils. These might be closer than I first thought. The database has Z1 extension to 30-35K and Z1 impedance of 2.4K.
neo
-
I do have a couple of Z1 bodies, but the original beryllium styli are unobtainium, I grabbed the X1 stylus when I had the chance - ... I will try to contact Nandric....
-
I have an original x1mkii stylus and have been trying to get a body for more than 3 years.... Each time one comes up, it goes for more than I am willing to pay......
It is a heavily laminated core in a very shure like design, and was made after JVC's extensive phase and CD4 research... yes it should be good
Did JVC actually manufacture any carts? Most of their lineup were made by AT. These (X1, Z1) have a Shure style body/stylus, but who manufactured them?
There aren't too many potential candidates left for Agon cart-of-the-month or were some 4-ch designs overlooked? These are the ones with suitably low inductance and high frequency extension. Of course this doesn't eliminate later designs with such attributes, but most vintage designs are much higher inductance and many are of the mellow variety.
Shure had a M24H that was made for 4-ch. Anyone?
It had response to 50K, 3mV, and 510 ohms (database). I found one on fleabey for $300 from a Japanese seller. It's probably still listed. Does Jico make a SAS for this?
I wonder what would happen if you fitted a 20SS stylus in an AT12S(a), or transplanted a boron/ML ? Most evaluations were done with people stuck at one resistance setting and using inappropriate capacitance. I think future MM/MI revelations will be with hybrid combos or guys like Soundsmith improving an existing design.
neo
-
I have wondered whether the JVC MM cartridges were in fact made by JVC - they do look very Shure like!
BUT - the JVC MC's were definitely designed and built in house, so I think it likely that parts of the MM might have been licensed (and perhaps built?) by the likes of Shure, but there is no question that they had the ability...
I have wondered about the M24H myself - but they are pretty rare and I have not found one in the wild at a reasonable price...
Quite a bit of SS's business now seems to be exactly that, further development of some of the better existing designs (B&O MMC, Strain-Gauge)...
bye for now
David
-
AT has another AT33 variant:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/AT33SA.html
Boron/shibata. Not sure if this is a US model. I would expect the price to be a little lower. You can get an ART7 for a hair more on Amazon.
The ART9 is about $200 more:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATART9.html
Wonder if the sell this on Amazon. Amazon has some Japanese vendors and you get it directly from them. Amazon backs it up, but you might want to check on warranty. Usually a cart either works or not, and a limited warranty doesn't do much. If there was a problem it could be a hassle returning it to Japan.
S Clark kindly lent me a DL102 (mono) cart to check out. I haven't listened to it yet due to fitment problems. Take a look:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/DENONDL102.html
This is a physically big cart. You have to stack the tags on the 2 pins. I'm not complaining, just having trouble with changing leads and fitting it in a removable headshell. Most of my leads are sealed and not designed for stacking. Sometimes when you bend them they break and you need extra long mounting screws..... So far it's been a comedy of errors. After I get it going, I'll let you know.
neo
-
Hi Neobop,
I've just installed my first mono cartridge...the AT33MONO which may be more than you wish to spend....but is a LOMC true mono and not a HOMC like the AT33LP.
With only about 6 hours on it so far.....the differences this cartridge makes over a 'mono' button on the phonostage or preamp are significant..not so much with the Beatles mono set (perhaps because they were cut with stereo heads).....but with all my other mono recordings, I sit in disbelief..
I just got Scott's 102 set-up the other night. I've only played one record and I think it might need some loosening up, but the presentation was superior to a stereo cart or a strapped stereo cart. This was on an old Blue Note Kenny Durham album, one with a blue and white label. By presentation I mean everything is more coherent, natural sounding. I'm not sure how to express it but it sounds more like everything is from the same recording instead of sounding disjointed, like you're listening to parts of the whole.
I have a number of Japanese monos that are probably more modern pressings. I wonder if most were cut on a stereo or mono cutter.
The DL102 is like a mono 103 except HOMC - 3mV, VTF 2 to 4g, 7cu @100Hz, .7 spherical. Only 2 pins which are extra long to allow doubling up the wires. It's quite long and might not fit in some cramped headshells. The doubled up wires were a bit of a problem. Most of mine have heat shrink or something preventing pushing one on far enough to allow another behind it. Not that hard to solve, just a bit of a pain.
So for now it resides on a Sony PUA-7. Looking forward to checking out some Clifford Brown and a bunch of other mono pressings.
neo
-
I've only played one record and I think it might need some loosening up, but the presentation was superior to a stereo cart or a strapped stereo cart. This was on an old Blue Note Kenny Durham album, one with a blue and white label. By presentation I mean everything is more coherent, natural sounding. I'm not sure how to express it but it sounds more like everything is from the same recording instead of sounding disjointed, like you're listening to parts of the whole.
I agree that it's difficult to describe the difference in presentation between a 'mono button' and a 'true' mono cartridge... :?
All I can do is repeat what a good audiophile friend told me......there IS a difference.... 8)
Interested in hearing some further thoughts from you when you've listened to more albums... :duh:
-
Any of you guys with true mono cartridges done a bit of CRO type analysis? Especially compared to a stereo cartridge patched for mono?
I would be very curious to know what comes up - Although I have a plethora of cartridges, I don't believe I have a single mono, as I always believed that patching or mono button (same difference) was identical to a mono cartridge......
So I cannot even test it ... :duh:
Might keep my eyes open for a basic mono cartridge...
-
We all know the basic difference between a mono and stereo groove - horizontal only modulation vs. 2 @ 45°.
When they say a true mono cart has no vertical compliance they're talking about output. True mono = 1 coil or set of coils for horizontal modulation only.
If you have a stereo cart and connect the channels together, it's almost the same as a mono preamp switch. It's not exactly the same because of the paralleling, and impedance considerations. Anyway, it makes sense that it would be desirable to eliminate any vertical output (noise and extraneous info) when playing a mono record.
The problem, at least for me, is figuring out exactly what kind of record you have and how is it played best. A modern mono pressing like the new Beatles, is a stereo pressing with the same modulation on each side of the groove, so is the superior sound coming from the remastering to the original mono tape presented in mono, or mono playback? Everybody says that there's little or no improvement from playing these with a true mono cart. I'm speculating that it would be better with a with a stereo cart with a superior tip profile and better resolution, with the channels summed rather than true mono cart.
The Ortofon 2M Mono is a modified stereo cart, at least according to their description.
http://ortofon.com/hifi/products/cartridges/2m-series/2m-mono
"•2M Mono uses a strapped output to deliver the same output signal from both sets of pole pins. This effectively eliminates the need for mono-specific equipment, making it possible to enjoy true mono reproduction on any stereo playback system."
Unless they're using the word strapped in a different way, as in connected to another set of pins rather than combined, this is a modified stereo cart?
A variant of this with a shibata tip (SE) is the Beatles Box edition.
As far as I can tell the Grado monos are strapped stereo, as is the older OM 25 mono. The 2 AT monos are said to be true mono? This is confusing as hell. Ortofon says the cart is strapped yet uses the description true mono. If the coils are connected together will vertical output be cancelled? Do you need samples and an X-ray machine to figure this out?
Anyone with specific knowledge, please chime in.
neo
-
I just got Scott's 102 set-up the other night. I've only played one record and I think it might need some loosening up, but the presentation was superior to a stereo cart or a strapped stereo cart. This was on an old Blue Note Kenny Durham album, one with a blue and white label. By presentation I mean everything is more coherent, natural sounding. I'm not sure how to express it but it sounds more like everything is from the same recording instead of sounding disjointed, like you're listening to parts of the whole...
That pretty much parallels my impressions as well. I've described the sound of the Denon mono as being more full sounding than stereo. I have a fairly large mono classical collection from the 50's and early 60's. It seems that they have a bit more dynamics than stereo. I have both mono and stereo Heifetz Tchaikovsky Conc. on first pressing RCA- there are things that mono does better.
-
I haven't played a lot of mono records with the 102 yet, but I'm definitely getting the impression that results are pressing dependent.
By that I mean mono records cut with a mono cutter head or a stereo one.
The Kenny Durham I mentioned earlier looks like an original Blue Note mono pressing. The change in presentation was rather dramatic.
By contrast, a Japanese reissue of Clifford Brown's Study in Brown (1958) seemed better (to me) with a stereo cart. I didn't do a direct comparison and this is based on memory of the stereo presentation. I'll check this out further. I'm not sure how the Japanese record was pressed. It might have been made in the '70s or '80s. The Brownie record didn't seem to have that change in presentation like the Kenny.
Scott, Halcro,
Are you guys getting similar results? At first I thought, the sound of the 102 was very different from what I'm used to, and that might make changes harder to figure out. In a way it seems to make it easier to identify that change in presentation.
neo
-
Dialoum, Hi David,
I have a lead on a JVC X1 body. I already have one and I remember that you have been looking for just the body. Tell me what you would like to pay (if interested), and I will twist his arm! (grin)
Regards,
Don
-
David,
Cool move by Griff. 8) Hope it works out.
The mono thing: I think the number one consideration is your mono collection. If you have a bunch of old mono records like Scott, a mono cart will give you a dramatic boost in performance. The whole presentation changes. The cut-off point seems to be around 1968 for phasing out mono lathes, but not everything before that is true mono recording. "They" began to use stereo cutters in the mid/late '50s, but different companies at different times.
True mono carts usually have a .7 spherical to fit the wider groove of these pressings. Earlier pressings (not microgroove) are better served with a 1 mil tip. 78's need a 3 mil tip, I believe. Some modern mono carts like the Ortofon 2M Mono and 2M Mono SE, are strapped stereo carts. The SE has a shibata tip and obviously is designed for modern mono pressings. Check out the specs. Resistance and inductance are roughly half of their 2M counterparts:
2M Mono - 350mH, 700 ohm
2M Blue - 700mH, 1.3K ohm
2M Mono SE - 300mH, 600 ohm
2M Black - 630mH, 1.2K ohm
The earlier OM D25 Mono has a tip a hair smaller than 1 mil. You might be able to use other OM tips for modern pressings? I'm not sure this is a strapped stereo cart. Resistance and inductance are the same as OM 5E. At least according to LP Gear.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/OROMD25M.html
Strapped carts: You can strap a cart right at the pins to experiment or have a dedicated mono cart. Take a single strand of copper wire and wrap it around the 2 plus and 2 minus pins (separately) in a figure 8. Make sure the wire is contacting the pins nice and snug. :thumb:
You can use 2 Y adaptors instead. 1 with 2 females and 1 with 2 males. Plug the singles together, then plug the 2 females into your tonearm cable and the 2 males into the phono stage.
Considerations: Strapping you cart will cut the cart impedance in half, and with most also the inductance. So you'll have to hear how it sounds. It could sound better. A more advanced tip should be better for modern reissues. Vertical noise might be cancelled or mostly cancelled in this configuration. According to Steve Hoffman this is true, but it might not be different than a mono switch or combining the channels after the phono stage.
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/if-you-have-a-turntable-you-need-to-play-your-mono-records-in-true-mono-how-to-do-it-cheaply.81073/
Combining the channels before the phono stage could hum. If you want to play modern mono pressings w/o buying a mono cart you'll have to experiment. At this point I can't say definitively how much better a true mono cart is than combined channels on a stereo cart on vintage pressings. That's up next, but the problem is I don't have a similar cart to the 102. I strapped the channels on my AT12E and it seemed pretty good when I checked it out briefly. I'll have to play the Kenny Durham and see if it has the magical transformation. I'll let you know.
neo
-
I didn't set-up the 12E. I figured it didn't have the right tip for the original mono pressing. Instead, I put the AT15/20SS back on and didn't strap the output. With the Japanese reissue the SQ was better with the SS in stereo, than with the 102. I used Y adaptors and combined the channels before the phono inputs. The SQ got worse. Then I ditched the Y and listened for awhile in stereo. Into side 2, I turned off the amp and inserted the Y between pre and amp while the record was playing. This was an improvement.
About strapping - I'm thinking you might get better results with a high inductance/resistance cart (if it's high output). You can see from the Ortofon numbers that the 2M series has a fair amount of inductance and cutting this in half leaves you with a "reasonable" amount for the voicing of the cart. If you start with a low inductance cart, cutting that in half might be hard to get a balanced EQ.
Using crappy Y connectors connected together isn't a good idea as an addition to your tonearm cable. Next up is the 12E, a high inductance model that I already have strapped, so no Y. I have that phony Precept stylus on there that looks like a .3 or .4 elliptical.
Interesting thing about the AT33 Mono. Separation between vertical and horizontal output is listed as 30dB.
http://eu.audio-technica.com/en/products/cartridges/product.asp?catID=8&subID=57&prodID=4072
The AT Mono 3 doesn't have that spec. It's a HOMC with a .6 mil spherical.
http://eu.audio-technica.com/en/products/cartridges/product.asp?catID=8&subID=57&prodID=4501
Grado carts have the coils in a hum-bucking configuration. This might be the reason their mono carts have the same inductance as the stereo ones?
neo
-
Tip size - According to Ortofon you could benefit from an advanced profile tip even on older microgroove records. I'll have to check this out first before I mess with the 12E. This is a history of the microgroove record, first introduced in 1948.
http://ortofon.com/hifi/products/mono-series
I'll see if I can get similar results with the older Kenny Durham LP, as with using the 102. I'll try to find another older mono pressing in my collection. Most are modern reissues. This really is confusing, especially comparing carts with decidedly different sound.
neo
-
This really is confusing, especially comparing carts with decidedly different sound.
Whilst I admire your endeavours Neo.....I agree with you that there are just too many variables in this exercise.... :duh:
Apart from the records themselves which may be originals or re-issues cut with stereo heads.....who knows :scratch:
There is the objective issue (in my case)...of trying to compare my true mono AT33MONO cartridge with an FR-66s arm on my Raven AC-2
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=109691)
against a DIFFERENT LOMC stereo cartridge on the same arm and table using the mono button..... :roll:
Perhaps the stereo LOMC cartridge is a better cartridge than the mono one regardless.... :thumb:
Or do I compare the AT-33MONO with one of 30 MM stereo cartridges on different arms on a different turntable...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=109692)
All I can really venture at this stage...is that for the majority of my 60 mono records.....there is a greater sense of realism and enjoyment for me, with the true mono cartridge.... :thumb:
-
Halcro, now you are just showing off..... :drool:
Maybe I should drop you a line when I'm in Sydney.... but I would have to visit with bib and towel....
-
Halcro, now you are just showing off..... :drool:
Maybe I should drop you a line when I'm in Sydney.... but I would have to visit with bib and towel....
Ha Ha......you got me David.... :oops:
Any time you're in Sydney...you're welcome to drop by.... 8)
-
Whilst I admire your endeavours Neo.....I agree with you that there are just too many variables in this exercise.... :duh:
Apart from the records themselves which may be originals or re-issues cut with stereo heads.....who knows :scratch:
There is the objective issue (in my case)...of trying to compare my true mono AT33MONO cartridge with an FR-66s arm on my Raven AC-2
against a DIFFERENT LOMC stereo cartridge on the same arm and table using the mono button..... :roll:
Perhaps the stereo LOMC cartridge is a better cartridge than the mono one regardless.... :thumb:
Or do I compare the AT-33MONO with one of 30 MM stereo cartridges on different arms on a different turntable...
All I can really venture at this stage...is that for the majority of my 60 mono records.....there is a greater sense of realism and enjoyment for me, with the true mono cartridge.... :thumb:
Quoting without the distractions.
Not ruling out anything at this point our issues are 1), true mono groove vs. a stereo groove, and 2), a true mono cart vs. channel summing.
I didn't see the post or opinion but it seems that J. Carr agrees with Ortofon about using advanced tips. Issues here - early pressings vary widely (pun intended) in groove width, and narrow tips could scrape bottom and/or have less intimate contact with the groove wall?
Ortofon claims that mono grooves are V shaped only wider. Other presumably knowledgeable sources say early mono grooves have steeper side walls and combined with wider groove width, insure less than optimal tracing using more advanced tips.
I suspect there's some truth in both points of view. Even though the microgroove was introduced in '48, I doubt if it adopted by many record companies until the '50s. If your old record specifies RIAA curve, then it was pressed after 1956 (I believe). Which brings up another point about EQ of vintage records and playback variations. :duh:
True mono carts - Think about it. How can a cart with vertical compliance have no vertical output? Carts work by cantilever movements exciting the generator, so if there is vertical motion..... Modern mono carts with vertical compliance use design schemes to cancel out most vertical information. The AT33 Mono has 30dB of vertical rejection at 1KHz. I imagine a cart tracking at 2.5 - 4g with no vertical compliance, wouldn't be kind to your mono reissue.
I didn't play with the mono stuff at all last night. To be continued.
neo
-
Last night I was listening to Gliere's The Red Poppy on a 1958 Westminster Lab label (W-Lab 7001). These are some of the higher quality mono classical recordings, as they were very aware of keeping the spacing wide between the grooves and limit the info per side to avoid the inner section of the lp. The key being that in 1958 they were already shooting for audiophile pressings. For me, a mono cartridge takes better advantage of the increased dynamics.
-
Yesterday evening I was typing a technical query for J. Carr on the agon forum, when the answer dawned on me. That was a bit of luck as that thread has become nasty (for me) and technical matters are best avoided there. It might be better not to elaborate, it's just a convenient way to ask a technical question.
What is a "true" mono cart? It's one with no output for vertical cantilever movements. This is accomplished by either having no vertical cantilever movement (no vertical compliance), or somehow having no output for vertical cantilever movements. This is not the same as blending the channels as in a mono switch. A mono switch will blend vertical output equally between the two channels, not eliminate it. Some people have speculated that strapping a stereo cart will cancel vertical output, but this doesn't make sense. Why would connecting the channels together selectively cancel vertical output?
Perhaps you get 6dB of common noise rejection like a balanced connection over single ended, but there's no mechanism for cancelling vertical.
This is from the AT33 Mono link a few posts back:
"The AT33Mono is made specifically for use on mono systems. It has a horizontal coil, and so in principle only generates electricity horizontally.
The AT33Mono produces sound to a very high quality because it does not easily pick up unnecessary strain components from distorted or scratched records, producing audio that you couldn't possibly get from a stereo cartridge.
The AT33Mono also has appropriate compliance in the vertical direction, so will not cause damage to stereo records. Enjoy those well-known classic mono records of yesteryear with the AT33Mono."
There was the answer all along. The 102 is a similar type cart with vertical compliance so you can play modern records, but no vertical output.
My query had to do with exactly how this is accomplished. It shouldn't matter if the coil is horizontal, if the cantilever is moving vertically there should be a corresponding output from the coil. I believe the answer to this is mechanical. The cantilever isn't connected directly to coil(s), there's a yoke and by orienting the mechanical design the vertical movements can be virtually eliminated.
If you have a new or pristine modern mono record (Beatles), using a stereo cart and mono switch isn't really different than playing a stereo record the normal way. A vintage pressing, especially a worn copy, is better served with a "true" mono cart.
neo
-
Searching for AT12S specs I goggled a gaggle of CD4 More pay dirt!!
Popular Mechanics 4/75
This starts on page 67 - scroll up to the sexy pic of the AT15 or 20
http://books.google.com/books?id=9OEDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA68&lpg=PA68&dq=AT12S+cartridge+specs&source=bl&ots=n2cJWnXL5W&sig=J7Ip_M8rib3mYWums8eJm6RCRWk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pPuCVPytDYa8yQS79YCYBA&ved=0CEwQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=AT12S%20cartridge%20specs&f=false
neo
-
You win the contest for longest hyperlink! Thanks.
-
Interesting article even with no test report, good comments on listening. Seems the B&O was the standout. Too bad no Shure or JVC in the survey.
One thing I found peculiar is they said no apprecable difference loading at 47K or 100K. These are 4-ch carts, but still.
The AT12S was the nice sounding bargain. Wonder how it would sound with an SS stylus.
neo
-
Neo, I'd assumed you'd already investigated the 12S. The 12S is low inductance but in a plastic body correct? I can tell you that the 12S is highly thought of on epay.
-
I've used the AT12S, and like it, just not as much as the AT20ss..
Was it Nandric on Agon who mentioned that he had had his broken AT150ANV retipped by SS, and that the result was superior to the original AT150ANV!?
That would imply that you could outperform the ATN150MLx by having an old (perhaps worn out) ATN120 stylus retipped at SS, and mounting it on a relevant body (AT150/155 or for lower mass 100/120/130/140/440 etc...)
Similarly any of the round plug AT's could be sent off for the same treatment...
If the metal bodied ones are more your thing, us an AT13/14/15/20 body, if plastic AT10/11/12 (and ATS13/14)
There is wide scope for exploration of bodies compined with retipper options.
Although not as economical as some of the finds that were around 3 or 4 years ago, in the current market the retipper pricing on an old but high quality body seems to me to be very good value
-
No I never had a 12S. That's 250mH ? It seems that virtually all ATs improve greatly with an exotic stylus and the 12S is said to be pretty nice with a bonded shibata, so maybe there's potential there. Round plug exotic styli are hard to come by anymore. The 15/20 series should fit. You might have to modify the carrier. I wonder if a nuded round plug stylus has compromised fitment. You'd think it would have the potential to rotate except for the magnet assembly holding it in place.
I don't remember Nandric's post about the 150ANV SS improvement. I do remember his not liking it at first and changing his mind. The 150ANV comes stock with a sapphire/ML, so take it with a grain of salt. Some people's favorite cart is the one they're trying to sell. I noticed he was touting/selling Kisiki, then Magic Diamond more recently. Maybe he buys two and sells the one he likes less. I invited him to join us here, but he hasn't shown up. Maybe it's for the best.
David,
On Asylum and now Agon, I read the Shure V15V/SAS needs 27K/700pF ? What's up with that, you have to lower the HFR to the lower treble? What test record are you using?
I remember your saying the higher inductance models are better suited for SAS (V15IV). 700pF seems excessive. What about HF extension, still decent with boron?
neo
-
Yes that's right - first time I tested the V15V-SAS I was very disappointed, a huge rise in the high end, extending right down into the midrange...
When I analysed the response by deducting the electrical influences, the result was however very close to what I was seeing from the Shure 1000E-SAS (500mH non laminated core) - so the mechanical response of the system was the same.
I then did an extensive series of measurements at 4 different resistive loads for each of 5 or 6 different capacitive loads, and started running figures through my cartridge model....
Like any cartridge loading, it is always a balancing act, you can accept a little more high end rise, in exchange for a flatter midrange and lower high end, or a flatter high end, in exchange for a slight midrange trough....
But either alternative was using a lowered R loading and a hugely increased C loading.
To put it really simply - the SAS resonant frequency is too low and the resonance damping within the suspension too limited, for it to run effectively in a 320mH low inductance body.
So you have to adjust the loading to provide a similar effect to running it in a higher inductance body - which is basically what that load does.
At 27k/700pf the V15V-SAS sounds like a V15V - neutral, detailed, yet relaxed, without loosing dynamics.
I admit to not being happy myself with such extreme C loading in particular ... I am not too fussed about the R loading - it does lower the V a little but not too much.
When I compare the response of the V15V-SAS with that I achieved with either the V15RS-SAS or the 1000E-SAS, it becomes clear that with a 500mH body (the V15RS is 405mH) the optimal loading is likely to be in a "standard" shure range (ie: 47k and 250pf to 400pf).
It just so happens that the V15-III & IV are both 500mH bodies (same generator) - both are laminated cores, so we minimise the eddy current losses.... I think these are the perfect bodies for SAS.
Other cartridges that would suit the SAS well would be the Grace F8 (580mH) but Jico doesn't make a stylus for it (why?), Azden YM-P20/50 - also no SAS...
Pioneer PC330 - 416mH - this is a body I have, and there is a SAS available - but its inductance is a little low, so it would require a relatively high but not extreme capacitance - maybe 400pf - on the other hand I do not know whether it has a laminated core - very few details around on this family....
The JVC Z1 has potential - it has a laminated core, inductance at 400mH is perhaps too low again - heading towards the same problem as the V15V-SAS...
So catch 22 - there are a number of good laminated core bodies available that might suit the SAS - but most of them are too low inductance to be ideal with the SAS (if neutrality is one objective) - at "standard" loadings.
I have not gotten around to biting the bullet and ordering a 4th SAS stylus to test my theory and fit one to one of my V15III or IV bodies...
In theory - the high capacitance should not be an issue as the phase effects of the mechanical rise, should be counteracted by the phase effect of the capacitance - resulting therefore in neutral or close to neutral phase - but I still feel uncomfortable with such a high capacitance.
Extreme configurations usually have a habit of having extreme problems that might not be immediately obvious, but can bite you in the butt....
I have no audible or measurable reason at this stage for this wariness... but I do want to compare the V15V-SAS to a V15IV-SAS with both loaded correctly to achieve a flat/neutral response.
My preferred test record is a Denon frequency sweep test record with tracks extending to 50kHz - it is recorded FLAT - no RIAA, and has a seperate test track up to 500Hz and another one for 500Hz to 50kHz
I have also run tests using the CBS labs test records (Spot, sweep and pink noise) and the results have been consistent.
I also use the HiFi news test record pink noise track, but it is not reliable above 15khz and is definitely the odd man out in this bunch - the F/R plots are clearly different above 15kHz,
None of the test records claim to be more accurate than +/-1db - and there is that level of variation (and perhaps a touch more) between the different test records, and sometimes between the different test methods within the same (CBS) family of records.
So when it comes down to final fine tuning the ear must rule for the final +/-1.5db variance... and I therefore do not fuss too much in terms of measurement /precision about getting too precise about R or C loading (mind you at the lower end 20pf is a big change at 100pf, but when you are at 600pf, the same difference requires more like 100pf... and a 20pf difference is neither here nor there)
Anyway, this aspect of vinyl is on my backburner at the moment... but I do intend to come back to it...
bye for now
David
-
Hi
over the weekend i pick up a realistic V15 RS but it need a new stylus which one do u recommend?
Thanks :thumb:
lap
-
"To put it really simply - the SAS resonant frequency is too low and the resonance damping within the suspension too limited, for
it to run effectively in a 320mH low inductance body. So you have to adjust the loading to provide a similar effect to running it in a
higher inductance body - which is basically what that load does."
That's disappointing to say the least. I thought the SAS is boron/MR. Some kind of 2-piece heavy cantilever? Where is typical HFR,
16K ?
"In theory - the high capacitance should not be an issue as the phase effects of the mechanical rise, should be counteracted by the
phase effect of the capacitance - resulting therefore in neutral or close to neutral phase - but I still feel uncomfortable with such a high
capacitance."
Seems to me just the opposite. Phase shift occurs at HFR and damping extends it in both directions. High capacitance will lower HFR
and make phase shift extend even lower. As far as phase is concerned the SAS is no better than other cantilevers with similar HFR.
Improvement probably comes from resolution/detail afforded by the cantilever and microridge.
Which brings up the matter with the X-1, 4-ch cart. I think inductance is even lower than Z-1. Maybe it's a situation of different
response and the SAS compliments instead bumping up in the wrong places. You have a stock stylus which probably has a higher
resonant frequency. They say these sound good with a cheap replacement so it shouldn't be a problem.
neo
-
I have been trying to get hold of you neobob lost touch since you picked up you things at my house and I moved.
-
Welcome Triodezxr,
Welcome to the monkey house in the zoological garden of audible delights.
Don't try to adjust the controls on your monitor, it's not a malfunction. You've entered the twilight zone, or I have.
Hope you stick around. PM sent.
neo
-
That's disappointing to say the least. I thought the SAS is boron/MR. Some kind of 2-piece heavy cantilever? Where is typical HFR,
16K ?
It is Boron/MR (or ML) - with an extended support pipe and the pivot point moved forward within the pipe, allowing for a shorter real "cantilever" - I need to have another look at the diagrams of the SAS...
There are a couple of resonances, with the first very well damped and controlled at 13 to 14kHz - it is only perceivable if you know where it is and can inspect the measurments looking specifically for it, otherwise it is lost within normal variations - however it is consistent across various measurement records and multiple tests. On some SAS specimens it is more visible than on others.
I do not know what is the cause of this resonance but suspect that it is the tension wire - and variation is due to individual production variations between samples.
The next resonance is at 28kHz - and this is relatively undamped - the rise to that resonance is the main thing that needs to be controlled to provide a neutral response... it goes up to over +10db.
The original V15VMR stylus depending on model/variation went from 32kHz to 35kHz (possibly even higher on the Ultra500... ) the tip mass did vary with the very best VST or Ultra versions having lower tip mass - due to thinner cantilever tube walls - the higher spec ones might have been hand picked?
The impact of raising that HF resonance is substantial - the boost on the SAS fades out around 14khz (actually a bit further, around 11kHz - probably due to damping) , where the VN5MR fades out naturally at 16 to 18kHz and with damping influence perhaps down as low as 14 to 15kHz.
How audible is that difference? well, anything below 15kHz is going to be quite audible - and the VN5MR moves the resonance amplitude boost out to above 15khz, then further controlls it with loading (and cartridge inductance) to result in a spec of +/- 1db to 20kHz
"In theory - the high capacitance should not be an issue as the phase effects of the mechanical rise, should be counteracted by the
phase effect of the capacitance - resulting therefore in neutral or close to neutral phase - but I still feel uncomfortable with such a high
capacitance."
Seems to me just the opposite. Phase shift occurs at HFR and damping extends it in both directions. High capacitance will lower HFR
and make phase shift extend even lower. As far as phase is concerned the SAS is no better than other cantilevers with similar HFR.
Improvement probably comes from resolution/detail afforded by the cantilever and microridge.
The High capacitance affects phase in the opposite direction to that generated by HFR, it is sort of like having two treble controls, and turning one up while turning the other down - net effect is Zero (assuming they are calibrated to match each other).
You can model the HFR resonance as an electrical resonance - it has exactly the same behaviour in terms of signal effect both in the amplitude and phase domains.
You can therefore also reverse that effect by building a filter network that has the exact opposite effect - that would be the standard Inductance/Capacitance/Resistance network set up by cartridge with R and C load.
But for the very same reasons that we like to avoid treble / bass controls, ie that there are other distortions added by each stage of processing, is I think applicable here. Yes it returns phase to near neutral, along with amplitude/frequency... but has it in the process boosted other distortions and effectively resulted in a step backwards? - Not sure!
Which brings up the matter with the X-1, 4-ch cart. I think inductance is even lower than Z-1. Maybe it's a situation of different
response and the SAS compliments instead bumping up in the wrong places. You have a stock stylus which probably has a higher
resonant frequency. They say these sound good with a cheap replacement so it shouldn't be a problem.
neo
I started looking for the X1 back when I was focused on low inductance bodies.... at the time I had not understood the relationship of phase to cartridge loading and inductance...
But the X1/X2 may also have other benefits, although not obvious in its appearance, it is a magnesium body, most likely potted as well, and in the case of the X2, it specifically states that it has internal anti-resonant treatment.
I think it likely that its performance should be almost identical to the V15V (same or very similar design and inductance) - but the X1/X2 may perform closer to the legendary Ultra500 due to the mounting and shell construction.
Still I am wary of the combination of SAS/and JVC given my experience with the Shure
bye for now
David
David
-
I misunderstood. From what you said I thought SAS HFR was similar to aluminum. So, it's 28KHz and damped to 10dB rise:
The next resonance is at 28kHz - and this is relatively undamped - the rise to that resonance is the main thing that needs to be controlled to provide a neutral response... it goes up to over +10db.
The original V15VMR stylus depending on model/variation went from 32kHz to 35kHz (possibly even higher on the Ultra500... ) the tip mass did vary with the very best VST or Ultra versions having lower tip mass - due to thinner cantilever tube walls - the higher spec ones might have been hand picked?
The impact of raising that HF resonance is substantial - the boost on the SAS fades out around 14khz (actually a bit further, around 11kHz - probably due to damping) , where the VN5MR fades out naturally at 16 to 18kHz and with damping influence perhaps down as low as 14 to 15kHz.
How audible is that difference? well, anything below 15kHz is going to be quite audible - and the VN5MR moves the resonance amplitude boost out to above 15khz, then further controlls it with loading (and cartridge inductance) to result in a spec of +/- 1db to 20kHz
I don't entirely understand your explanation. The boost fades out - you mean the lower end of the boost, and because the VN5MR has higher freq of HFR + more damping, it doesn't augment below 16KHz, and augments less? This is what I assume you mean and it would imply the SAS is inappropriate as a replacement for the VN5MR. Have you tried loading at 10 to 15K w/o such extraordinary capacitance?
This seems like the Peter principle at work. With the V15V Jico has reached their level of incompetence.
The High capacitance affects phase in the opposite direction to that generated by HFR, it is sort of like having two treble controls, and turning one up while turning the other down - net effect is Zero (assuming they are calibrated to match each other).
You can model the HFR resonance as an electrical resonance - it has exactly the same behaviour in terms of signal effect both in the amplitude and phase domains.
You can therefore also reverse that effect by building a filter network that has the exact opposite effect - that would be the standard Inductance/Capacitance/Resistance network set up by cartridge with R and C load.
But for the very same reasons that we like to avoid treble / bass controls, ie that there are other distortions added by each stage of processing, is I think applicable here. Yes it returns phase to near neutral, along with amplitude/frequency... but has it in the process boosted other distortions and effectively resulted in a step backwards? - Not sure!
I started looking for the X1 back when I was focused on low inductance bodies.... at the time I had not understood the relationship of phase to cartridge loading and inductance...
But the X1/X2 may also have other benefits, although not obvious in its appearance, it is a magnesium body, most likely potted as well, and in the case of the X2, it specifically states that it has internal anti-resonant treatment.
I think it likely that its performance should be almost identical to the V15V (same or very similar design and inductance) - but the X1/X2 may perform closer to the legendary Ultra500 due to the mounting and shell construction.
Still I am wary of the combination of SAS/and JVC given my experience with the Shure
"The High capacitance affects phase in the opposite direction to that generated by HFR, it is sort of like having two treble controls, and turning one up while turning the other down - net effect is Zero (assuming they are calibrated to match each other)."
"You can model the HFR resonance as an electrical resonance - it has exactly the same behaviour in terms of signal effect both in the amplitude and phase domains."
Wherefore thou utter such conjecture? You now measure phase, determined the sign thereof and declare peace between domains?
I suspect the SAS is a better match for the X1, Z1, simply because those carts most likely have a stock cantilever resonance close to that of SAS.
neo
-
Have you tried loading at 10 to 15K w/o such extraordinary capacitance?
This seems like the Peter principle at work. With the V15V Jico has reached their level of incompetence.
I agree, I am not convinced by the Jico VN5MR-SAS as a replacement for the original VN5MR (and am a fan of the Peter principle!)
I find it interesting that the VN5MR is the only stylus for which Jico have an alternate Boron cantilevered option, the non SAS MR in their catalogue, which is built more like the original Shure in terms of suspension etc...
But I have not tried it, and have not read any reviews of it - the reputation of the SAS has lead to people purchasing only that... also for a long time it was not clear that the VN5MR has a boron cantilever, so it was assumed to be a standard aluminium cantilever and therefore not great value.
It may be the better option for a V15V - but no way of knowing without testing!
Wherefore thou utter such conjecture? You now measure phase, determined the sign thereof and declare peace between domains?
I have to admit to building on the knowledge of others - specifically long conversations with Luckydog on VE a few years back.
He provided the physics background and the calculations/formulae for phase/amplitude, and also filled in some blanks about the physics - as long as the phenomena involved are "minimum phase" then you can adjust phase along with amplitude and you can revers them - this is how RIAA works... The EQ that is applied when recording an LP, affects both frequency and phase, and is in turn reversed by using the appropriate minimum phase reverse EQ filters....
The next question was whether cantilever behaviour was also minimum phase - if it is minimum phase, then its effects can be cancelled out by using minimum phase methods (such as an analogue LCR filter) - if not then other methods would be needed.
It did take a lot of searching and reading, but ultimately I found my answer in research papers on electron microscopy - this is another field that uses needles on the end of cantilevers to measure at the atomic or at least molecular level. Phase effects of the signal received down the cantilever (ie the cantilever motion) is important in getting these measurements right.... and lo and behold the clue I was looking for.... cantilever resonance is MINIMUM PHASE.
OK so now we can put two theoretical pieces together - if cantilever behaviour is minimum phase, then we can reverse it and cancel it out the same way we do with RIAA.... the solution is actually remarkably simple and elegant. (almost freakishly so!)
As long as the filters used are minimum phase such as standard analogue filters or their digital equivalents - achieving a flat frequency response is a result/consequence of getting the phase back to neutral (or vice versa, they go together)
So basically if you can get the frequency response to flat, your phase response will be close to neutral! (like I said - freakishly simple and elegant)
Can I prove it - can I measure phase and demonstrate that this in fact works? - No I do not have the tools for it.
I would have to commission a specific test record with appropriate tracks to test phase..... maybe this will annoy me enough at some stage to try going down this path.
But my discussions with LD (who's non-audiophile career is apparently as a physicist) seem to support this theoretical approach, and my searches for further information on phase/frequency have shown no inconsistencies with this theory.
Some curly other possibilities - there are other influences on the frequency response - eddy currents, cantilever flex, etc... other causes for non-linearity and other causes of distortion that may appear within a F/R measurement plot.
Of these effects, those that are simple resonances AND minimum phase are no concern - that corrects out simply by achieving flat F/R. But some of these effects are not simple resonances, and therefore cannot be corrected for in this manner (bummer).
So you need to find a cartridge/stylus that minimises effects other than basic resonances to be able to correct phase truly and effectively using these methods.
It is very hard to separate out these other influences from the resonance - I think I may be able to estimate the eddy current contribution to losses in high frequency - but it is a gut feel based on some observations/measurements and I still need to research the maths further before I can test it and try to apply it to my model - and then try to measure it to confirm whether reality conforms with the hypothesis....
Eddy current is probably the biggest additional influence. But I won't know until I work through how to measure/calculate it etc...
This bit is a work in progress. but I am fairly certain that within the 1kHz to 8kHz zone it is not more than a 3db contribution to losses - above that it gets harder as the cantilever resonances kick in and make it hard to determine what is the EC loss and what is the resonant boost. (hence the need for a theoretical mathematical basis that I could then use to separate the two....)
All of which amounts to saying - it is not conjecture but well documented physics.
However my mental and mathematical cartridge model is still incomplete, and the devil is in the detail.
I suspect the SAS is a better match for the X1, Z1, simply because those carts most likely have a stock cantilever resonance close to that of SAS.
It may well be! - but it would require that both the resonance AND the damping be close to that of the SAS - which would be a remarkably serendipitous circumstance.
On the other hand, I believe that this is exactly the case for the V15III and IV - where the SAS specs seem coincidentally (or perhaps by design?) very close to the OEM styli. I believe the SAS was first released for the V15III - perhaps because this is a very common cartridge that sold in huge numbers, so maybe the match is no coincidence.
In any case I am looking forwards to Don's review, and then to getting my hands on an X2 (or is that X1mkII.... some sources use one name and some the other, yet the photos seem to show the same cartridge..)
bye for now
David
-
I figured Luckydog provided the basis of this, and I suspected a similar finding, but.....
" if cantilever behaviour is minimum phase, then we can reverse it and cancel it out the same way we do with RIAA.... the solution is actually remarkably simple and elegant. (almost freakishly so!)
As long as the filters used are minimum phase such as standard analogue filters or their digital equivalents - achieving a flat frequency response is a result/consequence of getting the phase back to neutral (or vice versa, they go together)
So basically if you can get the frequency response to flat, your phase response will be close to neutral! (like I said - freakishly simple and elegant)"
The problem here is an RIAA reverse filter is set within the preamp to compensate at fixed frequencies and at predetermined slope. It just becomes an exercise of selecting the right caps and testing for accuracy. It's more complex with cantilever resonance, electrical resonance and phase. There are instances within a response plot where amplitude and phase are going in opposite directions and then the same direction within the scope of an amplitude compensation filter. In reality you're not doing anything to cantilever resonances, you're manipulating electrical parameters to interact, because the net amplitude response is mechanical + electrical.
If you have a cart of 320mH, and load it with 720pF, electrical resonance is 10.5KHz. This doesn't change mechanical HFR. The cantilever wiggles are what they are. A tuning fork doesn't change pitch, but you could manipulate an electrical output to do so. There's a 180° shift either at mechanical or the combined resonance (mechanical I think). Does loading with capacitance cancel this? It lowers in frequency the net affect, like maintaining 250pF on an M97 so treble droop doesn't worsen. What's the HF response look like at 720pF, still response past 20K ?
Seems to me you'd be better off using Scotty's X-induct in reverse. Hook up 200mH coils in series. I wonder how much a used accelerometer costs?
neo
-
In that 1977 Popular Mechanics survey of 4-ch carts, they said the B&O 6000 was the clear standout. These require a mounting adaptor for standard 1/2" mounting. I've seen these on epay and they might be available from Soundsmith. I believe they used an adaptor in the magazine survey so it might not be too bad. Other than that, I have no info about this adaptor or how it might compare to a P-mount to 1/2" adaptor.
I saw this ad on US Audio Mart for a NOS MMC2:
http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649141968-new-in-box-bang-amp-olufsen-mmc-2-pickup/
Nice little chart in the ad:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=110406)
The MMC 6000 has a beryllium cantilever and a tip they called Pramanik - probably like a shibata. VTF = 1g, cu = 30.
neo
-
Did you know Stanton had 3 LOMM models?
Product catalogue from the Library of Congress. Specs on last page.
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/master/mbrs/recording_preservation/manuals/Stanton%20Product%20Catalog.pdf
neo
-
And there were the pickering versions as well - including p-mount...
p.s. I contacted pickering UK, they still have the LO p-mount bodies in stock new, but no needles - however they wanted too much for it! (I would dearly like a p-mount version for the Revox, but not at the price they are asking...)
-
David,
V15 RS ? Specs look like a V15VxMR except w/HE stylus.
So that would be SAS @ 27K/700pF or regular replacement:
http://www.turntableneedles.com/Shure-VN5xMR-type-JICO-Brand-HyperElliptical-Stylus-our-Needle-77x3-DHE_p_4183.html
http://www.turntableneedles.com/VN5xMR-type-JICO-Shibata-Stylus-for-Shure-V15xMR--our-Needle-77x3-DSH_p_4120.html
SAS:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/e007496.html
http://stylus.export-japan.com/index.php?cPath=18&sort=2a&page=12
Hi
over the weekend i pick up a realistic V15 RS but it need a new stylus which one do u recommend?
Thanks :thumb:
lap
-
With the V15RS, it is identical to the V15VxMR, just like Neo said.
Best needle is the VN5xMR-SAS from Jico - I have not done the extensive testing with my own RS & SAS to identify the optimal loading, but at a guess I would place it in the mid 30's for R and maybe 500pf - the body is 420mH from memory - so you have a bit more inductance to help out...
I would experiment with values from 32k to 42k and from 450pf to 600pf.
An alternative would be Jico's VN5MR (non SAS) which also has the boron cantilever and MR needle, but with the original Shure style suspension and not the proprietary Jico SAS suspension - it is slightly more economical, but I have not heard it or tested it, nor have I read any reviews of it in the forums....
I can hazard no guess as to its loading... assuming it has a lower res F you would need to raise the C... but until measured - who knows?!
-
Stocking Stuffers - might be post Xmas stuffers by the time you get it, but don't you deserve another toy?
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-grace-f-9e-rare-top-mm-cartridge-2014-12-20-analog-90066-los-angeles-ca
Is this the same guy as before? There's also a 9L for the same price.
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-signet-7-tkcla-2014-12-18-analog-15241-upper-saint-clai-pa
Replacement stylus is now unobtainium. SS charges $450 for a micro retip. Maybe Andy Kim or Expert Stylus is more affordable.
Here's a new one on me. Anyone hear of it?
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-synergistic-research-pht-phono-transducer-free-shipping-worldwide-2014-12-12-analog-92307-apple-valley-ca
http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649166359-ortofon-kontrapunkt-b-mc-cartridge-ruby-cantilever-mint-condition-low-hours/
Maybe out of the realm of stocking stuffer. Lots of love for the B.
http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649165832-audio-technica-at14sa-mm-cartridge-stylus-oemnos-atn14/
Sweet
http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649161505-audiotechnica-at20sla-phono-cartridge-lengendary/
http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649109584-shure_premier_m95ed_cartridge_with_new_evg_stylus/
Is this a good deal on this cart?
neo
-
7 reviews from 1980 - Dynevector Karat Diamond and Ruby
http://www.cieri.net/Documenti/Cataloghi/Altri%20marchi/Dynavector%20-%20Moving%20Coil%20Cartridge%20Test%20Reports%20and%20Reviews.pdf
neo
-
Popular Electronics - test report 7/'73 Shure V15 III
http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Poptronics/70s/1973/Poptronics-1973-07.pdf
Page 76 check out capacitance.
neo
-
AT95 sa ....?
-
AT95 sa ....?
Hi A Wayne,
That's an AT95 w/Jico shibata
neo
-
Saw a thread on VE about putting an AT95 into an aluminum body:
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=73915
I assume they mean a deluxe aluminum body, it already is aluminum. Seems to be a lot of trouble unless the goal is have a different plug. If someone wants to go there, I think complete potting could be worthwhile. Mine is partially potted and it seems to make a difference. I suspect a nice ebony top would be an improvement for virtually any AT MM, and would be more worthwhile.
BTW, stock stylus 10Hz cu = 15.
On another note I'm a little surprised we haven't heard more about the JVC X1, Z1. Maybe it's because almost nobody has an X1 ? Comrades Nandric and Griffithds have declared it the best (Agon thread), but no one else concurs? David?
neo
-
Hello Neo,
I also am waiting to hear from David. I do have more to say in regards to the Z-1 SAS combination but I want to wait and hear from David before I add to the discussion. I just saw a JVC Z-1 EB purported to be an elliptical/boron combination on the Jauce (Japanese auction site), sell for $27. I seriously thought about bidding on it but considering I already own 2 of the X-1's and a Z-1 original with also a SAS stylus to place in it when ever I want, sort of makes me feel I'm might be getting greedy so I left it for someone else to discover.
I stand by my claim BTW! And I am also sure that Nandric has the same problem that I have (when one of them is in play), in regards to getting this smile off of our faces! (grin)
In play I hear very little difference (if any), between the Z-1 and the X-1, both having a beryllium cantilever and a shibata tip. There is a slight difference in measured responses but where it counts the most, between my 2 ears, I do not hear it.
I was able to buy a Z-1 original stylus (beryllium/shibata), from that Jauce site for $22. Yes, pocket change for a beryllium cantilever!
But the real killer deal is with the Z-1S body (which can be found on any auction site), married to a Jico SAS stylus. More details will follow after David has time to digest his X-1 MKII and reports! He has waited for a long time to get a X-1 body to go with his original stylus so I want him to enjoy it first. :D
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Don,
The X1 arrived two days ago, I will report when I get the chance...
-
Hello Neo,
I also am waiting to hear from David. I do have more to say in regards to the Z-1 SAS combination but I want to wait and hear from David before I add to the discussion. I just saw a JVC Z-1 EB purported to be an elliptical/boron combination on the Jauce (Japanese auction site), sell for $27. I seriously thought about bidding on it but considering I already own 2 of the X-1's and a Z-1 original with also a SAS stylus to place in it when ever I want, sort of makes me feel I'm might be getting greedy so I left it for someone else to discover.
I stand by my claim BTW! And I am also sure that Nandric has the same problem that I have (when one of them is in play), in regards to getting this smile off of our faces! (grin)
In play I hear very little difference (if any), between the Z-1 and the X-1, both having a beryllium cantilever and a shibata tip. There is a slight difference in measured responses but where it counts the most, between my 2 ears, I do not hear it.
I was able to buy a Z-1 original stylus (beryllium/shibata), from that Jauce site for $22. Yes, pocket change for a beryllium cantilever!
But the real killer deal is with the Z-1S body (which can be found on any auction site), married to a Jico SAS stylus. More details will follow after David has time to digest his X-1 MKII and reports! He has waited for a long time to get a X-1 body to go with his original stylus so I want him to enjoy it first. :D
Regards,
Don
Hi Griff,
Seems like a prudent move, waiting for David. I don't doubt your sincerity, but we all have different opinions and so far it's you and your comrade saying it's the best MM. I think Aceman said it was sweet. I don't know what Raul said, apparently it never made it to cart of the month even though he used 100K load - same as 4-ch.
Considering the carts have response to 40 or 60KHz (whatever), I see potential problems with an SAS and its low resonant frequency, but who knows maybe it's like a 95/CA (400mH range) - throw just about anything on there and it sounds different degrees of good. I believe David has an original stylus so probably no report on a Z1/SAS. These things are never all or nothing. Like the TK7LCa, some people love it and others think it's second tier.
neo
-
No SAS for the X1 here.... (hesitant to get a 4th SAS when my other 3 are barely run in!)
And the TK7LCa, well it is basically an AT20ss isn't it - and I have to say the AT20ss is pretty spectacular... :thumb:
-
Could someone give me a "heads up"on one of these bodies?
Don grb
-
No SAS for the X1 here.... (hesitant to get a 4th SAS when my other 3 are barely run in!)
And the TK7LCa, well it is basically an AT20ss isn't it - and I have to say the AT20ss is pretty spectacular... :thumb:
I agree, the 20SS is a great cart, but it doesn't have colorations some prefer. There are so many ATs over the years it's hard to keep the numbers straight. The 20SS is 2.7mV, 500 ohms - response to 50K. The 7LCa is 5mV, 800 ohms DC, 550mH - response to 35K.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=96288)
The 7LCa is slightly sweeter, more seductive, while retaining good resolution. IMO the 20SS gets its sweetness from the shibata and is a little more neutral, transparent, and slightly more resolving. Both great carts.
neo
-
Could someone give me a "heads up"on one of these bodies?
Don grb
Hi Don grb,
It's every man for himself. I saw a Z1S on fleabey a couple of weeks ago (like $45), but it was withdrawn from the auction before it ended. Try here:
http://www.jauce.com/
http://www.easyauctionjapan.com/
Love those Japanese LPs.
neo
-
When you go to these various sites looking the the X-1 or Z-1, look under both JVC and Victor. I know the Japanese sites like to use Victor instead of JVC.
Regards,
-
Their are 3 of the Victor Z-1S cartridges with a head shell available on the Jauce site. Most cartridges on the Japanese auction sites will come with a head shell.
Regards,
-
Thanks everybody!
-
A few weeks ago i won an auction on the Japanese Buyee/Yahoo site for a JVC/Victor Z1 with original beryllium cantilever.
The sound of this cartridge was immediately impressive with a glorious deep bottom end and realistic seductive midrange ... :P
My joy was short-lived as mistracking became evident (especially on the inner grooves) :cry:
A collapsed suspension was revealed as the culprit and no amount of VTA and VTF adjustment could ameliorate the problem. I suspect that the absence of a stylus guard may carry most of the blame for this condition as Banquo also has a sample with the same problem... :evil:
I have a SAS stylus on the way as a replacement...but will have to wait for my return in February to test it.... :thumb:
Luckily I have had enough hours with the original stylus to be confident of assessing a comparison... :P
-
Halcro,
I do not want to say to much until David has has some time to enjoy his X-1, but I will say that the purchase of the SAS for your Z-1 is money very well spent! Congratulation BTW in your purchase.
Regards,
-
A few weeks ago i won an auction on the Japanese Buyee/Yahoo site for a JVC/Victor Z1 with original beryllium cantilever.
The sound of this cartridge was immediately impressive with a glorious deep bottom end and realistic seductive midrange ... :P
My joy was short-lived as mistracking became evident (especially on the inner grooves) :cry:
A collapsed suspension was revealed as the culprit and no amount of VTA and VTF adjustment could ameliorate the problem. I suspect that the absence of a stylus guard may carry most of the blame for this condition as Banquo also has a sample with the same problem... :evil:
I have a SAS stylus on the way as a replacement...but will have to wait for my return in February to test it.... :thumb:
Luckily I have had enough hours with the original stylus to be confident of assessing a comparison... :P
Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks for the post Halcro, but why the razz face at the end? I think my skepticism is misunderstood. I'm looking to establish creditability.
You can't have a new contender with only two guys, neither of which is Mikey Fremer, saying it's so. These carts somehow fell under the radar since the '70s. Why?
Nandric said he thought the X1 was the best MM long before this, and there was little or no response until Griff chimed in. I think this is a great thing. It's lucky that the Z1 is so close in performance. Get a body, buy a stylus and you've got a great cart. What's not to like?
Seems the suspensions are like some ADC. What's the deal with stylus fitment? The X1 and Z1 take different styli. There's an X1 MKII - the same stylus as MKI ?
I saw the Z1 has an S, E, Eb (beryllium?) versions. I assume they all take the same stylus?
neo
-
Hi Neo:
We are going to have to be a little careful here with these JVC ID's. I have just seen a Z-5S on sale in Germany with a Z-1S stylus installed. Does this mean that all the "Z" varieties are interchangeable? I would think so but this is only my guess. I also know there are Z-3's and Z-4's. I have not seen a Z-2 so I can not confirm if it exists or not. Some of those Z-3 and Z-4.s also sport the Z-1S stylus. I don't know what if anything is different with any of them 'generator' wise. I do have pretty good knowledge pertaining to the X-1 (to be called MKI), the X-1 MKII, and the following model, the Z's. The X-1 has the same cantilever and stylus as both the MKI, MKII, and the Z-1. That is Beryllium cantilever with a Shibata tip. The 'E' is an aluminum cantilever with a elliptical tip. The 'EB' is said to be an elliptical tip on the beryllium cantilever. I have not seen this one myself so I state from what I have read. The 'S' is conical (spherical) on an alloy cantilever and is the only one without a tension wire in its design. This 'S' version was the free cartridge on many of the tables sold during the life time of the 'Quad era'. Must have been awfully popular because I have just seen a case (100 lot), of JVC Z-1S stylus original replacements for sale for $500. And individual 'S' stylus's for sale all over the internet. I have to admit, I am a bit surprised at just how close this 'S' tip sounds to the 'Beryllium/Shibata version. I am convinced that there is something about this JVC generator system that is controlling it signature sound. I even have a Tonar replacement elliptical stylus for this X-1 which sounds very little different than any of the others. Yes, I am sure you are thinking how can this be. Well, I am thinking the same thing but I have each of these styli/cantilever combinations and I am at a loss to explain it. The only stylus that makes a noticeable difference is the Jico SAS. And it's difference in not in its sound or tone, but in sound stage. It makes the stage wider and deeper. Other than that, it also sounds like all the other combinations that I have mentioned.
I have a X-1 MKI body but have never seen a X-1 MKI stylus assembly. Both of my X-1 bodies have the X-1 MKII (original) stylus's. The X-1 Nivico replacement sounds the same as the originals but is neither a beryllium cantilever nor a nude square shank Shibata. It is an aluminum alloy cantilever with a bonded shibata.
I would have no problem with someone buying a Z-1S and stating that they see nothing in its presentation that would warrant changing the 'S' stylus for something else. There is a 'House' sound with this cartridge that stands out no matter what cantilever or stylus you use with it.
Don't go thinking that by me saying 'House sound' that I am referring to 'colored' or 'warm and or fuzzy'. This cartridge is clean and neutral. I might also use the word 'Bold'. It does grab you and commands you to listen. I own a lot of cartridges, both M/M, M/I, and M/C. Very few of the have this ability to make you just stop what ever it is that you are doing and just listen!
I have spent the last few years, amassing a collection of "by gone era" cartridges that made the cartridge of the week on Raul's Moving Magnet thread, and I must say, this one is by far the 'best of the bunch'.
Regards,
-
As far as I can tell the Z1, Z3, Z4 all use the same plastic holder (in differing colours) and are interchangeable - I had a look at the turntableneedes compatibility section on the Z1 - which is usually a reliable indicator.
The stylus code is 7986...
Also according to TTN - two cartridge bodies fit them MD1025 and MD1027 - According to VE MD1025 is the Z1S... so which is the MD1027 and how does it differ?
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=112264)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=112265)
No SAS for the X1 here.... (hesitant to get a 4th SAS when my other 3 are barely run in!)
And the TK7LCa, well it is basically an AT20ss isn't it - and I have to say the AT20ss is pretty spectacular... :thumb:
Well I can certainly agree that the TK7LCa is pretty spectacular.....but as for being like the AT20ss.....I see Marilyn Monroe and Mia Farrow... :lol:
And yes I know that the photo shows an after-market stylus in my AT20ss....but it was replaced with a genuine $300 20ss stylus and still sounded like fingernails down a chalkboard.... :evil:
There were two happy days in my cartridge adventures.....when I sold the AT20ss and when I sold the Technics EPC100Mk3... :thumb:
-
What was your reaction to both of those? (the reason you were happy to see them go?...)
-
The AT20ss....with both after-market and original new stylus.....had a thin and flat midrange with a MIA bottom end.... :evil:
The treble presentation appeared designed to loosen tooth fillings with a brittleness and aggression guaranteed to have my better-half storming down the hallway brandishing meat cleavers.... :nono:
The Technics EPC100Mk3 was the polar opposite with a bland, sterile and recessed presentation guaranteed to even bore a career Quantity Surveyor.... :lol:
But hey....that's only in my system....
YMMV... :scratch:
-
Well I can certainly agree that the TK7LCa is pretty spectacular.....but as for being like the AT20ss.....I see Marilyn Monroe and Mia Farrow... :lol:
:rotflmao:
Anyone remember the Big Bopper? Skinny Minnie, she's not skinny. She's just tall, that's all.
YMMV was never more appropriate. The 20SS is an all time favorite of mine. In my systems I get the feeling it sounds like the record and little else. IMO that's the most you could or should ask for, but..... I wonder if the problem was taste, synergy, or not broken in. All the above?
Which leads me to speculate about the JVC, keeping in mind that I have yet to hear one.
"I have to admit, I am a bit surprised at just how close this 'S' tip sounds to the 'Beryllium/Shibata version. I am convinced that there is something about this JVC generator system that is controlling it signature sound. I even have a Tonar replacement elliptical stylus for this X-1 which sounds very little different than any of the others. Yes, I am sure you are thinking how can this be. Well, I am thinking the same thing but I have each of these styli/cantilever combinations and I am at a loss to explain it. The only stylus that makes a noticeable difference is the Jico SAS. And it's difference in not in its sound or tone, but in sound stage. It makes the stage wider and deeper. Other than that, it also sounds like all the other combinations that I have mentioned.
I have a X-1 MKI body but have never seen a X-1 MKI stylus assembly. Both of my X-1 bodies have the X-1 MKII (original) stylus's. The X-1 Nivico replacement sounds the same as the originals but is neither a beryllium cantilever nor a nude square shank Shibata. It is an aluminum alloy cantilever with a bonded shibata.
I would have no problem with someone buying a Z-1S and stating that they see nothing in its presentation that would warrant changing the 'S' stylus for something else. There is a 'House' sound with this cartridge that stands out no matter what cantilever or stylus you use with it.
Don't go thinking that by me saying 'House sound' that I am referring to 'colored' or 'warm and or fuzzy'. This cartridge is clean and neutral. I might also use the word 'Bold'. It does grab you and commands you to listen. I own a lot of cartridges, both M/M, M/I, and M/C. Very few of the have this ability to make you just stop what ever it is that you are doing and just listen!
I have spent the last few years, amassing a collection of "by gone era" cartridges that made the cartridge of the week on Raul's Moving Magnet thread, and I must say, this one is by far the 'best of the bunch'."
That seems truly bizarre, but it's not. The fact of the matter is, a spherical stylus is incapable of extracting HF detail like a more advanced tip. What's the size of a Z1 spherical, .65 or .7mil ?
If you hear a tune on the radio played by a DL103, does it sound like there's something missing? No, it sounds like the radio even though if you play the same cut on your rig, you get more detail. I suspect the forte of the JVC carts is the presentation. As for the rest, we'll have to wait for other opinions. Obviously we all get different results and some people are more into presentation while others are more into information. I don't see how a more advanced cantilever/tip would only improve soundstage. It must be both. Intriguing!
neo
-
Neo,
I think whether one perceives a difference between a conical or a more advanced tip when tracking a groove in a record would depend on the groove itself. There is no doubt that a more advanced tip is 'capable' of capturing more information that a more benign conical (if that conical is of the larger variety in diameter). Some conicals are actually half or less than the diameter you have referred to. But not all, and I would venture to say that most of the records that we purchase do not contain this 'capable' range of frequencies or information for this retrieval! Then of course we could also discuss hearing abilities. I am in my 60's. I seriously doubt that I can hear above 18K! (grin)
I would imagine there are those that spend the day listening to test records. Or even canons? Those people would prefer to spend their time with a Jico SAS or like tip profiles. But others, those that like to spend their time listening to records, the everyday 'normal' kind, could and do find the Denon's quite enjoyable.
I am not saying the Denon's are the best or even 2nd best. I just stating measured response on a graph using a test tone isn't what everyone is looking to discover nor do they find it as meaningful as other find it!
I have records that did prove the Jico SAS as being the most revealing in tone, timbres and sonics, including soundstage. But of the 4,000+ records that I own, this small handful of records could be counted with just 1 hand! (grin)
And I do have BTW, a RCM so dirty records is not my 'problem'. (grin) Now worn records, well we all have a few of those!
Regards,
-
Griff,
I think whether one perceives a difference between a conical or a more advanced tip when tracking a groove in a record would depend on the groove itself. There is no doubt that a more advanced tip is 'capable' of capturing more information that a more benign conical (if that conical is of the larger variety in diameter). Some conicals are actually half or less than the diameter you have referred to. But not all, and I would venture to say that most of the records that we purchase do not contain this 'capable' range of frequencies or information for this retrieval! Then of course we could also discuss hearing abilities. I am in my 60's. I seriously doubt that I can hear above 18K! (grin)
Well, no. Spherical tips don't get smaller than .5mil and the vast majority are .65 - .7mil. .7mil = 17.78um. .65 = 16.51um.
The Ortofon SPU Classic GM is 18um (about .7mil). Some of the 103 variants are around .65mil. If a spherical is too small the contact area also is too small and the tip will sit on the bottom of the groove and lose contact.
The ability of the moving system to resonate at a high frequency is not the same as being able to trace HF detail. A 103 has response to 40K or so.
I happen to like the 103, it has a natural, musical sound. I like it better with a more advanced tip, cause that's what I like. I'm also in my '60's and I'm quite sure I can't hear 18K, but I can hear cymbals and HF music. I think it's well established that response above the audible band effects the sound in the audible band.
I would imagine there are those that spend the day listening to test records. Or even canons? Those people would prefer to spend their time with a Jico SAS or like tip profiles. But others, those that like to spend their time listening to records, the everyday 'normal' kind, could and do find the Denon's quite enjoyable.
I am not saying the Denon's are the best or even 2nd best. I just stating measured response on a graph using a test tone isn't what everyone is looking to discover nor do they find it as meaningful as other find it!
I have records that did prove the Jico SAS as being the most revealing in tone, timbres and sonics, including soundstage. But of the 4,000+ records that I own, this small handful of records could be counted with just 1 hand! (grin)
And I do have BTW, a RCM so dirty records is not my 'problem'. (grin) Now worn records, well we all have a few of those!
Regards,
You imagine there are those who spend their day listening to test records, and others listening to "normal" records?
What is this, a condescending dig at David? I for one appreciate all the hours of work and analysis spent figuring this stuff out while we play pin the tail on the donkey. This is unpaid, a labor of love and I'm quite sure the goal is to enjoy the music more.
BTW, I also have a test record (1), but it's still sealed. I adjust things by ear and it seems to work out. Maybe some day I'll check it out.
I don't doubt your results Griff, but you've got to remember people hear differently. We listen for different clues and sometimes get different results.
Regards,
neo
-
I have to admit that most of my listening is digital - vinyl is risk prone around a toddler.... especially one fascinated with anything mechanical or technological!
And the first thing I will do (when I get some "toddler free" time) is run the X1 up on some test records....
That will help me adjust it properly (loading as well as VTF, VTA, alignment) - it will also tell me its objective abilities.
This helps to quickly separate those that are subjectively pleasing (and the reports will differ from hearer to hearer) from those that are objectively excellent performers.
Only after that do I start to put on some "listening" records....
And I usually listen to music through this process....
I try to be technically rigorous as the ear and mind are often all too easily tricked, but I ultimately have my own subjective favourites too... (and I am still trying to understand what it is about those cartridges/styli...)
-
Hello Neo,
Their was no dig implied towards anyone. The point I was trying to make was that to some of us, it doesn't matter if through the use of test records or test methods, that cartridge 'A' measured/performed better than cartridge 'B' if during real world listening to 'normal' everyday records, it is actually cartridge 'B' that is the preferred cartridge to listen to. Many of us and I would suspect you included, have sold highly regarded/tested cartridges that just didn't cut it when installed in our systems, whether it be due to our hearing differences, tone arm compatibility, excess capacitance present in our cables, or just the wrong alignment of the stars!
The tests that you and David perform are very much appreciated by not only myself, but I am sure by many others. But lets be honest. There is no test or test record that someone else in there system can use that is going to tell me how that cartridge is going to sound in my system.
Perhaps what I am trying to say is that I don't see this hobby of our as being just black or white but a more heavily shade of 'gray'! (grin)
My best cartridge is a Moving Coil. Does that mean all Moving Coils are better than Moving Magnets! It does not to me but there are people who will and do state this as if it were an absolute! I just also happen to feel the same way about conical's.
The replacement of the conical with a more advanced tip profile in the JVC Z-1S, whether it be an elliptical, a Shibata, or the SAS , has brought up questions that I just have not been able to wrap my head around. Why is there not leaps of improvements or at least noticeable differences between these various profiles? Why is there not readily discernible difference between any of them? Why does the SAS not stomp all over the conical in its overall enjoyment factor? These are questions I just can not answer. This JVC is the most puzzling cartridge I have come across in my 50 years in this hobby!
David, I hope you find time to take it for a spin! But be forewarned. You will be enchanted and awe struck but at the same time, questioning you sanity! (grin)
Regards,
-
On the subject of MM vs MC....
It is I believe traditional in this day and age to send balaclavad goons over with kalashnikovs to sort out blasphemers like you..... :uzi:
"Je Suis Charlie"
(Seemed topical)
Nah I'm not fussed about it - and I still find the little Sony XL-MC104P remarkably sweet.... it is MC and high output, aluminium cantilever and "ordinary" (albeit nicely polished) eliptical....
It also has a measurable colouration around 6kHz... perhaps that is exactly what I like about it?
But I also love the AT20ss and that measures flat as a tack across the frequency response....
-
But I also love the AT20ss and that measures flat as a tack across the frequency response....
Just goes to show..... :roll:
I'm firmly with Griff on this one...... :lol:
-
And just a PS to this "measurement vs listening" discussion.....if your measurements David, show that the Signet TK7LCa and AT20ss are the same beast......how do explain that in the same system, with the same arms, turntables, cables, amps and speakers......they sound as different to me, as any two cartridges possibly could ...? :o
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=112394)
-
Assuming I had an LCa (I don't) - then I would say that I am not measuring the right thing.... and have to work out what to measure!
I do however have a TK7su (needle-less) - which I have tried with the ATN20ss - seems to me to be identical to the AT20.... except in my case the AT20 is the better one - by measurement - impossible to differentiate them audibly.
I mixed the LCa up with the SU earlier...
I just got hold of an unopened NOS AT160ML - which should be a lot closer to the TK7LCa than the AT20ss... (another cartridge to get around to - but I couldn't miss the chance, as they are not thick on the ground now)
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=112395)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=112396)
Speaking of the TK7SU.....I find it understandably similar in most respects to the TK7LCa..... :icon_lol:
Bear in mind that I have tested most of my cartridges in at least 3 arms and some up to 6 arms... :thumb:
I can only assume that my AT20ss must have been seriously defective to explain this puzzling divergence of experience... :scratch:
-
Just to clarify for those unfamiliar with the Signets....the only 'revealed' differences between the 7LCa and the 7SU is one uses a line contact stylus whilst the other uses a Shibata... 8)
-
Also the generators are the same spec for AT15/20 and TK7SU/LCa...
But the needles differ between AT15/20, AT20ss, TK7Su and TK7LCa
I believe that the Su needle should be identical to the SS but cannot confirm that, and the LCa should be a step up as it was the first AT needle to go beyond the Shibata to an even finer line contact....
However what I can confirm is that the 15/20/Su all have the same generator (within variances of manufacturing)
Although I would expect a marginally improved performance from the LCa, I would not expect a night and day difference as you are describing....
On the other hand.... the TK7 body is heavier than the AT20 body, and I think the Signet stylus holder has more inherent damping - so it may be something much more subtle in terms of resonance control and interaction with headshell/arm.
I believe you also said at one point that you got best performance from the TK7 on wooden headshells? (was that you?) - cos that type of response seems be a strong pointer to damping/resonance related issues.... (and therefore the potential for concomittant differences on various arms ...)
-
David,
I generally have found that all my metal-bodied cartridges sound best in a wood (or plastic in the case of the Copperhead) headshell...whilst plastic-bodied ones I have found sound best in metal or ceramic headshells :o
-
If the generators of the 7Su is the same as the 20, then the 7LCa is odd man out. It's 5mV, 550mH, 800/900 ohms.
The 7Su is an earlier generation having a round plug? I believe the 7LCa has a 100 series rectangular plug.
neo
-
Yes the su has the earlier round plug...
-
Regarding contact area:
This is an illustration of relative contact area of tips used in the '70's
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=112450)
This might not be 100% accurate, but it gives an idea of sidewall contact area. Modern micro tips have much narrower and longer contact area than shibata. A .7 spherical can't trace some of the narrowest groove undulations, but it doesn't sound like there's anything missing until you make a comparison.
We tend to think in absolutes - all or nothing, but that is not the case. Some people prefer less detail in favor of a more "musical" presentation if the cart can deliver.
neo
-
The LC / LP tips used by AT after the Shibata's (on the LCa, 155LC, 140LC, 152LP etc...) were according to AT a modified Shibata design.
I believe that they are symmetrical front and back which results in a straight contact patch rather than the Shibata's lightly curved patch. (the original Shibata is asymetrical front to back)
The Shibata profile is apparently one of the easier (and therefore cheaper!) ones to cut and polish, which is I think why it is suddenly coming back into vogue now that supplies of the more exotic line contact designs are either drying up (FG) or becoming more expensive (Namiki / Ogura)... The side profile is marginally narrower than 0.3mil elipticals and slightly wider than 0.2mil elipticals... where the LC's and the more exotic Microlines/Microridges/FG's are narrower than 0.2mil (some of them as low as 0.1mil, but most around 0.15mil).
-
Just looked up some of my measurements:
TK7su 437/458mH 493/480ohm
AT20SLa 453/453mH 474/477ohm
AT20SLa 453/448mH 489/463ohm
AT14Sa 456/460mH 455/453ohm
These are all clearly the same generator in slightly varying body configurations.
Strangely the TK7su is the worst of the bunch... with a relatively large left/right variation in inductance which causes subtle voicing variance between the two channels.
I would have expected the Signet offering to spec better than the AT offering... but that is not the case.
I have been using an ATN15ss stylus with my best AT20 body... hence AT20ss - I do not own an actual SS body.
-
Measured the X1mkII body...
R= 478 ohm / 377 mH
L= 494 ohm / 400 mH
In terms of channel matching, not a great example.... (look at the AT20 in my previous posting!)
Still the channels are within 6% and 3.5% ...
Impedance and Inductance appears identical to the Z1's
-
Impedance and Inductance appears identical to the Z1's
What do you conclude from this..?
And how does that conclusion relate to listening experience in your opinion?
-
No conclusion - just data points...
There is enough of a difference between the channels inductance for their to be some channel to channel voicing variation - but the impact is likely to be subtle....
My gut feeling is that the Z1 and X1 generator core are most likely identical with the stylus holder plastic ensuring that the styli are not intechangeable (so as to avoid someone plugging a high end X1 stylus into a low end Z1s)...
Sad to say there is no way of determining whether the core is laminated or not or how laminated (thickness/number) - without destructive testing.... Although come to think of it, I could sacrifice one of my worse exemplars of Z1s...
There is a possibility that the X1 had more sophisticated lamination than the Z1 (similar to Nagaoka and the MP500 vs MP100 )
Meaningful conclusions are what we start to make when most of the measurement is complete....
-
Just looked up some of my measurements:
TK7su 437/458mH 493/480ohm
AT20SLa 453/453mH 474/477ohm
AT20SLa 453/448mH 489/463ohm
AT14Sa 456/460mH 455/453ohm
These are all clearly the same generator in slightly varying body configurations.
Strangely the TK7su is the worst of the bunch... with a relatively large left/right variation in inductance which causes subtle voicing variance between the two channels.
I would have expected the Signet offering to spec better than the AT offering... but that is not the case.
I have been using an ATN15ss stylus with my best AT20 body... hence AT20ss - I do not own an actual SS body.
The Signet MR5.0ML I recently picked up, also had a disappointing generator, at least channel matching. I've purchased 30/40 year old ATs and had better luck.
Maybe there's something going on we haven't considered. Didn't J. Carr say something about laminations making it more likely a cart goes out of spec?
neo
-
No conclusion - just data points...
There is enough of a difference between the channels inductance for their to be some channel to channel voicing variation - but the impact is likely to be subtle....
My gut feeling is that the Z1 and X1 generator core are most likely identical with the stylus holder plastic ensuring that the styli are not intechangeable (so as to avoid someone plugging a high end X1 stylus into a low end Z1s)...
Sad to say there is no way of determining whether the core is laminated or not or how laminated (thickness/number) - without destructive testing.... Although come to think of it, I could sacrifice one of my worse exemplars of Z1s...
There is a possibility that the X1 had more sophisticated lamination than the Z1 (similar to Nagaoka and the MP500 vs MP100 )
Meaningful conclusions are what we start to make when most of the measurement is complete....
I can think of a better use for your worst case exemplars! I know this guy who felt out of place on Raul's thread because he could never find one of the super bodies. Poor guy feels the same way here!
-
David,
Quote" My gut feeling is that the Z1 and X1 generator core are most likely identical with the stylus holder plastic ensuring that the styli are not interchangeable (so as to avoid someone plugging a high end X1 stylus into a low end Z1s)..."
I have a Z-1 stylus (original), which is also a Beryllium cantilever with a nude square shank Shibata tip. It looks and I assume it 'is' the same cantilever/stylus as what is/was found on the X-1. To my ears, these two cartridges (the X-1 and the Z-1) when fitted with their original stylus assemblies, are identical sounding. The plastic part of the body has been changed on the Z-1 and also the body of the X-1 which was gold plated is now just bare metal on the Z-1. A few of the published specs. are slightly lower on the Z-1 but even they are well within allowable tolerances of the X-1. Neither of the mentioned changes would effect performance but they both would reduce cost to manufacture. Perhaps due to mass production, is the reason for the much lower pricing of the Z-1? I think there has to be some other explanation why JVC chose to change the stylus holders. Perhaps they too were cheaper to produce in the 'Z' configuration? But I do agree that they must be the same generator.
Regards,
-
The Signet MR5.0ML I recently picked up, also had a disappointing generator, at least channel matching. I've purchased 30/40 year old ATs and had better luck.
Maybe there's something going on we haven't considered. Didn't J. Carr say something about laminations making it more likely a cart goes out of spec?
neo
The vintage JVC literature states that the Z1 is also laminated. (and that the Z2 body is the same as Z1, the Z3 is apparently a variant originally sold mounted on a headshell)
AT seems to have had their production QC under better control than most manufacturers - with lower variation from spec.
-
I have a Z-1 stylus (original), which is also a Beryllium cantilever with a nude square shank Shibata tip. It looks and I assume it 'is' the same cantilever/stylus as what is/was found on the X-1. To my ears, these two cartridges (the X-1 and the Z-1) when fitted with their original stylus assemblies, are identical sounding. The plastic part of the body has been changed on the Z-1 and also the body of the X-1 which was gold plated is now just bare metal on the Z-1. A few of the published specs. are slightly lower on the Z-1 but even they are well within allowable tolerances of the X-1. Neither of the mentioned changes would effect performance but they both would reduce cost to manufacture. Perhaps due to mass production, is the reason for the much lower pricing of the Z-1? I think there has to be some other explanation why JVC chose to change the stylus holders. Perhaps they too were cheaper to produce in the 'Z' configuration? But I do agree that they must be the same generator.
Regards,
Nah - the original Shure patent for their first "stylus holder" (moving away from the M3/M7 type at the time) describes it as "decorative stylus holder" - its purpose always was to interfere with stylus exchange between models!
There are a plethora of examples of high end models being identical to basic models with the stylus being the only differentiator (other than cosmetics): ADC XLM/QLM/VLM, Shure V15HRP/500E, AT120/440, AT14/20, A&RC77/M77/P77, Ortofon OM5/10/20/30/40 and lots more!
In many cases the manufacturer just had a series that shared the styli - in others (like Shure, JVC, AT) variations in stylus and body mounting were designed to stop people swapping styli on otherwise identical bodies.... which is where there are opportunities for the knowledgeable cartridge propeller heards to pick up economy models and equip them with TOTL needles requiring only very minor plastic surgery to fit...
-
Here's the quote from J. Carr about laminations:
Regarding coil impedance, my general experience is that the fewer the components comprising the coil bobbin, and the fewer the number of coil layers, the more consistent the coil shape and impedance will be. Using more components for the coil bobbin (as in a laminated coil) increases the likelihood of bobbin mis-shaping and non-flat surfaces, while each coil layer added results in a less flat surface for the next coil layer to be wound onto.
:dunno:
neo
-
Swings and Roundabouts... like everything in vinyl!
although in this case, I would hazard a guess that laminations increase the complexity and difficulty of manufacture ... and therefore cost, but they do not make the goal impossible...
The AT laminated cartridges of the AT20 family I mentioned earlier are all examples of very high quality manufacturing (and hand picked models from that manufacturing I would think...)
but i also have measured examples of V15V bodies that are disappointing... (Would love to get some measurements from a couple of ultra500 bodies to see whether they were hand picked)
The variability of high output cartridges is one of their downsides, but clearly not a problem that cannot be overcome (you should see the variability of some of the cheaper models!!! - even though they are unlaminated).
Perhaps this is one of the reasons Technics chose to use HotPressedFerrite for their top cores rather than laminations?
-
I think everyone's waiting to hear more about the JVC X1/Z1. Griff kindly loaned me an X1 for review, as it were. He sent three styli with, but due to a mix-up one is for a Z1. The two X1 are a bonded spherical on an aluminum cantilever, and a nude shibata(?) on what looks like an unusual aluminum cantilever with a suspension wire. It's unusual because the front flattens out and is parallel to the record, but is an elongated flat part. It looks to be about a third longer than usual, and with the naked eye makes the cantilever look curved. I only have 30X at the moment, but the shibata looks like a spherical.
I don't have enough time on this yet to say anything definitive, but it does have great bass. It's deep and powerful without sounding bloated or sloppy. So far that's the long suit of the cart. I have it on the Unitrac, tried a different alignment and had to put it back to Baerwald etc. etc. Capacitance load is supposed to be 275pF and max VTF 1.75g. Please correct me if this is wrong. I also read that cu is 12 @ 100Hz.
That's about all I've got at the moment. I expect we'll be hearing from David before too long and Halcro in a couple of weeks.
L - 429mH/464 ohm
R - 406mH/464 ohm
neo
-
I found an original X1e aluminium cantilever eliptical on ebay this week - so my review will in due course include that as well...
-
On another note - one of my searches over the last couple of years was for classic MM's with LC tip designed for mid mass arms.... The X's are one family that meets that requirement, but there are also the JVC 4MD-10X (have one waiting..) and the 4MD-30X (a higher VTF lower compliance ATS14 derivative - have not found this needle yet...)
The X1 is 1.7g +/- 0.15g
2.7mV
6g
The other X.... appears to have been sold in Germany as X2 and Japan as X1mkII - the pictures look the same for these two... and may explain the confusion between X1mk2 and X2... For simplicity I will call both X2, until I have evidence that they differ!
The X2 is 1.5g +/- 0.2g
3mV
7.5g
Both are 12cu at 100Hz
Neo, I have not found any mention of C load in doco I have found - I am assuming that given they are CD4 cartridges the load is probably intended to be 100pf? (and presumably 100k for CD4 or 47k for stereo...)
Where did you find the 275pf load figure?
-
I must have capacitance mixed up with Shure carts, which I've been looking at lately. Guess that explains why I got better results with 175pF (total), than 275pF. Dropped preamp capacitance to 100pF and the top end opened up and mid bloat went away.
12cu @ 100Hz implies rather high compliance. Have you measured arm/cart resonant frequency?
The 440 is 10cu @ 100/18cu @ 10 and tracks at a max of 1,8g.
I suspect I'll have to try another arm anyway. So far, presentation is good, but harmonic detail is lacking. I was listening to Tete last night and it seemed as if 25% of the strings in the piano were missing. Before I switch arms I think I'll try it on the other system, although I'm probably putting off the inevitable.
Check out LP Gear JVC replacement styli:
http://www.lpgear.com/category/JS.html
More than half are AT. I wonder if JVC actually manufactured these X1/Z1. Gear describes the ATN14S as the 4DT20X original manufacturer replacement?
http://www.lpgear.com/product/JVCS4DT20X.html
Turntable Needles has a Jico shibata for $118.
Almost forgot - VE library lists the Z1 output @ 4mV ?
neo
-
A funny thing happened as I was changing out the cart. One of the cartridge clips fell off the wire in the Unitrac headshell. I wonder if that could have something to do with preliminary results. :duh: :roll:
I'll never really know if the X1 and Unitrac are a good match. The cart is now residing in a Sony PUA-7 with a lower mass headshell. Oh my, this is a whole other thing. I was going to try the Alphason 100S (11g mass), but the Sony has VTA on-the-fly and this gets tedious.
I took another look at the stylus, the one with the tension wire and clear plastic. It's a round shank and considerably smaller than the Jico (or whatever) spherical. It looks like it could be bonded, but it's hard to tell with 30X. I really should get one of those USB scopes.
Things are looking up.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I am going to pull all my JVC X-1 and Z-1 cartridges and styli together and compare to my known list of said items. From the results of that comparison, we will, or I should say, I will know what combination of styli you have and what I need to sent for you comparisons.
BTW: Where's David? He should be chiming in with some feedback for his listening session with his X-1!
Regards,
Don
-
Sorry guys, it is difficult to get the requisite peaceful time in a household with a toddler...
Being a Dad has sort of killed a lot of my music and technical sessions.... especially those related to delicate turntables and cartridges.
It's on my list of things to do - but the various planets must align to allow it....
bye for now
David
-
Happened to see this on Agon. They don't come around that often:
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-audio-technica-at-ml170-occ-mm-cartridge-2015-01-14-analog-94158-san-francisco-ca
neo
-
Here's a temporary diversion back to the AT95e.
A German gent has come up with a tripod cantilever mod. "It puts Ella in the room."
It helps if you read German but Google Translate makes it understandable.
http://de.schiller-phono.de/produkte
-
Thanks for the link Otis. Interesting stuff, I never saw that before.
Potential problem though. Tip mass must be very high and tracking is probably marginal at best. Maybe Ella sounds as if she's in the room, but I suspect other deficiencies.
neo
-
I think I'm starting to get a feel for the X1, but so far results are only for this Sony set-up and only with this stylus with the suspension wire. The stylus fits snugly in the carrier, nice interface. I suspect other problem(s) of a tweaky nature - more about that later.
My normal fare is small group jazz and that's where I started. I had a couple of records out, Stitt Plays Bird and Red Rodney's Bird Lives. The X1 integration of the bass line in the ensemble is outstanding. With some set-ups the bass line tends to get lost or overshadowed. Not here. Like the description of the German tripod cantilever, I heard some bass detail on a couple of records that I hadn't noticed before. Saxophones jump out at you and the presentation is enticing, but the high end is soft and a little recessed. This balance compromises the overtones/harmonic detail slightly and seems to negatively affect transient response. Please keep in mind, this isn't my top table and deficiencies could disappear with changes to set-up or table. On the other hand the AT20SS or a Virtuoso normally resides here and IMO either one outperforms the X1 in this set-up, so far.
I have a Warne Marsh record on Criss Cross and results were similar. The X1 is good at presenting different instruments at the same time, but the same caveats apply.
These results made me curious about rock performance. What happens when you turn it up? Joni Mitchell's LP Mingus is outstanding at high volume. This was recorded with Weather Report guys when Joco Pastorious was her boyfriend. Jaco Kills it with his fretless electric and Joni's amplified guitar strumming is a wake up call for someone in a different time zone.
Tracy Chapman's first album is another good comparative test.
I like ZZ Top and I used to listen to Eliminator CD in the car all the time. I'm not sure if it's just my copy, but this one is hard to get sounding right.
The X1 did a great job of taming ZZ's top end, but all in all, the same general strengths and deficiencies apply.
BTW, Paul Simon's Graceland is another good one for this. Like any album, you have to be familiar with it.
A couple of times I heard a pronounced midrange resonance. Not sure where it's coming from, but I thought I'd try a little tack around the stylus holder and metal cart body. That works on the AT95, I think it's worth a try. Before we move on to another arm I'll triple check alignment and set-up parameters. I never saw such a tight VTF spec for a MM. It looks like a J. Carr loading spec for Lyra. :o
Maybe out of curiosity I'll try the spherical stylus.
neo
-
Here's a temporary diversion back to the AT95e.
A German gent has come up with a tripod cantilever mod. "It puts Ella in the room."
It helps if you read German but Google Translate makes it understandable.
http://de.schiller-phono.de/produkte
Caught up with this link... by the way if you go to his home page, there is an English option, which leads to a more limited website...
Although he is clearly (by the pictures) manufacturing these, there is no sign of a link to an online store - I am not aware whether these are available anywhere for sale or at what price.... anyone know?
-
David,
If you hit the button labeled 'offers', you'll see a couple of tables for sale. There's also a button labeled 'contact'.
Maybe a mechanical engineer could enlighten us, but it seems to me those additional cantilever supports would add directly to tip mass, otherwise it wouldn't increase rigidity? Some of the carts had 4 or more supports. So if a stock 95E has .6mg (guess), the modified one has > 1.8mg.
Maybe this is wrong and it only increases partially. This is something to figure out, but if tip mass is dramatically increased, tracking suffers and high frequency extension and transient response as well. I think there's a reason cart designers use exotic cantilevers rather than an aluminum Eiffel Tower.
neo
-
The next installment of the X1 takes an unexpected twist. Things have been a little strange here at bop palace. It's been unusually cold and it seems to be upsetting the ghost(s) that haunt the place. Don't know why, I'd think they'd be immune.
We last ended up with our hero (X1) about to undergo experimentation with a little tack on the body behind the plastic stylus holder, and a little up high in the back bordering on the top and pin holder plate. When I first mounted the cart I was suspicious of the integrity of the top to body interface, but it's not my cart so I didn't mess with it.
That was interesting, the wonderful bass was greatly diminished, replaced by a top end previously unheard. The strength of the cart seems to be in bass and midrange dynamics. I then proceeded to mess up the alignment. Now it sounds like a cheap cart with sizzle and hollow mids and bass.
Tack round two - fixed the alignment, had it right in the first place, and left the tack as is. BTW this cart is unusually susceptible to alignment imperfection. I think it must be the short cantilever. Anyway, sounding a little better. The high end is much better, but the magic is mostly gone. I think judicious tack removal might restore the bass and retain the high end.
Stay tuned to this channel,
neo
-
Hmm the vagaries with the body (resonance control?) - makes one perhaps take a second look at the difference between the X1 and the X2 (X1mk2) --- as the core bodies seem the same but with differing mountings and resonance control.....
-
There are a couple of unknowns. Would the same thing happen with all X1's or is it specific to this example or even set-up?
I think it's time to move on to another arm. Maybe the PUA7 and X1 isn't a great combination. Now to decide two things. Which arm, and do I tweak the tack before or after the move?
The 11g Alphason 100S seems the logical choice. It's a lovely arm even if no VTA OTF. I think I'll leave the tack alone initially, and see what the difference is. Then I can remove it in stages.
neo
-
Neo, good work with the JVC. The comparo with the AT20 is particularly apt since many of us have or have had a variation of it. Helps assign a rank. By all means, if you can, try it on a different arm. If it still doesn't out play the 20, well... :?
I think your instincts about the German cantilever guy (he calls it 'Space Needle'. Wonder if he's been to Seattle?) are correct. The unstated assumption seems to be the added ETM is offset by the stiffer cantilever.
Wasn't there a Shure paper that said alu cantilevers whip like an unattended garden hose? If so, that would explain other companies use of diamond and ruby as materials. It's interesting users of the exotics and the tripod cantilever both cite tremendous "clarity" as the main benefit.
-
But the same gains are available on short cantilever designs - eg: Karat, Decca, or the more traditional ADC & Sonus cartridges, and even the now hard to find ATML1x0 series
All of which achieve the objective (in part at the very least) without sacrificing tip mass...
Still would love to get hold of one for testing....
-
Neo, good work with the JVC. The comparo with the AT20 is particularly apt since many of us have or have had a variation of it. Helps assign a rank. By all means, if you can, try it on a different arm. If it still doesn't out play the 20, well... :?
I think your instincts about the German cantilever guy (he calls it 'Space Needle'. Wonder if he's been to Seattle?) are correct. The unstated assumption seems to be the added ETM is offset by the stiffer cantilever.
Wasn't there a Shure paper that said alu cantilevers whip like an unattended garden hose? If so, that would explain other companies use of diamond and ruby as materials. It's interesting users of the exotics and the tripod cantilever both cite tremendous "clarity" as the main benefit.
Otis,
I think I forgot to say, welcome to the thread. All contributions are gratefully accepted, or is that excepted? Just kidding, the German cantilever guy has a most interesting mod. Even if it's not viable (what he saves in exotic material is spent on labor?) it's got to be a tradeoff.
Don't rank the X1 just yet. I could tell from the onset, this is an appealing cart. The tack somehow minimized its strengths, but brought the top into play. If I can get that bass/mid dynamics back with improved top end, it could go a long way toward .....
There's another factor here and it could be the sample I'm using and/or age. What is this cart, 30 or 40 years old? Maybe old glue is letting go. I think Don has 2 or 3 of these and I doubt if this is the best sounding one. We all have our sonic priorities and I think Don loves dynamics. I on the other hand just turn it up and listen mostly for different aspects. Tete Montoliu trio records on SteepleChase are extremely telling for me. Maybe I'll get it to outperform the 20SS. It could take a few days. I was about to get started again when I thought I'd check the thread.
neo
-
Haven't had much listening time yet on the new set-up, but I just wanted to take a moment to say it seems much better.
No details on the difference or why, but it seems like it might be substantial.
neo
-
I've finally had a chance to listen to the JVC Z1/SAS for the last 5 days.
I don't think that a stylus/cantilever assembly requires any 'break-in' so serious listening was done comparing the SAS stylus to the original JVC beryllium/Shibata (which is a beautifully polished square nude shank pressure-fitted diamond compared to the glued SAS into a boron/aluminium cantilever).
It was immediately obvious that the tonal characteristics of both styli were similar with the SAS extending the high frequencies quite considerably, with a transparency and delicacy which was appreciated.
As already mentioned by me and all the other listeners.....the bottom end and midrange of this cartridge is impressive.
The overall tonal presentation is much to my liking being similar to all my favourite cartridges like the Signet TK-7LCa and 7SU, the Garrott P77/SAS, the Shure V15TypeIII/SAS, the Fidelity Research FR7f/Lc, the ZYX UNIverse and the MIT 1 but the Z1/SAS may be better than other cartridges I've heard at 'deciphering' complex and/or badly recorded/mastered records.
As I've written previously elsewhere http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1236947666&openmine&zzHalcro&4&5#Halcro....I don't think there is much to be gained by listening to wonderfully recorded tracks of music one loves when comparing cartridges?
How many degrees of 'wonderful' can there be?
So the torture tests of 'Alabama' and 'Words' from Neil Young's "Harvest" were delivered with a clarity and understanding I had never previously heard.
So also for the climax in "Pines of Rome" whilst 'Wah Wah' by George Harrison was actually 'listenable' at volume. A rare occurrence indeed.....
The only faults with the Z1 that I could perceive at this early point is a lack of expansive soundstage width (not beyond the speakers) and a suspicion that its euphonic bass and midrange may well conceal the differences between recordings.... with a certain 'sameness' to the sounds of various recordings over long listening sessions...?
I have yet to change headshells and tonearms let alone turntables....
Time is on my side.... :D
-
This weekend I was invited to have an experimental listen to a BenzMicro LPS ... the experiment was with an additional 1000pf, or 470pf, and either 2k2 or 47k ohm loadings.
The idea being to tame high end rise by putting enough C onto an MC....
On Annie Lennox a whiter shade of pale, the increasing C was immediately noticeable as a reduction in air/staging.... with the 1000pf it was most noticeable, with the 470pf it was mildly noticeable.
We also listened to a number of other recordings, ranging from Wagner to Dire straits, passing by Bob Marley... none of the other tracks played showed any impact to the high end, air or staging.
Andy who invited me for the listen, was also expecting changes in the lower register with varying R load - but the R load seemed to make no difference whatsoever...(regardless of album/track)
The recording quality and the pressing quality on that Annie Lennox LP is excellent, and it clearly has substantial "stuff" recorded there in the higher frequencies - so the variance in C loading showed up... this is my preliminary conclusion of the reason for what we heard.
I think there is something to be said for high C loadings on many current MC designs. I have also noted repeatedly that a number of current high end interconnects for turntables have capacitance that I would consider extreme in a traditional TT setup (600pf + !) - but given that their market is 99% MC - perhaps what they are really providing is stealth capacitance?
bye for now
David
P.S. If Andy can forward me some recorded test tracks, I will do a tech analysis of the difference as well....
-
Shunt capacitance on the input should create a low pass filter on the signal. It's interesting that its affects were only noticed on the one record.
I was thinking of trying large value capacitance to prevent high frequency ringing with my AHT stage, if I ever try another cart like the DL-S1 again, but that's not likely. I may eventually get an ART7 or 50ANV. They seem to be of superior design and they don't have the unusually high inductance/resistance of the Denon coreless models.
High impedance seems to be a Denon design feature. I think the 103 is something like 30 ohms.
Progress is slow but steady with the X1. I've removed the tack from the top/rear and left it on near the stylus. I'm not sure why the problem(s) with the Sony/X1 combo, but they're virtually gone. The big bass didn't come back all the way. Now it sounds slightly big - more like normal bass. Maybe the tack near the stylus has something to do with that? I was guessing the top/rear for that.
High frequencies, cymbals and such are clear and tend to be a little forward in the mix. As before, the X1 excels at presentation. With small group jazz it's easy to differentiate each player in the ensemble even on records that previously seemed to bury someone, especially the bass player. The only caveat is still a slight lack of harmonic content. Not like before, but pianos can sound slightly hollow and missing a few strings.
I might be able to work this out. I'll see what removing the tack altogether does, if anything, and I plan on moving this set-up to the other room where it will be on another system including phono stage.
neo
-
As I've written previously elsewhere http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1236947666&openmine&zzHalcro&4&5#Halcro....I don't think there is much to be gained by listening to wonderfully recorded tracks of music one loves when comparing cartridges?
How many degrees of 'wonderful' can there be?
So the torture tests of 'Alabama' and 'Words' from Neil Young's "Harvest" were delivered with a clarity and understanding I had never previously heard.
So also for the climax in "Pines of Rome" whilst 'Wah Wah' by George Harrison was actually 'listenable' at volume. A rare occurrence indeed.....
The only faults with the Z1 that I could perceive at this early point is a lack of expansive soundstage width (not beyond the speakers) and a suspicion that its euphonic bass and midrange may well conceal the differences between recordings.... with a certain 'sameness' to the sounds of various recordings over long listening sessions...?
Interesting approach, but when doing a comparison with only torturous recordings you're negating the ultimate performance. It's an aspect worth investigating. While making shit smell better is practical, I hope your evaluation is a little more expansive. It's those great recordings which sound somewhat like live music and played with your best, that give you that basis of comparison for ultimate performance.
I tried to approach it as starting over with the HR100. I removed the rest of the tack and rebalanced. This is a very dynamic cart and like Halcro, a couple of previously unlistenable records were rendered listenable. One screechy recording of Aaron Copeland was still screechy.
I haven't tried the spherical stylus yet and so far results are much the same as before. I think there is a trade-off, dynamics for some tonality. This isn't noticed on many recordings, especially the unfamiliar.
"a suspicion that its euphonic bass and midrange may well conceal the differences between recordings.... with a certain 'sameness' to the sounds of various recordings over long listening sessions...?"
A couple of small group jazz records were excellent. I have a Tina Brooks reissue on Blue Note that was the best I've heard it - improved over a few other listens. Somehow it was similar to a Marcus Roberts LP with Wynton, that should have been different. Ever hear anyone use the descriptor "hi fi" ?
Going back to Tete on SteepleChase, I think I nailed the VTA. The cymbals and bass seemed right. Results were similar as before only a little better until I got to a crescendo near the end when everyone was playing at the same time. It kind of fell apart, got congested. Maybe the needle was dirty.
Just as the first couple of tries didn't work out, I keep thinking something might be wrong. The excellent results I'm getting with many records would suggest otherwise. Maybe tomorrow the moon will be in a different phase or the vinyl gods will look more kindly on this endeavor. This might be a great cart to have for problem records, and most others.
neo
-
While making shit smell better is practical, I hope your evaluation is a little more expansive. It's those great recordings which sound somewhat like live music and played with your best, that give you that basis of comparison for ultimate performance.
Yes....you know I was a "..little more expansive." :icon_lol:
This might be a great cart to have for problem records, and most others.
Just about sums it up....I think. :thumb:
-
I wrote my previous post late last night. While there are a couple of mistakes in syntax, and I think the trade-off might be stated backwards, I think you know what I meant. Halcro's observation about a certain sameness to the sound, was a keen one and I think it's true.
Don Griff stated (it might have been on Agon) that the cart sounds much the same with the spherical stylus. I've been putting off that investigation until I had a better feel for the cart, but that should be interesting. The implication is that fine detail is somewhat compromised with the stock stylus. That should coincide with the trade-off and the strengths of the X1, rendering some previously unlistenable recordings, listenable. On most recordings it's not readily apparent that some detail is absent and that makes the X1 a valuable addition to your stable, that is if you want to hear Stephen Stills singing off key and the overdubbed lead guitar on a couple of cuts on Neil Young's "Harvest" LP. I can imagine the Z1 residing on one of the arms on Halcro's 3 armed bandito, being pressed into service more times that we'd care to admit.
neo
-
Hi Neo;
I am quite surprised at what lengths you have gone to define this gem. Your use of the putty to damp resonances I found quite interesting. JVC (Victor) took a different approach than what you tried. The have a cartridge, the Victor U 1-E that is a Z-1 mounted in one of those integrated adjustable (for overhang), head shells. What they have done is to bolt the stylus housing (with the use of 2 screws), to the cartridge body. Your method was to damp resonances, and their method was to transfer these resonances. From their approach I would assume that those resonances are an important factor in how this gem is to perform.
I'm happy to hear you and Halcro also find this cartridge a worthy contender! Now as we patiently wait for David to test his??? :D
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Don,
Thanks again for the opportunity to check out the X1. It's a fascinating cart.
The JVC cart with the stylus holder screws is like the Signet TK 9/10 and the AT 22 series. They have a screw on the bottom securing the stylus holder.
This helps prevent any movement of the cantilever, other than in response to the groove. Some people glue in a removable stylus for the same reason.
According to J. Carr, only a small percentage of the mechanical energy of the cantilever gets converted to electricity. The rest goes into the body and hopefully, dissipated out the arm. TOTL carts like Atlas, Anna and AT50ANV have specially constructed bodies made all or part of titanium, to address this.
A removable headshell presents an additional problem with energy possibly being reflected back to the cart. Finding the right headshell/cart combination is another form of alchemy.
When I first received the X1, I experienced a comedy of errors. I had a Sony XL MC2 (20cu) on the Unitrac. The spacing of the pins is very tight and the oversized clips barely fit. I must have compromised a solder connection when I removed the cart, but it still made contact. I was getting both channels with the JVC, but WTF ? This couldn't be the cart you were raving about, but I was at a loss until I removed it.
The Sony arm is somewhat unique. The bearings for vertical movement are just above the armtube. The ones for horizontal movement are located beneath the plinth. I'm not exactly sure of the mechanical implications, but carts of suitable compliance, and even some that aren't, often get good results. I suspect the cheap lightweight headshell I was using didn't get along with the X1. It's the same shell I was using for the 20SS. That's what inspired the tack. Its function up front was similar to the screw through a stylus holder. Up higher it was to prevent any movement of the top relative to the body, and to damp vibrations.
The Alaphson arm is a one piece titanium armtube with integral headshell and gimbal type bearings. I suspect good results with the Unitrac if everything's functioning properly. I guess Murphy and his damn law had it in for me. Sometimes you have to hang in there and figure out what's up.
neo
-
A postscript to the JVC Z1 cartridge.....
I swapped the cartridge to another metal headshell (because of cartridge's plastic carrier) and mounted it on the FR-64s arm around the Victor TT101 DD turntable....a more revealing playing unit.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=114552)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=114553)
The characteristics of the cartridge remained the same....but suddenly I decided to increase the loading to 60K Ohms. :icon_lol:
Why I hadn't thought to have done this previously I don't know.. :scratch:...but what a difference.. :thumb:
All the euphonic colouration in the midrange and lower bass magically disappeared leaving the most crystal pure and delicious sounds enfolding my listening room. With a fair bit of added capacitance (200uF)..there are few cartridges which can extract this amount of detail and information whilst retaining the emotional content of the recorded sounds...
At this stage the Z1 is in my top 5 favourite cartridges...and it may rise.... :bowdown:
-
A postscript to the JVC Z1 cartridge.....
I swapped the cartridge to another metal headshell (because of cartridge's plastic carrier) and mounted it on the FR-64s arm around the Victor TT101 DD turntable....a more revealing playing unit.
The characteristics of the cartridge remained the same....but suddenly I decided to increase the loading to 60K Ohms. :icon_lol:
Why I hadn't thought to have done this previously I don't know.. :scratch:...but what a difference.. :thumb:
All the euphonic colouration in the midrange and lower bass magically disappeared leaving the most crystal pure and delicious sounds enfolding my listening room. With a fair bit of added capacitance (200uF)..there are few cartridges which can extract this amount of detail and information whilst retaining the emotional content of the recorded sounds...
At this stage the Z1 is in my top 5 favourite cartridges...and it may rise.... :bowdown:
Halcro,
Most interesting, good thinking. This is with the SAS ?
Added 200uF ? This is a typo right? Assuming you added 200pF, added to what?
I'll have to see what I can do with the AHT. I don't have the caps on hand, but maybe I won't need it without SAS ? Think I'll put in an order with Newark. Maybe I can have some parts in a couple of days.
neo
-
Saw a post by Luckydog on Karma. He says that wiring the channels of a stereo cart in series for mono, is superior to parallel. Series gives you horizontal output only, where parallel just combines stereo channels. So, with parallel connection you still get vertical noise and imperfect linearity between channels (separation/crosstalk) makes it fuzzy and unfocused.
Other considerations might be inductance and resistance. Cart inductance would double instead of halve. Same for resistance. This would tend to give a HF roll-off instead of rising high end. You might have to change loading anyway.
There are some inexpensive mono carts out there that are said to yield good results - might be easier if you have removable headshell. Halcro has the AT33 Mono (LOMC) and there's a less expensive AT MONO3 (HOMC), looks like for med mass arms. Scott's DL102 is nice for heavier arms.
Hadn't thought about this before. Anybody have ideas how to wire 4 cart leads in series for mono?
neo
-
Halcro,
Most interesting, good thinking. This is with the SAS ?
Added 200uF ? This is a typo right? Assuming you added 200pF, added to what?
I'll have to see what I can do with the AHT. I don't have the caps on hand, but maybe I won't need it without SAS ? Think I'll put in an order with Newark. Maybe I can have some parts in a couple of days.
neo
Hello Neo:
I need to remind you that I would like to loan you my Z-1 SAS when you are ready. Keep this in mind if you intend to order caps.
Regards,
Don
-
Halcro,
Most interesting, good thinking. This is with the SAS ?
Added 200uF ? This is a typo right? Assuming you added 200pF, added to what?
I'll have to see what I can do with the AHT. I don't have the caps on hand, but maybe I won't need it without SAS ? Think I'll put in an order with Newark. Maybe I can have some parts in a couple of days.
neo
Sorry Neo...
Yes....200pF added via the phono stage to the existing capacitance of the cable (which is low Cardas Golden Ref).
-
Don,
No, I didn't realize that about the Z1. I'd like to check out a couple more things with the X1 and I'll send it back to you.
No rush on this end. I've been thinking of getting one of those little Vista stages - plug in resistors. I can do that with the AHT, but the sockets are kind of delicate and I generally use it with LOMC's and keep the gain on high.
I'll send a PM.
neo
-
Halcro,
This is an interesting development. I've been thinking about the X1 and instinctively, it would seem to be too bright with a higher value load resistance.
I don't know the capacitance of the Cardas, but with internal arm wire I guess somewhere around 125pF. That would put the total around 325pF ?
Back in the day (late '70s on) 225pF became kind of a default standard, so it's right in that ballpark.
neo
-
Halcro,
This is an interesting development. I've been thinking about the X1 and instinctively, it would seem to be too bright with a higher value load resistance.
I don't know the capacitance of the Cardas, but with internal arm wire I guess somewhere around 125pF. That would put the total around 325pF ?
Back in the day (late '70s on) 225pF became kind of a default standard, so it's right in that ballpark.
neo
That is interesting Neo...I didn't know that.. :o
I think it appropriate to thank Griffithds for bringing this cartridge to our attention...and I will be most interested in your views on the Z1/SAS when you receive it... :drool:
-
I think it was on the Agon MM/MI thread, that Don said the X1 sounded virtually the same with a conical stylus ! At that point I assumed he couldn't hear too good, and wondered how that could even be possible.
Thinking about it a bit, I never actually downgraded a more "advanced" tip for a conical (except once), but many of us experienced an upgrade to a slimmer profile stylus and the results seem indisputable. How could the opposite not be obvious?
BTW, that one time was when Nandric (MM/MI thread) gave me an ATN3400 stylus he bought for the Virtuoso. This is a bonded conical on a carbon fiber cantilever. Lets just say it didn't work out. Nice of him to go to the trouble, you never know till you try.
That's what I wanted to check out before I send the cart back. I'm not quite through due to time restraints, but initial results seem a little strange. Last night I put on an old Fathead Newman (septet) - a used promo LP. With the stock stylus it sounds great. That never lose the bass line presentation really bodes well for many albums and the rest seemed coherent, well placed and in proper proportion.
Five stars.
Next up was the same Tete LP (still stock stylus) and it seemed even worse than before. I had the feeling I should adjust arm height, but unsure of direction. This requires a little more exploration. I think I might be able to nail it, and I think I mentioned that I really need VTA OTF. This is a tedious procedure with most arms and the HR100 is no exception.
The conical is some kind of Jico or Tonar replacement. I noticed the plastic stylus holder fits loose. The pipe that holds the cantilever seems to fit tight into the body receptacle, so I'm unsure of any consequences. I didn't add any tack. That would require rebalancing the arm and it was getting late.
Results seemed much the same as with the stock tip, maybe slightly worse. This is in no way my final word on this experiment, so stay tuned.
On another note, I checked an email address I seldom use and found a sort of seasonal greeting from Raul. Some people on the Agon thread might think we dislike each other, but that would be untrue. Like the rest of us, Raul is human and sometimes humans disagree or find fault with each other. I've said numerous times we owe a debt of gratitude to Raul for opening the eyes of the high end community.
neo
-
Took a slight diversion from the X1 stylus comparison. Tightening up the stylus holder is the only way I'll get an idea of ultimate (for lack of a better term) capability. This is confusing. One would think a small acoustic group with horns and a rhythm section (piano, bass, drums) would be as challenging, but not so. These Steeple Chase recordings are very real sounding, and when you get it right it sounds almost live. The harmonics of the piano plus Niels Pedersen on bass aren't easy to get right. Tootie Heath on drums adds to the dynamic complexity, and altogether it tells you pretty much what a cartridge is about.
I reapplied tack up front on the body up against the plastic holder of the stock stylus, rebalanced, and got out a different Tete LP. This one is called Tootie's Tempo. The difference is astounding. At that point I made no other changes to the set-up. The rest of the time I tried to get it perfect, as it was good, but not great. So far I haven't been able to get it to top level performance and this includes some arm height adjustment.
I wonder how much better the other albums would sound with the tack. This was the first time I used it with this arm. This is probably the only time I'll get to check out the X1 - they're rare, so I want to be exhaustive. I've never experienced a cart quite like this.
neo
-
I've never experienced a cart quite like this.
I agree Neo...
The more I listen the more fascinating it becomes :drums:
The only problems I sometimes find are because of its extended low-frequency abilities...
More than any other cartridge I've experienced..the Z1/SAS either plumbs deeper into the 20Hz range...or has a frequency emphasis there...? :scratch:
I imagine this would still be fine for most systems....but with my two Vandersteen 2Wq subwoofers....it can be a bit too hard to handle on recordings from Moby or Massive Attack or Dead Can Dance... :surrender:
Now I've heard these acts perform 'live'....and in a way the emphasised bass energy is realistic. I think perhaps my subs are just being overdriven despite their own individual 300W Class D amps.... :banghead:
-
Hi Halcro,
I wasn't aware you were also a Dead Can Dance fan, and a Vandersteen fan to boot! We have more in common that we realize! I also run Vandersteen's and use a Victor TT-81.
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Don,
That's amazing... :lol:
When did you get the TT-81?
You know I started my whole 'Nude TT' journey with the TT-81...and I still have it... :thumb:
I also listened carefully to both TT-101 and TT-81 in the same stainless steel cradle I designed.....and I could not hear the difference between the two... :tempted:
A really great turntable....
The Moby concert I went to at the Sydney Opera House was the first one ever where I had to stick fingers in both ears to stop the pain... :roll:
But it was still great.... :D
-
Oh Don,
I wonder if you might be able to help The Professor (Timeltel) obtain a Z1 body without stylus....?
I could then get him a SAS stylus for it... :thumb:
Regards
Henry
-
I have a few Z1's....
-
Hi David,
PM sent....
-
Hi Halcro,
It seems David has Tom covered with the supply of a Z-1 body. I remember he had a bunch of those but no stylus's. But I do have a spare that I bought off of the Japanese auction site that I could send Tom if Davids offer doesn't work out.
In regards to the TT-81, I actually have two of them. One in an original plinth and the other without a plinth. The one without has been complete gone through (caps.,etc.), but it is the 100 volt model. I do have a good variac for it. The main one that is in use is the 120 volt model. I bought it a couple of years ago with no information as to how old the caps. are. but it worked (and still does), flawlessly. The arm that I use on it is the JVC 7045. The only thing I have changed was the rubber mat. I don't care for what rubber does to the sound so I installed the Accromat by Funk. What a major improvement!
I still have a picture of that tone arm support stand (arm pod), that you made for your TT-101. The brass one that you had painted black. Some day I would like to make one for myself to use on the ''nude'' TT-81. I have a spare Graham 2.2 arm that I would like to mount on that arm pod! I think the two would be a great combination.
BTW: I agree with you 100% in your feelings regarding this Z-1 with the SAS. It hard for someone who has not heard this combo to believed just how good this thing sounds. The dynamics is what startles me the most about it. It reminds me of the times I spent listening to 'Master Tapes'!
Regards,
-
Hi Don,
I have a spare Graham 2.2 arm that I would like to mount on that arm pod! I think the two would be a great combination.
Have you listened to the Graham with a high-compliance MM cartridge?.....because I had a Phantom II
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=115015)
which simply would never sound well with any MM I mounted... :scratch:
It's since gone and I don't miss it... :uzi:
Regards
Henry
-
Hi Halcro,
I actually own 2 of the Graham 2.2 arms. One of them is installed on an Extended VPI Aries T/T with all the bells and whistles. I very much like the 2.2 and have heard that it is preferred over the Phantom. I could not say because I have only heard the Phantom at trade shows. The guy that I bought the 2nd 2.2 from had it listed with 2 arm wands. It was the arm wands that I really wanted but considering what the wands were selling for (that is when you could even find one for sale), I went ahead and bought the 3 pc. set. I now have 7 of the arm wands. All mounted with various cartridges. It really is one hell of an arm but those damn wands are expensive. The last one I bought was $450 used. Bob was selling them for $800 new but the manufacturer of the Bendix connector stopped making the size that Bob was using so he no longer has them available. I never met a cartridge I didn't like with the 2.2. Neither high compliance or low, M/M or M/C, and is the only arm that allows my London Decca Jubilee to strut its stuff! (grin)
Regards,
Don
-
In November on the Agon MM thread, I wrote this satirical post after a week of inactivity there:
"A fitting end to the MM/MI thread?
Nandric and Griffithds declare a winner with a "sweet little cart" rescued from obscurity. Who's to offer another opinion with only a few examples in the known world? Known to us, that is.
Raul has this cart, yet never declared it the best? Just got a mention? Maybe it isn't so great at 100K, but it looks like a 4-ch cart.
What do we make of this, a conspiracy of two who prefer MCs (at least Nandric), to have their way with the defenseless MM damsels? Is this sweet little cart a pawn in a power struggle for MC superiority?
Since Raul isn't here I want to tell you, it's plagued with distortions. These are insidious anomalies designed to mask reality and lull you into sweet stupor. This is a warning. Don't listen to the JVC Sirens. Cover your ears like brave Ulysses or you'll be lulled to your demise. You'll be doing crazy things and sabotaging your set-up. Nandric wisely bent the beryllium cantilever and broke out of his stupor, but the call of the Siren was too much to resist."
Of course the post wasn't serious. It was designed to get the thread going again. Maybe it helped, but I no longer have that motivation.
Now, after playing with the X1 for awhile, I think the post was somewhat prophetic. You've read about the uncanny performance of X1 with many types of popular music and with some music not so popular. But the very thing that makes that possible also causes its shortcomings.
A stylus/cantilever responds to a groove modulation with only one response at a time. It is a series of these responses that make up the continual cantilever vibrations which excite the generator. If that response is emphasizing one aspect like bass/midrange dynamics, it's likely that another aspect gets shortchanged. I think that's exactly what happens, but you probably won't hear it with Tracy Chapman, ZZ Top or even Fathead Newman or Red Rodney.
I did manage to get the Tete records sounding half decent, but half is as far as it goes. Harmonics and tonal complexity are subjugated, while the strengths of the X1 sound a little absurd here. I can get many "normal" MM's sounding excellent on these and similar recordings, so I think there's a tradeoff. I'm also guessing that's why the X1 was never cart of the month. I must say though, on many recordings the X1 sounds great and could be one of your funnest, favoritist carts.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I have 2 different phono stages. One is set at 47K default, while the other is 100K for M/M and 47K for M/C (I had it built this way). I do prefer the
X-1 at 100K but I prefer all M/M/s at this 100K setting. There is absolutely nothing to dislike a M/M at 47K but I do find that my old ears (read hearing), perceives high frequencies better when there is nothing strangling it while it is trying to pass from point A to point B.
Personally, I am less interested in the 'why' than the actual 'end results'. If it is 'distortions' that make this X-1 sound the way that it does, well them direct me towards more cartridges that have this type of 'distortions'. I have cartridges that I have spend several thousands of dollars on that are taking a back seat when the choice comes to which cartridge I mount next. Actually I have come to leaving either the X-1 or the Z-1 SAS always mounted on one of my tables. Out of 60+ cartridges that I have at my disposal, there are only 3 that can compete in this pleasure factor of cartridge ratings. Those 3 are the Benz Micro LPS, the London Decca Jubilee, and the Einstein Barco TU 3. That leaves a hell of a lot of high priced ''also rans''! (grin)
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Dynamic Don,
MC's @ 47K and MM's @ 100K - make that Dynamic Don the larger than life guy. :wink:
For awhile in the '80s, HP and the guys at TAS were loading their MC at 47K. So naturally I had to try it with my Genesis 1000 (4 ohms). It didn't get brighter really, it got bigger. The stage and dynamics were larger than life, sort of like the X1 only more so, much more. At first on a couple of records it seemed amazing, but I soon tired of it. Eventually, so did the guys at TAS.
Some of this is phono stage dependent. I've read that Herron MC stage sounds great at 1M load. The tube configuration probably has something to do with that. With MM I think it's a different story. Even carts designed to load at 100K (4-ch) are brighter there, and many others have a very jagged and rising response. There are links in this thread to test reports which support that. I've never heard a MM sound acceptable at 100K, but that's me. A stereo is minifying a musical event and it seems to me you're changing proportions to taste. Nothing wrong with your preference, different strokes and all that, but with the X1 it's at the expense of other parameters.
Tell you what, even though I'm pretty sure of my results, my listening time has been severely curtailed lately. This is due to some obligations and believe it or not, the weather. It was 2° F when I got up this morning and the heating system is dodgy. So, if it's still okay with you I'll keep the X1 a little longer and verify results. Besides, it sounds great on a whole lot of records. :thumb:
neo
-
Hi Neo,
No problem with you keeping it longer. The Z-1SAS is still waiting in the wings!
This one might tip you over into having to spend some money! (grin)
I should have added additional information to the M/C load side of the phono stage. It also has switches for 50/100/250 and 1000 ohms. The default is 47K for the M/C side. No I do not run my M/C's set their but usually use either the 50 or 100. I do use the 1000 on one of my Benz's and also on the Blue Oasis.
Regards,
Don (Dynamic Don) (grin)
-
I believe Mr Benz recommended 47k for his MC's some years back.....
Don, what you need is a good quality graphic equaliser - set it to a traditional "smile" setting, and I 'reckon you will be good to go with the rest of your cartridge collection..... :lol: (or maybe not)
-
Hi David,
You make me laugh!
Regards,
:lol:
-
You've read about the uncanny performance of X1 with many types of popular music and with some music not so popular. But the very thing that makes that possible also causes its shortcomings.
A stylus/cantilever responds to a groove modulation with only one response at a time. It is a series of these responses that make up the continual cantilever vibrations which excite the generator. If that response is emphasizing one aspect like bass/midrange dynamics, it's likely that another aspect gets shortchanged. I think that's exactly what happens, but you probably won't hear it with Tracy Chapman, ZZ Top or even Fathead Newman or Red Rodney.
I did manage to get the Tete records sounding half decent, but half is as far as it goes. Harmonics and tonal complexity are subjugated, while the strengths of the X1 sound a little absurd here. I can get many "normal" MM's sounding excellent on these and similar recordings, so I think there's a tradeoff. I'm also guessing that's why the X1 was never cart of the month. I must say though, on many recordings the X1 sounds great and could be one of your funnest, favoritist carts.
neo
The situation hasn't changed since this post. When you alter the dynamic (tonal) relationships within a recording, that change extends even to the sound of an individual instrument. This became apparent on some acoustic jazz and classical music.
The strengths of this cart has been mentioned and that's not diminished, but there's no free ride. You often have to give up something to get something else, and that's the case here. Rock on.
neo
-
Please don't think my last post was condescending. I listen to rock sometimes.
There's an interesting thread on Agon about MC loading:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1424065925&&&/Cartridge-impedance-loading-question
Poster Lewm got a vintage Ortofon MC2000 cart. This is the predecessor to the MC3000 which Jonathan Carr mentioned as a memorable coreless model.
Output is 0.05mV !! Better have some gain.
Others on that coreless list are the Sony XL-88 and Yamaha MC-1000, Fidelity Research FR-7, JVC L-1000, Benz Micro Ruby, Denon DL-1000A, Hiphonic MC-D15, Nagaoka/Jeweltone JT RII and JTR3. The Sony XL-55 and the MC-9 are also coreless I believe. The DL-S1 is coreless, and I think the 304 as well.
There's another thread about the ART9, the higher output version of the ART7.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1424885270&&&/Audio-Technica-AT-ART9-phono-cartridge
neo
-
Hi Neo,
Received the package today. All is well! (grin)
Happy that you enjoyed your time with it. :thumb:
Best regards,
Don
-
Please don't think my last post was condescending. I listen to rock sometimes.
There's an interesting thread on Agon about MC loading:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1424065925&&&/Cartridge-impedance-loading-question
Poster Lewm got a vintage Ortofon MC2000 cart. This is the predecessor to the MC3000 which Jonathan Carr mentioned as a memorable coreless model.
Output is 0.05mV !! Better have some gain.
Others on that coreless list are the Sony XL-88 and Yamaha MC-1000, Fidelity Research FR-7, JVC L-1000, Benz Micro Ruby, Denon DL-1000A, Hiphonic MC-D15, Nagaoka/Jeweltone JT RII and JTR3. The Sony XL-55 and the MC-9 are also coreless I believe. The DL-S1 is coreless, and I think the 304 as well.
There's another thread about the ART9, the higher output version of the ART7.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1424885270&&&/Audio-Technica-AT-ART9-phono-cartridge
neo
I have the Sony XL-55
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=115798)
and the Fidelity Research FR-7f
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=115799)
They are both interesting cartridges with the FR-7f/LC being the best LOMC I have yet heard... :thumb:
In fact I have been conducting an exhaustive series of listening comparative tests with my LOMCs which include the ZYX Universe
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=115800)
The Dynavector XV-1s
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=115801)
and the MIT-1
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=115802)
As good as the FR-7f/LC is, with its holographic imaging and convincingly relaxed presentation.....I still prefer the overall sound of the Signet TK-7LCa
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=115803)
and surprise, surprise....
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=115804)
the JVC Z1/SAS which contrary to Neo's opinion on the X1.....I find excels on classical music and jazz and rock and reggae and...and.... :lol:
Not that the Z1 and TK-7LCa are in any way alike....surprisingly... :dance:
But here's the thing with the Z1/SAS...
Unless you carefully set a slightly positive VTA (arm up at pivot), track at 1.25Gm but most importantly....unless you can set your phono stage to load the cartridge at 60K Ohms with 250pF of capacitance....you are not hearing this cartridge deliver what it can...
And when this cartridge delivers.....all bets are off..... :drums: :guitar:
-
Way to go Halcro! :thumb: :thumb:
I run mine at 100K and load with only what the cables provide !
-
Way to go Halcro! :thumb: :thumb:
I run mine at 100K and load with only what the cables provide !
Hi Griff....
That probably gives a fairly similar loading to that which I run... :D
-
Halcro,
Great photos, thanks for taking the trouble. They add a kind of tangible reality to all the model numbers.
There was an interesting comment on that ART9 Agon thread, something to the affect that ART7 has a purity that's better suited to classical, and the higher output ART9 is more enjoyable for more popular fare. The ART9 was said to have more midbass and dynamics.
One might wonder about the dynamics part given the low output and possible system limitations, but I found that comment interesting and similar to my feelings about the stock X1.
To reiterate, there's little doubt that X1 has greater than "normal" dynamics, especially in the bass and lower midrange. This changed the micro dynamics and harmonic relationships. This was only evident on a few familiar and well recorded acoustic piano and trio records. When it went wrong, it was pretty bad and decidedly second rate. Loading to a higher value would tend to make it worse, theoretically increasing dynamics. There was improvement when I secured the stylus assembly. VTA was slightly positive. VTF was 1.7g.
Of course there is no SAS for the X1. I wonder if a more rigid boron cantilever/microridge fixes this on the Z1?
I think I should also mention once again, most things seemed better not worse, and this was a fascinating and enjoyable experience.
Unfortunately, due to circumstances I have to hold off for awhile checking out the Z1. It shouldn't be too long.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
Glad you liked the pics. I agree that they give our conversations a little more interest particularly for most folk who may never have seen a lot of the cartridges you mention.....
I've read that ART9 Thread and saw the comments to which you refer.....
It sort of borrows from the old "speakers for classical" vs "speakers for rock" chestnut..... :rotflmao:
IMHO...if a speaker can't perform well on all music types.....it can't really be called high fidelity.
And similarly (or more emphatically)...if a cartridge can't perform equally on all musical genres....it simply ain't doing its job...... :wtf:
I agree that the Z1/SAS when loaded at 47K presented an overly prominent bass and midrange....and I in fact noted this in my first impressions of the cartridge. Yet that colouration balanced out nicely with the 60K loading, but yes....the Z1/SAS is a particularly dynamic cartridge. I think that is part of its allure... :lol:
I can tell you that I have been digging out all my Mercury records to hear them balanced (and tamed) through the Z1/SAS in a way that no other cartridge has managed.... :violin:
Kind Regards
-
Living Presence more dynamically done? Seems like you're playing to the strengths of the cart. Maybe you'll hear what I mean with more limited instrumentation, acoustic stuff you're familiar with.
I couldn't imagine loading the X1 at 60K. Although the bass has extra dynamics, the top was not deficient, or the presentation distant. 60K is a load for an M97 w/stock stylus. Maybe that's unfair, your Z1 isn't high inductance with rolled response. Still, it doesn't seem appropriate.
I think what I said in the first place, is appropriate. A stylus/cantilever can only respond and vibrate one way to a particular groove modulation, but in a continuous flow. If that response is extra dynamic it would tend to have deficient micro dynamics.
It will be interesting if/how your results change as you get more familiar with your new favorite. When I check out the Z1 I'll be sure to try your recommended load. I now have the caps - that's 200pF + cables?
neo
-
Neo,
The X-1 or Z-1 were designed to be CD4 compatible.
The JVC spec. sheet states "Load 47-100K ohms"
What makes loading it within the designers load range, so hard to imagine?
Regards,
-
Griff,
You make it seem as if I was outside of the recommended range. I was not.
It was the sound, as I explained. Due to physical conditions I wasn't using the AHT, so it would have been impossible anyway.
This brings up another aspect -frame of reference. We tend to think what we're used to is correct, and everything else is some kind of aberration or wrong. I tried not to fall into that trap as the X1 seemed very different from what I'm used to. But when it comes to those Steeple Chase (and Enja) records it's not a question of taste or preference, it's either all there and in correct proportions like real instruments, or not.
I'll check out alternate loads with the Z1 when the time comes. I never favored uber dynamic presentations, usually listening somewhere between near field and "normal" living room type distance. Very dynamic can sound like a DJ cart. I wonder what a Shure 44-7 would be like with an exotic stylus?
I still think that very dynamic would tend to obliterate some fine detail, but I'll try not to let conjecture get the best of objectivity.
neo
-
HI Neo,
Actually it is what or "how you put it" that made it seem like every one else including the designer, were loading it wrong. Your statement
'I couldn't imagine loading the X1 at 60K', and 'Still, it doesn't seem appropriate' seems to imply 'we' are loading it incorrectly. It is possible and quite likely, that if you had loaded that cartridge at something other than 47K, your results on those test records would have been different. Whether you would have preferred those results is a different matter! But to guess at what those results would have been is not very scientific.
Regards,
-
Hi Griff,
I assumed it would be understood those comments would be based entirely on my results. I've also never been successful with a 100K load although it seems to work for some people. Maybe there's an aspect of this that warrants discussion?
Looking at MM test reports (there are quite a few in this thread) they invariably get bright at 75 - 100K and many have jagged response - big peaks and dips. Even those designed for 4-ch exhibit a rising high end. Those in particular can't be loaded down with capacitance (not for 4-ch), as some do.
But you're right, I didn't try 60K. That was based on my assumption of results and the physical reality of listening room temperature swings. Listening time was cut short by the necessity to warm up the room. The AHT is particularly heat sensitive and it would have been nearly impossible. DC offset is set manually. The bright side is temps are rising and it should be a lot easier with the Z1. I've left the Alphason set up just as it was.
Sorry to disappoint, but I really don't think results would have been better with the records in question. My guess is it would have been worse. The Z1 looks to be virtually identical cart despite HF extension spec, so we'll see. With an SAS it should be more exact.
Regards,
neo
-
Hello All,
I'm new to this thread, but I've been watching it keenly. I just purchased a Victor Z1S and I'm wondering about differences between the different Victor Z1 cartridges. I want to purchase a Jico SAS diamond for it, but I noticed that Halcro has a Z1 with the clear plastic stylus designated as DT-Z1 SAS on the Jico site and the stylus for the Z1S is the DT-Z1S SAS. Does anyone know if the Z1S and the Z1 are the same cartridge and does anyone know if these styli are similar?
Thanks for doing what you do.
Pat
-
Hello All,
I'm new to this thread, but I've been watching it keenly. I just purchased a Victor Z1S and I'm wondering about differences between the different Victor Z1 cartridges. I want to purchase a Jico SAS diamond for it, but I noticed that Halcro has a Z1 with the clear plastic stylus designated as DT-Z1 SAS on the Jico site and the stylus for the Z1S is the DT-Z1S SAS. Does anyone know if the Z1S and the Z1 are the same cartridge and does anyone know if these styli are similar?
Thanks for doing what you do.
Pat
Good question Pat.....
I didn't even know there were different Z1 cartridges till I saw the different styli on the Jico site.. :scratch:
Perhaps Griff can enlighten us...?
-
Hi Pat.
All Z-1 bodies are the same. There is a Z-1, Z-1S, Z-1E, Z-1EB, Z-4 which is also a Z-1 and a few others. All the same. All the stylus are interchangeable. But they are not interchangeable with the X-1. The cartridge generators are very similar but they (Victor/JVC), changed the diameter of the tube that slides into the cartridge body so the X-1 and Z-1 are NOT interchangeable. But they do sound the same. I own both and have to get up and go over to the turntable to be able to make a correct determination as to which one is mounted and playing. That is unless you have the SAS stylus attached. No mistaking it when it is mounted. Also, when you order the SAS from Jico you can get the clear housing, the green housing or the orange housing. These are the different colors of the -1 (clear), the -1E (orange),or the -1EB (green), stylus housings. Exact same SAS stylus but just in case you want to stay with the same color of the 'Z' cartridge that you own, Jico supplies you with the option to buy the same color of stylus housing. The 'clear' housing is the color of the one that came with the Z-1. Just for information purposes, the Z-1 was a Beryllium cantilever with a Shibata tip. The 'E' versions were Elliptical tip. The 'S' version is conical or spherical. The 'B' on the 'EB' version was E for Elliptical, B for Beryllium.
Hope this answers your questions. If not, then ask again because someone could write a book on all the variations of this Jem!
Regards,
-
Hi Griff,
Thanks for the thorough reply. There is also a grey SAS stylus, which I think must have been the original colour of the Z1S stylus. The reason I asked the question, is that when you look at the photo of the different SAS styli on the Jico website, it look as though the SAS stylus in the clear plastic is a different shape than the SAS stylus in the grey colour. It must just be a low quality photograph. Thanks for your input. I'm going to order a stylus this weekend.
Regards,
Pat
-
Hi Pat,
I forgot to mention the gray -1S stylus housing. Probably because no one buys the Z-1S to actually 'use' the conical stylus! That's kind of sad because the acutal 'S' conical stylus is not all that bad! Also the gray stylus housing is a little different in its shape. Not as sturdy as the others. The 'S' stylus is also the only stylus that does not have the 'tension wire' design.
I would not put to much faith in the pictures that you see on the Jico site. or any site for that matter. Sometimes there is just one picture and sellers will rotate the item descriptions around that same picture. So what you see is similar but not the actual item.
You will be shocked at how good the Z-1 SAS is. The best part of all is that you will not have to comb the auction sites for months on end to find a replacement stylus for your old gem. Just place an order! (grin)
Regards,
-
Hi Griff,
I ordered the grey Z1S stylus. I'm assuming that they are all the same. Should I have ordered the clear stylus?
Thanks
-
Welcome Artman, welcome to Vinyl Circle.
What carts have you been using? Please let us know what you think after you get the Z1 up and running.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I've used the following cartridges: Grace 9E, Monster Cable Alpha 2, Monster Cable Sigma 1000, Fidelity Research FR1 Mk3 original and a Soundsmith FR1, Accuphase AC1 and an AC1 retipped by Soundsmith, Denon DL107, Denon 103 original and with UWE wood body, Empire 4000D mk3, Koetsu Black with vdh tip, AKG P7, Nagaoka MP50.
My favourite of the lot is the Empire 4000. It has all the detail of the moving coils carts with none of their agressiveness. Im looking forward to trying the Victor Z1.
Regards,
Pat
-
Hello Artman,
When you say you ordered the gray Z1S stylus, there is no mention of SAS in this statement? This would implly that you ordered the conical (spherical)? This is what is sound like to me?
I believe all the SAS stylus's for this Victor Z-1 are priced at $133. Doesn't matter which color of housing you choose, The price is still $133. What did you pay for yours, or better yet, what is the item # listed on the Jico site that you ordered. If it was the conical, well, I could have sent you many of those for free! :)
-
It amazes me that even though this thread has been going for awhile now, there are nearly 60K views. In light of that I want to go over a couple of things most of us already know.
Classical (acoustic) music is the hardest to reproduce correctly. We used to have certain demo records like "Dark Side of the Moon" or "Brothers in Arms" that could show off a system, but classical is the acid test of phono capability. It's so easy to get it wrong.
Recent thread on Agon about MC cart loading was interesting. Atmasphere's contention that the cart generates its own RFI is a novel way of looking at the tank circuit from inductance/capacitance. Since radio frequency is 3KHz on up to 300GHz, the possible overload or oscillation caused, could be considered RFI. Adding capacitance will lower the frequency of resonance. Everybody used to say that MC's were immune to capacitance loading, but that depends.
If you hear a tonal change (MC) with load change, then you're hearing a change in RFI interference at the particular load. The changes I referred to in previous posts were of imaging, stage, dynamics and focus, not tonal. When I had a problem with the DL-S1 the HF overload inter-modulated down through the mid/treble and gave everything an unpleasant sheen or glare. Not an uncommon occurrence, on Asylum, Ellison loads his at something like 22 ohms, which is below the cart resistance.
Designers like Atmasphere or J. Carr say the stage is flawed. Since the only way to prevent this is to limit bandwidth, I think the cart is flawed. They also say to load it as high as possible, but when you do you're often trading off focus/detail for dynamics and big stage.
neo
-
Hi Griff,
I ordered the grey SAS version that lists for $133.00. Is it the same as the clear version SAS that also lists for 133.00?
Thanks,
Pat
-
Pat,
Ahhh grasshoppa, you did good! :thumb: :thumb:
-
But Grasshopper is VDH. :roll: Pretty lame I know, but I thought of my old partner's Goldmund Reference w/Grasshopper when I read that. Nice sounding table, I guess you could say authoritative.
I found a couple of classical replacement records on Agon. They are both Carlos Kleiber conducting Beethoven's 5th, and Brahms' 4th on DG. I'm awaiting delivery. Carlos Kleiber was the greatest conductor I've heard. Other readings often sound silly or awkward in comparison.
Griff, now might be a good time to send the Z1, if you're still so inclined. The X1 is pretty amazing and I expect the Z1/SAS at 60K or whatever, to overcome any limitations. We often get what we expect and I'm thinking no caveats this time. Thanks again for making this possible.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
For a moment I had to think what you meant by VdH! Then it hit me :lol:
Not so lame after all!
In regards to the Z-1 SAS. You will have to wait. The professor Tom needed a Z-1 body so I sent him one. I left the SAS attached for him to listen to so as soon as he returns the stylus, I will mount it on my new Z-1E body and send it to you. Of course I will have to spin a few records first! :wink:
-
Hi Griff,
No rush, the X1 took out much of the mystery.
I am a little curious why there isn't more talk about these. Maybe only a few guys scored?
I looked on a couple of Japanese auction sites after you brought it up on Agon, and it seemed like there were quite a few of them around, mostly Z1.
neo
-
Hi Neo.
Neither the X-1 nor the Z-1 was ever brought into the US or Canadian market place. This is why neither of them ever show up on Ebay. But they were quite popular in Japan and somewhat in Europe. Just about any time I visit the Jauce auction site (Japan Ebay), I will see some variety of a Z-1 for sale. The problem I see is that a lot of the various models that are for sale will have the 'S' (conical) stylus installed. Doesn't matter what the model of the cartridge is. They must have a million of these tips floating around in Japan and are being used as a quick and cheap replacement tips. Knowing how good the Jico SAS tip is for this cartridge body (the Z-1), I would imagine Jico is doing a very brisk business in SAS sales in Japan! Actually that JVC/Nivico Z-1 stylus that Jico sells is a very good replacement also. It has the tension wire and is a Shibata tip. It's a alloy cantilever instead of the original Beryllium but still a very good replacement.
The X-1 does pop up occasionally on the Jauce site. But it is hard to get a bunch of people talking about something they can not locate to purchase unless they join a Japanese auction site. Even Nandric, (Nikola), will not join that site so I have been doing his buying for him. It does take a bit of understanding to operate within that culture. I during my employment days, have spent many business trips within Japan so I am not intimidated with their system or market place. I must admit though, I do have problems understanding what the seller is trying to convey sometimes with some of those translations! :)
-
A few months ago there was a Z1 on US ebay, but that's the only one I saw. Now it seems to be only styli.
Searching for Z1 for sale - Japan, this comes up:
http://www.hifishark.com/search?q=victor+z1
Looks like Yahoo auctions has a few. What's the deal with Yahoo, are they an intermediary or a separate auction site?
Looking at those prices I imagine the fees and shipping are considerably more than the cart.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
From what I can tell from their (Yahoo), site, is is quite similar to Jauce. You must join, then transfer money from PayPal to your Yahoo account before bidding, etc. Same as Jauce. Most Japanese will not deal with international buyers. They are quite the close society in this regards. It is because of this, that there are actually several of these 3rd party 'go between's'. It has a lot to do with not trusting foreigners and not speaking other languages. If you have had difficulty in the understanding of the auction translations from Japanese to English, you must also think about it the other ways around. The translation of English (or other languages), also do not translate well to the Japanese methods of speaking/thinking. Many Japanese understand English when spoken to them face to face, but to read it or read it through translation programs is it quite another matter.
I have never really found out whether the Yahoo is a separate auction site from Ebay or it is the same? I have discovered items (same item), going to either Yahoo or Jauce so I guess it is the same site, just different 'go between'! If they were separate, you would think Yahoo would have one here!
Regards,
-
Yeah, I followed a couple of the Japanese sites for a couple of days based on the recommendations here. I gave up after a day or so.
-
I've not bought anything from the Yahoo site, but I have bought many things through the Jauce auction site. One of the strange things that I still have trouble wrapping my head around is this thing called the 5 minute extension. We are all familiar with looking at the auction end time. Some of us even practice snipeing (the practice of placing a bit during the last couple of seconds of the auction). On the Japanese auction site, if the 5 minute extension option is agreed upon by the seller, what happens is that if someone places a higher bid during the last 5 minutes of the auction, the auction get extended an additional 5 minutes beyond the original ending time. This doesn't just happen once, but as often as someone places a higher bid during the 5 minute period. The auction doesn't end until a 5 minute period passes without 'any bidding'! Think about this for a minute. In theory, and auction could go on for ever, providing someone continues upping the bid. I have lost several items due to this 5 minute extension. Remember, you must have your bidding money in 'Yen' and deposited in the Auction sites account. So if you decide to place an additional bid during this extended 5 minute period, you have to go through PayPay and transfer additional funds (in Yen), into you Japanese auction site account before you can continue you bidding. This all takes more than 5 minutes, so the chances are the auction will close before you get another chance to bid. The only way to beat this is to have large sums of your money sitting in your Japanese auction account waiting for you to find something to bid on. Their (the Japanese auctions), really are set up to protect the Japanese whether it be buyer or seller.
But there are so many audio items that you can not find else where on the Japanese sites that I find it hard to resist and have learned to work with what is provided. Also the exchange rates from dollars to yen are in favor of the dollar. It is also getting this way in Europe with dollars to euro's so not only are the rarity of the items to be considered, but also the bargain prices.
Regards,
-
I've been looking at some of the newer AT MM's, specifically the low inductance models. We talked about the 100E with generator specs nearly identical to the 150MLX.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/AT100E.html
I think I previously mentioned the newer 5V, with specs slightly changed.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/AT5V.html
360mH, 610/2.1K ohm DC/impedance. In both cases the stylus/cantilever is used to tone down response just as the ATN120E tones down the identical generator - 440ML. The 33EV (MC) has a .2 x .7/tapered aluminum which tones down the previously boron/ML 33 series.
The newer 5V was designed by the same team that designed the 150ANV and 50ANV, and I'm guessing that it's slightly superior to the 150 motor, although I don't know how audible that is. Inductance is almost the same. I would think it's close to the tolerance of the 150 spec? But DC and impedance are lower which is a good thing. I'm thinking of getting a 100 series low inductance body and the 5V looks interesting. I also want a mono cart. I'm making a list for Santa. :roll: Meanwhile, I keep buying and replacing records.
David,
What do you think about this?
Have you had a chance to check out the JVC?
Bet I know what kind of toys you're buying for Xmas. Better to give than receive.
Regards,
neo
-
Saw a post by Luckydog on Karma. He says that wiring the channels of a stereo cart in series for mono, is superior to parallel. Series gives you horizontal output only, where parallel just combines stereo channels. So, with parallel connection you still get vertical noise and imperfect linearity between channels (separation/crosstalk) makes it fuzzy and unfocused.
Other considerations might be inductance and resistance. Cart inductance would double instead of halve. Same for resistance. This would tend to give a HF roll-off instead of rising high end. You might have to change loading anyway.
There are some inexpensive mono carts out there that are said to yield good results - might be easier if you have removable headshell. Halcro has the AT33 Mono (LOMC) and there's a less expensive AT MONO3 (HOMC), looks like for med mass arms. Scott's DL102 is nice for heavier arms.
Hadn't thought about this before. Anybody have ideas how to wire 4 cart leads in series for mono?
neo
I've been thinking about this mono cart business, and I still can't figure out why wiring the channels of a stereo cart in series will give true mono, in other words cancel vertical output. Taking Luckydog's word for it, here's how to do it:
The trick is to connect the 2 plus wires together and do the same with minus. Then connect the cart just like you would wire 2 speakers in series. You jump the minus on A channel with the plus on B. Then connect the plus leads to the plus pin on A channel and the minus leads to the minus on B.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=118310)
If you try this with a MM the resistance/inductance will increase, so you might want to experiment. I have an AT12E wired in parallel and I'm not sure if it's a good candidate. It's very high inductance to start with, so ?? Maybe a MC would be a better idea?
If anyone tries this please post results.
neo
-
Azimuth -
Most of us think of azimuth as getting the needle perpendicular to the record, when viewing the cart from the front. If you are using an oscilloscope or a computer program for minimum crosstalk, this would be incorrect.
Minimum crosstalk is achieved when the generator (coils) are oriented so they're parallel to the record surface.
Think about it. It's the cantilever movements that excite the generator. If those movements (side to side) are tilted with respect to the motor and groove, then the balance is uneven. If the needle is slightly askew with respect to azimuth, it's not as bad. Because the groove walls are 45° a slightly disoriented tip will cause less error than a tilted motor. Hand made MC's tend to be worst offenders.
neo
-
Hello All,
I received both the Victor Z1S and the Jico SAS stylus. I used the stock stylus on the Z1S for about a week and while it was "pleasant" and inoffensive, it does not even begin to suggest what the SAS stylus brings to the mix. The Jico stylus is incredibly quiet. When the record is in mint shape, there is no audible noise. The midrange is ethereal with an almost tactile presence; you can hear people breathing before they begin to sing. Musician's voices emanate from bodies in the soundstage in a way that allows a listener to be completely engaged in the music that is before them. I have about five hours on the cartridge, and I'm assuming that the diamond will need be worked in. I'm generally really pleased with what I'm hearing. My only concerns are that the bass seems a little shallow in comparison to the Empire 4000 and there is a tiny bit of glare in the lower treble. I suspect that my phono stage is the culprit. My phono stage (heavily modded Dynavector P75Mk3) is loaded at 47ohms and I think it has a capacitance of 560pf.
Does adding resistance soften the sound? Is the opposite true for capacitance?
Thanks
-
Welcome to the JVC Z1/SAS Club artman... :thumb:
I'm surprised you say that the bass seems "shallow" compared to the Empire 4000, as at 47K Ohms Resistance....I think most of us here agree that the bass is fairly dominant... :o
I also have the Empire 4000D/III and think the bass is a little wooly and less defined than the Z1...
Can you tell us what arm and turntable you're using?
Are you able to adjust the loading on your Dynavector phono stage as I load mine at 60K and 125pF whilst Griff uses 100K..
By elevating Resistance, I have found generally that low-frequency output (or boom) is softened whilst high-frequency response is at the same time elevated.
Adding Capacitance I have found, does not generally affect the lower or mid frequency response but can 'dial in' some missing high-frequency harmonics.
-
Hi Halcro,
I'm using a Roksan Xerxes turntable with an Origin Live Encounter Mk3. I lowered the vta to just below level last night and the bass has improved significantly. Now the treble is a tad soft. I don't think I can change the loading at the moment. The Dynavector is optimized for MC. I will have to add some resistance and subtract some capacitance manually.
I can also alter the sound by changing the input tube of my Quicksilver monoblocks.
Your advice regarding loading and capacitance is very helpful.
Thanks :D
-
Hi Artman,
Adding resistance - if you mean raising the value of input resistance like going from 47K to 100K (loading up), will make it brighter. Loading down will make it less bright.
The affect of capacitance is more complex. It combines with the inductance of the cart and becomes part of a tank circuit. It affects the response of the cart by lowering high frequency resonance. Results vary depending on cart inductance and mechanics. Sometimes capacitance is used to augment treble dips. It will always lower high frequency resonance and this could be a concern in a high inductance cart (MM). In the case of the Z1 I don't think this would normally be much of a problem, except 560pF at the preamp seems excessive. Depending on you cables that could net nearly 700pF total.
Any way you could verify the Dynavector capacitance?
If your input resistance is fixed at 47K, you can't just add resistance to get a higher value. Adding resistors will put them in parallel to those already in place and will give you a lower value.
neo
-
Hi Artman,
Neo's explanation regarding Resistance is a more apt description than mine...'brightness' is an appropriate adjective. Higher numerical Resistance ALWAYS increases brightness whilst lower numerical Resistance ALWAYS decreases brightness.
The reason I high-lighted 'ALWAYS'....is that following Neo's explanation of Capacitance loading....there are many cartridges which don't appear to audibly change at all with varying Capacitance. In those cases I always leave the loading at 'minimum'.
When a cartridge DOES respond to Capacitance loading, it doesn't necessarily mean that 'more is better'.... :nono:
It can be highly rewarding to adjust Resistance and Capacitance in a balanced manner until the sound is superior to the standard 47K Resitance and only cable Capacitance.
The Shure V15/III is a prime example.... :thumb:
An adjustable Resistance and Capacitance control is invaluable for this... :lol:
Regards
-
Hi Halcro and neobop,
The default setting on the phono stage is actually 560pF and my tonearm capacitance is 130pF. I have emailed Dynavector in regard to changing the capacitance via the jumpers for the mc stage. While the phono stage has values for resistance, it doesn't have values listed for capacitance.
Dynavector manual:
http://www.dynavector.com/pdf/P75_mk3_emanual_%20r2v0_a4.pdf
A friend of mine is a very good tech and he says that he can change the capacitance for me. It will void the warranty, but the warranty has already been voided because my tech buddy installed an opamp socket that allows the end user to swap out different opamps. This made a huge difference.
Thanks,
artman
-
Artman,
I don't know what carts other than the Empire you use, but that one recommends < 100pF. Some of the older recommendations might be for preamp capacitance rather than total. I'm not sure of the recommendation for Z1, it must have been low for 4-ch. Halcro mentioned he settled on 60K and 200pF in the preamp.
What op amps did you replace, and with what?
neo
-
Hi Artman,
I've never heard of inbuilt fixed Capacitance in a phono-stage of 560pF. It just seems way too high and added to your tonearm Capacitance, it could be strange on some MM cartridges... :scratch:
And I don't understand providing Capacitance for MC cartridges which shouldn't need nor respond to it... :nono:
Perhaps you can clarify this with Dynavector as the Manual does say other values of Resistance and Capacitance are available..... :bawl:
If you are planning on adding more MM cartridges to your repertoire...I'd consider buying a phono-stage that allows you to alter the loading, preferably 'on-the-fly' as these changes are rather subtle.
-
Hi Halcro and neobop,
The opamp that replaced the stock opamp in the Dynavector is the Analog Device AD797. I don't remember the opamp it replaced. The difference would be like comparing a cheap new 12ax7 to a nos Mullard or Telefunken. The Analog Device AD797 opamp is smoother with much more nuance etc.
I`ve emailed Dynavector to try and figure things out. According to my tech friend he can modify the preamp to have a socket for both capacitance and resistance.
What phono stages are you people using? Has anyone had any experience with any of the Sutherland designed preamps?
artman
-
Artman,
The AD797 has a very good reputation. You're lucky to have a friend who can do those mods. If he can install sockets for capacitance and resistance, that would be ideal. You can get 1% silver mica caps for about a dollar each at Mouser, Newark etc. Resistor prices vary to about $18. ea. for nude Vishay, but you can get good .1% for a dollar or two.
I never used a Sutherland, but I checked out the owner's manuals. They're all geared for MC's. 47K is the only MM option and capacitance is a mystery. The new TOTL 2-piece unit has a card you can configure, but it sounds like a PIA if you want to reconfigure. I'm not sure.
I have 4 phono stages. American Hybrid Technology is my best. It has sockets for gain and resistance. Capacitance is 50pF, but I can load additional caps with resistors.
Not sure if you're familiar with this stuff. If you put 2 caps together (parallel), the net is the sum of the 2. Put 2 resistors in parallel and the net will be lower. You need a parallel resistance calculator or meter to get the final value.
There's an inexpensive stage called Vista. It too has sockets for gain and resistance, but not capacitance. Boris, the guy who makes these will custom make it any way you want. He can probably install sockets for caps as well. Owners say it beats just about anything up to around $1K, but since you already have the Dynavector.....
Old schoolers don't like IC's or op amps, but they're stuck in the '70/'80's. Op amps are technically superior and better suited for low level phono signals IMO. I never heard your modded Dynavector, but with those mods I suspect it will take a lot of money to improve on it.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I am not sure if you received my reply to your last private message. While typing my reply, my dog decided to go from sitting on my left side to sitting on my right side. In doing so, he walked across the keyboard of my lap top. This happened right in the middle of answering you message. Suddenly your message was gone? I don't know if it sent, got deleted, or what ever! Anyway, I will repeat it here.
There was an emergency in our household so the Z-1 SAS didn't get in the mail until last night. The delivery date was stated to be on Monday. You will notice that the generator is no longer a Z-1s but a Z-1e. The 'S' model (the one that you have heard), was left with our friend 'The Professor'! You will also notice that I have left the cartridge mounted on a head shell. I purchased this Z-1e with stylus and head shell from the Japanese auction site. I did mount it as delivered to me only to determine that it worked. When Tom returned the SAS stylus, I just removed the 'E' stylus, mounted the 'SAS' stylus, and sent the entire thing to you. Head shell and all. I did this only because had I waited, removed the head shell and packed it up differently, I would have arrived at the post office a few minutes after they closed for the day. As it was, I just made it. The guy was reaching for the keys to lock the doors when I 'ran' up.
So enjoy! I know you will.
Regards,
Don
-
Thanks Griff, the PM was sent.
On Agon you mentioned something about the Garrott (A&R) P77/SAS1. I take it this is your latest darling, better than the X1/Z1 ? Maybe just different.
Way to keep the MM thing alive.
Kudos,
neo
-
Hi Neo,
No, the Garrott Bros. P77 is a cartridge that I have had for a long time. Found it on the Australian E/bay several years ago. I bought the SAS for it a few years ago. It was my 1st introduction to the SAS stylus. I later found a A&R P-77 on the British E/bay site. I wanted to discover the differences that were made to the A&R after the Bros. worked their magic on them. A lot of the A&R's around for sale but good luck finding a Garrott Bros. version. They are very similar to the Grace F-9e in their performance. The SAS turns it into a completely different cartridge. The Garrrott P-77 with the SAS reminds me of the AT-155 LC. Yes, from a Grace F-9e to a AT 155LC is quite a difference. The SAS is one hell of a stylus!
Regards,
Don
-
Griff,
Wild stuff - small world. The 155LC is a 440/120 body with beryllium/LC. That's the same as a Signet MR 5.0LC. It's usually hard to tell the difference on those between an LC and ML. The boron/ML seems slightly more exact, maybe less organic. Lots of AT's used that body though. I used to have an ATN152ML - also beryllium/ML. The 152 body was the same. I also have an ATN140LC - sounds similar to the ATN440ML.
You've added the ART9 to your list of favorites?
Regards,
neo
-
Neo,
It's a little early to say for sure, but I'm leaning towards removing the ART 9 from 'that' list an placing it on a list all by its self! (grin) I need to allow that 'newness factor' to pass and judge solely on what I hear'! I even smile just thinking about it!
I'm not quite sure what you mean by the use of the words 'less organic'? I have a couple of those 152 ML's. If I was to substitute your words 'less organic' and insert my words 'more romantic' then I would have to nod in agreement!
I bought one of those 140LC's with the idea to use its cantilever for a transplant but like it so well that I just kept it as it was. Somewhat of a bargain for their asking price.
Regards,
-
Seems that everyone who tries the new ARTs thinks highly of them. Interesting thread on Agon comparing the ART7 and ART9. User said the 9 has a little more warmth and midbass - better for popular music. Of course with .5mV it's a lot easier to amplify. The 50ANV is still available and now it's less than $1500.
I was describing boron vs beryllium and I think boron sounds a little less musical, romantic. Boron is more rigid but beryllium is lighter. Not complaining about either. Seems that all the beryllium cantilevered styli have disappeared and NOS is now unobtainium.
I wonder how the ART9 compares to the Cadenza Black.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I am only familiar with the Cadenza Black through its reputation. From my experience with the ART, I would think that you would be asking an awful lot of that Black in a comparison. Keep in mind that the ART 9 is Audio Technica's statement product. Not just another cartridge in their vast line up.
It was a very hard decision that I had to make to decide between the ART 9 or the 50 ANV. I own the 150 ANV. and wanted to own the pair, but considering AT has deem the ART 9 as there top cartridge in its design parameters, I decided to go with it. I also considered the ART 7. I like what those coreless designs provide but considering the amount of years that it has been available, and the 9 being what should be 'the latest and greatest' (grin) I went with it. I would assume that considering how impressed I am with this 9, that either of the other two, the 7 or the 50 ANV would be some mighty fine cartridges to send many hours with. Their all up at that rarefied air level in performance.
BTW: For reference Neo, I still prefer the AT 160 ML over the 150 ANV. But just how thin must we split these hairs during these comparisons!
Regards,
-
Had another PC virus, kept me busy for a few days. System restore to the rescue!
"For reference Neo, I still prefer the AT 160 ML over the 150 ANV. But just how thin must we split these hairs during these comparisons!"
You like that 490mH motor (160ML), although the 160 might have internal refinements the others lack, it's a 440/120 generator. If you swap styli and use a boron/ML does it sound different?
The Z1/SAS arrived. I've only played a couple of records and so far so good. I heard a big improvement right away. I have a feeling this will live up to its billing. Started at 47K/100pF (preamp capacitance) and have no desire to go to 60K, but too early to tell.
neo
-
This might be of interest to some people with mid-fi decks filled with clay. After I sent the X1 back to Griff, I noticed the top of the PS-X50 arm bearing housing wasn't level with the platter. I stopped using it for awhile until I could figure out what the problem was, and that was it.
The deck of the X50 is made of some kind of anti-vibration resin. Apparently, the weight of the clay (I had it packed) made it sag in the middle.
I removed a few pounds of clay, but left it in the corners and on either side. It seems just as affective, but the plinth is still sagged in the middle. The situation was remedied with a thin metal washer under one side of the arm base.
I have a feeling the plinth won't go back to being flat. It might be like an old dust cover that had heavy books piled on it for twenty years - permanent sag. I happen to have an X50 parts deck with the plinth and electronics in tact and functional, but switching a semi is a big job.
One of the reasons for talking about this, Griff sent the Z1 mounted in a standard headshell. [Interesting mount BTW. Screw heads on top with nylon washers. Just under the shell is a spacer about 2mm high. Then hex nuts on the bottom.] Since it was already mounted I threw it on the now functional Sony. That was before my last post. Results were immediately obvious and since then I've played some of the same records with a Virtuoso/Jico SE and a 20SS. I now have the Z1 ready to mount on the 100-S. Sorry to take so long, but I've had a lot of extraneous problems, most of them with my PC. I'm now awaiting delivery of a new one.
Not quite ready to go into all the gory details. Suffice it to say, the Z1/SAS seems top drawer.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
It would be nice to say that experiences like the one you describe with the sagging plinth are sent to test us....and that we learn and become stronger from them.. :duh:
But sometimes it's just a pain... :oops:
Last week whilst I was removing the headshell containing my beloved Garrott P77/SAS from my new Dynavector DV507 MkII tonearm it slipped from my grasp and as I watched in seemingly slow-motion....the headshell/cartridge hit the shelf, bounced up and completed multiple turns as it tumbled to the polished granite floor below... :slap:
I stood in disbelief at first...my mind summarising the steps that would be required to procure a new SAS from Jico...and then I bent to retrieve the innocent victim of my clumsiness. In the less than bright light around my turntable....it appeared that I had indeed 'lost' the complete cantilever? :cry:
When I inspected with my loupe under bright light....I was astonished to see not only the cantilever in place and unbent, but also the stylus in apparently pristine condition. I couldn't believe it.. :o
With the two initial impacts (plus the several bounces) replaying in my mind, I thought here was proof of the existence of the great audio god we all know exists.. :P
Remounting the headshell into the Dyna arm I sat back to listen....and whilst I couldn't put my finger on anything in particular.....the sound was not quite what it had been.. :nono:
Perhaps the impact on the stone floor had jolted the coils or damaged something internally...?
I doubt that the Garrott can be replaced... :scratch:
-
Oh Vnl, greatest of audio gods, you tease us so.
A miracle for brother Halcro, only
to end in doubt and frustration.
Woe to thee of ultimate aspirations. In Olympus
only the gods reside. Approach if you
must, but the journey is perilous. I will
place boulders in your path and hurl carts from
the mountaintop, saith Vnl.
neo
-
Halcro,
That is heart breaking news! :cry
At least you live where, if there is one to be found, you can find it. I don't know if you have ever heard the A&R Crambridge version. There is a similarity but you would never mistake it to be the Garrott. I wonder if the current Garrott suppliers would attempt a repair? Sure wouldn't hurt to ask.
Regards,
Don
-
Wondering if you guys have experience with these tables.
The TT-71 is identical to the 81 except no bidirectional speed correction or pitch control. Ever hear it?
How about the Denon DP-80, thoughts and comparisons?
neo
-
Hahaha Neo..... :lol:
Thanks for the sympathy Griff. You're right...I'm certainly in the best place to find another Garrott P77 but I haven't given up hope on the existing one. Seems that all my cartridges now sound 'odd' on the Dyna arm so it may be the arm that is at fault..?
There's a warranty on that... :thumb:
Neo, I believe that Griff has two TT-81 decks and I have both the TT-81 and TT-101. If I recall correctly, the Professor (Timeltel) has the TT-71 and Raul also bought one two years ago (despite already having a Denon DP-80), claiming it was better than both the TT-81 and TT-101...but just when and how he was able to audition all three decks together is a mystery.. :duel:
Nevertheless....my faith in Victor and their engineers convinces me that no excuses need to be made for the performance of the TT-71... :dance:
I hope you get one.... :bounce:
Regards
-
Well there really is an audio god.... :lol:
I reset the Dyna tonearm geometry and ensured that both the armpod and turntable were dead level and whoa and behold....
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120141)
The Garrott P77/SAS appears to back baby...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120142)
Fingers crossed for the future.... :beer:
-
Good news!!
These audio gods are quite vain. Vnl must have realized we identified him by name and discussed his harsh and cruel treatment, which inspired him to relent. You might think unfamiliarity with the new arm caused the confusion, but it might be just a convenient misdirection. :wink:
Seriously, the 507 is an interesting arm. Lewm and I were talking about his, on Agon.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120148)
The tube connected to the back of the headshell must be level. This seems inconvenient for SRA adjustment. Please tell us your thoughts after you've had a chance to get familiar.
Thanks for the info on the TT-71. I saw a post by Mosin (of Saskia fame) where he said the old Denons were the only ones (DD) he could listen to. I assumed it was the Denon AC motor and speed correction circuitry that made the difference. The info about Raul and his opinion is most interesting. I've been thinking of selling two or three tables and getting something more substantial. Saw a DP80 motor unit for sale and it said it weighs 50 lbs. Seems pretty substantial.
neo
-
Halcro,
Good to hear that the Garrott is back!!! But perhaps this should be looked at as a 'heads up'! It might be a good idea to start looking for a backup generator! I've done that with my 'Grace' and I am now thinking about the Garrott. Your possible loss 'got me a thinkin'! :)
Regards
-
Griff,
I did have two bodies AND stylus assemblies but sent one to the Professor (together with a SAS) for him to experience.
I don't think he hears it quite the same as you and I do... :scratch:
Regards
-
On another note, I was looking at replacement styli. On another forum someone said the Jico HE stylus has a smaller profile (minor radius) than a Vivid line. Not sure about this -
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATN142LP.html
Says Vivid is 6/75 um = .2 x 3.0 mil.
Here is a Shibata:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/ATN152MLPG.html
I think the hyperelliptical is also .2 mil with a small oval contact. There is some rounding off when converting from um to mil. .2 mil is also translated to 5um.
When I was doing transplants for the Virtuoso, a nude ATN7V seemed a little better than the replacement styli. That's a square shank on tapered aluminum.
neo
-
Griff,
What do you know about the Victor X-1/2E?
Regards
-
Neo,
How do you change the stylus on the Virtuoso....?
-
Hi Halcro,
In regards to your question about the X-1 MKIIE. All the X-1 generators are the same. Personally, I feel that anything in the X-1 model line would be very good contenders. Also the Z-1 models but after that, they became 'P' mounts and cheaper manufactured clones of the Z-1. I am a bit surprised at how far JVC took this line. I have even seen a Z-6 which had the Z-1 conical replacement stylus attached, but I am only most familiar with those that are between the X-1 and the Z-1 lines. I own a Z-1 MKIIE and consider it a very good elliptical performer. The only X-1's that I own are the both the original and the MKII versions. The Professor also owns a Z-1 MKIIE and also considers it a good performer. I'm not positive but I think that all the X-1's had beryllium cantilevers. With the Z-1, only the top model was beryllium, the rest were aluminium alloy. Not saying anything is wrong with 'alloy', just making that clarification. I also own the Jico Nivico replacement cantilever for the X-1 MKII. It is not beryllium but I'll be damned if I can hear any difference. Voiced very similar to the original.
Regards,
-
Change the stylus on a Virtuoso - that's how this thread got started. I was looking on page 1 for photos and noticed it's been over 4 years.
All the Clearaudio MM are an AT95 motor and body in a wood jacket or wood top. That's a 400mH neutral sounding generator. To replace the stylus you get an AT with the same plug, trim off the excess plastic and it fits right in the receptacle.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=61814)
AT95 plug
There are four types of AT plugs. The 100/120 series is top one today - fits the 150, 440 etc. The older AT10 through 20 are the round plugs. The 3400 series is a different size rectangular plug, and fits the AT95, 3400, 3600, etc. and many P-mounts like the 92E and all those with the long sides. The fourth type is the screw-in like on AT22 -25 and some Signets.
Here is my Virtuoso series 1 with an ATN92E:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=53590)
Before all the plastic was trimmed.
To do a transplant you have to use the compliance screw to remove the entire stylus assembly from the plug. Then you replace it with the donor. Stock 3400 series styli have no screw so you have to first buy an aftermarket replacement.
neo
-
Neo,
I have the ATN7V...
When I remove the screw from the original Virtuoso stylus and plug in the ATN7V, do I need the screw or not?
Yes...the 507/II is a fascinating arm..
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120187)
I'm not sure I understand your question re. SRA?
The "tube" at the rear of the headshell caters only for vertical pivoting and VTF of the headshell...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120188)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120189)
The VTA or SRA is handled by raising or lowering the entire arm via the adjustment lever at the base of the arm just as the MA-505 arm does....
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120190)
This arm is so heavy and dependent on perfect levelling and rigid mounting that Dynavector refused to sell me one unless I had a separate armpod... :lol:
When supported correctly...this arm is hard to beat... :banana piano:
-
"I have the ATN7V...
When I remove the screw from the original Virtuoso stylus and plug in the ATN7V, do I need the screw or not?"
The ATN7V sounds very nice in a 95/Clearaudio. IMO a little better than all the bonded aftermarket ones. Compliance is just a hair higher than the 95 styli so it's good for heavier arms.
You can't remove the compliance screw from the Virtuoso plug because it doesn't have one. All AT 3400 series styli have a press fitting and no screw which is more evidence that AT makes the entire cart except the wood, for CA. Anyhoo, for a transplant you first need an aftermarket stylus like a 95SE, which is a Jico .3 x .7 - and has the screw.
Scrape off the paint covering the screws and loosen each. The screw only holds it in place, it doesn't adjust compliance. Once loosened, the stylus will pull out easily and you can make the substitution. It's fiddly - you might have to try multiple times before you get it perfect. The magnets have to be aligned in a V and compliance is maintained by putting a little pressure on the rubber donut.
Timeltel wrote a nice description on Agon and I copied it somewhere here on this thread. There are more detailed instructions near the beginning of this thread and again on page 6 methinks, but that's basically it.
neo
-
When Lew brought up an issue with the 507 II it sparked my curiosity and I read the manual. Maybe it's the translation but it seemed to say that the tube behind the headshell must be parallel to the record. It seems to me if you raise or lower the back of the arm that tube will no longer be parallel?
I haven't played with one of these, but I think this might be a misunderstanding.
neo
-
Neo,
The "tube" behind the headshell is firmly attached to the rectangular beam of the main tonearm which moves only horizontally. Therefore it and the "tube" are ALWAYS parallel to the record.. :D
Regards
-
The "tube" at the rear of the headshell caters only for vertical pivoting and VTF of the headshell...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120189)
The VTA or SRA is handled by raising or lowering the entire arm via the adjustment lever at the base of the arm just as the MA-505 arm does....
That's what I thought. The arm has VTA on the fly? The smaller tube allows for vertical motion and rotates - does not stay parallel with the main arm.
Check the owners manual. It indicates the tube connected to the headshell is supposed to be level to the record when the cart is in playing position. This would disallow tail up or down VTA/SRA. That's what Lew and I were discussing on Agon. He seemed to think that was the case.
If the arm has such a VTA provision I have to assume the parallel thing is for initial instillation.
neo
-
No....you're misunderstanding.
The cartridge pivots up and down around the tube.
You've pasted my second photo which is the cartridge in the 'down' position. Compare that to the first photo with the cartridge in the 'up' position.
You will see that the "tube" hasn't moved relative to the main 'beam' yet the counterweight and cartridge have...
-
Neo,
If you download the Manual from Vinyl Engine it may become clearer...?
Then again...it may not, in which case you will simply have to play with one... :thumb:
-
I didn't know the headshell pivots independently. Still, it doesn't look like it would work without the tube pivoting as well. The big circular connector between the main arm and the tube is just to connect them? Sure doesn't look like it.
Strange arm, glad it sounds good.
One of my power amps has volume controls. It's an old Mitsu 150 wpc. I normally keep the pots full on to effectively take them out of the circuit. But I dislike line stages so I'm going directly from a phono stage into the Mitsu. This is like using a passive except easier to drive. The phono stage doesn't have to drive the passive and extra cables. It is a little inconvenient changing the volume, but it has a purity to the set-up. That's how I've been listening to the Z1. I now have it on the HR-100S and it's sounding pretty good.
neo
-
There was an immediate attraction as soon as I heard the Z1/SAS. In some ways it sounds like the Genesis. It's fast and articulate and sounds better than the X1. I can only talk about my limited experience with these two. Maybe the stock X1 stylus was worn, or the body wasn't the best sample like the MR5.0ML I bought recently, or the loose fitting stylus wasn't secured enough with the tack, but whatever, the Z1/SAS is noticeably better. I didn't measure it, but the cantilever looks shorter. It 's a pain to align.
It's also finicky like the Genesis. They have boron/microridge in common. Maybe that contributes to a similar touchiness with VTA and VTF. I'm tracking at 1.8g and I just reduced it to 1.75 and everything fell apart, got all grainy, distant and indistinct. This was side 2 of the same Fathead Newman LP I played with the X1. Side 1 was excellent. I really didn't expect that to be so dramatic.
Adjusting VTA/SRA also reminds me of the Genesis. It's the way the sound changes. I'm not hesitant about changing these things, but each adjustment is a tedious affair with the 100S. I'm tempted to try the Unitrac, but I don't know, it sounds pretty good on Alphie.
I'm still trying for perfection and I'm not there yet, so I'm hesitant to discuss shortcomings I might yet work out. I will say this, it doesn't miss on those piano records like the X1.
neo
-
Neo,
Jico recommend tracking all SAS styli at 1.25Gm....
This provided a conundrum as John and Brian Garrott insisted on 1.75Gm for their P77.
Perhaps the reduced contact area of the SAS styli equalises the pressure?
At any rate....all my SAS styli are happily tracking at the recommended VTF....
Regards
-
Halcro,
Actually, Jico recommends 1.25g +/- .25g. This looks like it was written when they only had Shure SAS replacements. I'll try a lower setting, but I think Jico knows more about jewels and setting diamonds, than phono carts. Remember what David said about the resonance of their longer cantilevered SAS ?
If Jico knew what they were doing like a cart manufacturer (AT), they would have redesigned the cantilever. David's running 600 - 700pF to flatten response on Shure/SDS low inductance models! That's not only ridiculous, those are the first ones they came out with, which proves my point.
I figure the short cantilever on the JVC is what saves it from a similar fate. A shorter cantilever will have a higher resonant frequency, all else being equal. But I'll try it anyway. As far as your Garrott, the stylus determines the correct tracking force, but in this case I'd say, use your ears.
Regards,
neo
-
Hi Neo,
I think you have your description of Jico backwards. Morita, the head phono cartridge guy at Jico is the person who designed the Sony XL series of cartridges. I own a Sony XL-55 and a XL-88. Both highly sought after and thought of in the audio World.
He partnered with VdH and a 3rd person for its development and manufacture. He was a Sony employee at the time and has a long history in cantilevers and styli manufacture. There might be more money to be made on the side of the company that you have mentioned, but it is not the only division where expertise is demanded and provided.
Regards,
-
Hi Neo,
I think you have your description of Jico backwards. Morita, the head phono cartridge guy at Jico is the person who designed the Sony XL series of cartridges. I own a Sony XL-55 and a XL-88. Both highly sought after and thought of in the audio World.
He partnered with VdH and a 3rd person for its development and manufacture. He was a Sony employee at the time and has a long history in cantilevers and styli manufacture. There might be more money to be made on the side of the company that you have mentioned, but it is not the only division where expertise is demanded and provided.
Regards,
Hi Griff,
That's nice, but past glories or accomplishments aren't what we're talking about.
David: "At 27k/700pf the V15V-SAS sounds like a V15V - neutral, detailed, yet relaxed, without loosing dynamics."
Yea, great job. :roll:
Are you kidding me?
Regards,
-
Halcro,
Thanks for the suggestion. I reduced VTF and it seems to work out. I haven't finalized the situation yet.
neo
-
Neo,
Happy listening.... :thumb:
Regards
-
I can see why professional reviewers often take a month or three to evaluate. A lot of time can be lost pursuing an erroneous assumption, and combining such things as set-up and loading, can also be time consuming. Now that I'm tracking < 1.5g I'm tempted even more to switch to the Unitrac. With the cart clip re-soldered it's fully functional again.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=48102)
This is mine w/980LZ. Here's one with a better view of the azimuth adjustment:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120511)
Up to three plastic weights are positioned on that bar. The arm looks a little weird and I wouldn't ordinarily be attracted, but Mosin recommended it as his favorite reasonably priced arm. He even gave me 6 little rubber retaining rings for the plastic weights. I think he said he owns 5 or 6 of these arms. So, when I found one attached to a Denon 1250 with a DL-103d, I bought it.
I don't have much to add to my opinion of the Z1. This is a very appealing cart and what it does right (which is a lot), it does very well. So far it's not perfect which is the reason behind all the switching components. BTW I went back to using a line stage. Even with gain to spare it can sometimes sound kind of dead without one. I'm not exactly sure why, but now the dynamics are amazing.
neo
-
When I first heard this cart I wondered if I would wind up looking to buy this off Griff, or another one. After I sent back the X1, I fixed the Unitrac lead, set-up the 440/beryllium ML and breathed a sigh of relief . The Z1 is different - better in every way. I think this is mostly due to the loose stylus on the Z1. Some tack on the body next to the plastic stylus carrier wasn't enough. Also the joint pipe or insertion tube on the X1 is bigger and looser. The Z1 is a little precision machine in comparison. The SAS plastic carrier fits tightly around the body and the insertion is as tight as you'd want.....
The strengths are transient response, dynamics, detail and presentation. The weakness is tonality. Hard to tell Tete's Steinway from Oscar's Bosendorfer. It's not always noticeable, but when I substitute the AT the tones and overtones with all their richness, are back. The Z1 is better, but how much?
Some of you might remember J. Carr talking about cantilevers. He said a short cantilever means trade-offs. I wonder if.
Instead of switching arms, I switched amps. I happen to have an amazing tube amp built by Dan Fanny (AHT), years ago.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=48064)
Danny was a tube god before AHT. Underneath those diodes where the rectifier would be, is a circuit board with a chip that performs that function. This 50 wpc amp is killer.
I already knew about the tonal thing with the cart, but I wanted to hear the difference with the amp. Like I said, the Z1/SAS is better in every way and that includes tone and harmonics. Even with that shortcoming it's hard to imagine any audiofool not wanting one of these. What it does right, it does very well and those are appealing attributes.
neo
-
I have the Sony XL-55
and the Fidelity Research FR-7f
They are both interesting cartridges with the FR-7f/LC being the best LOMC I have yet heard... :thumb:
In fact I have been conducting an exhaustive series of listening comparative tests with my LOMCs which include the ZYX Universe
The Dynavector XV-1s
and the MIT-1
As good as the FR-7f/LC is, with its holographic imaging and convincingly relaxed presentation.....I still prefer the overall sound of the Signet TK-7LCa
and surprise, surprise....
the JVC Z1/SAS which contrary to Neo's opinion on the X1.....I find excels on classical music and jazz and rock and reggae and...and.... :lol:
Not that the Z1 and TK-7LCa are in any way alike....surprisingly... :dance:
But here's the thing with the Z1/SAS...
Unless you carefully set a slightly positive VTA (arm up at pivot), track at 1.25Gm but most importantly....unless you can set your phono stage to load the cartridge at 60K Ohms with 250pF of capacitance....you are not hearing this cartridge deliver what it can...
And when this cartridge delivers.....all bets are off..... :drums: :guitar:
Halcro good to see you posting here! I started threads years ago on Audiogon asking about tracking of a Zyx Airy3 (an old one before the X, S coil wire designation) and the threads weren't approved. I experienced quite poor tracking with it and a R50. On some loud dynamic tracks I would hear audible mistracking. Confirmed with the HFN+ test record where the carts would buzz on even the first track of side 2.
I'm curious how your UNIverse fares in this regard?
-
Halcro good to see you posting here! I started threads years ago on Audiogon asking about tracking of a Zyx Airy3 (an old one before the X, S coil wire designation) and the threads weren't approved. I experienced quite poor tracking with it and a R50. On some loud dynamic tracks I would hear audible mistracking. Confirmed with the HFN+ test record where the carts would buzz on even the first track of side 2.
I'm curious how your UNIverse fares in this regard?
Thanks J-Pak. Just wondering what your moniker is on A'Gon?
I've never had a problem with tracking the UNIverse....and I've used it in arms as light as the Hadcock GH228 and as heavy as the Fidelity Research FR-66s.. :lol:
In fact...with over 15 arms and fifty cartridges I have never experienced mistracking.. :nono:
I'm wondering if the phenomenon might be a set-up or structure-borne feedback problem..?
Have you tried increasing VTF and/or anti-skate?
Regards
-
Thanks J-Pak. Just wondering what your moniker is on A'Gon?
I've never had a problem with tracking the UNIverse....and I've used it in arms as light as the Hadcock GH228 and as heavy as the Fidelity Research FR-66s.. :lol:
In fact...with over 15 arms and fifty cartridges I have never experienced mistracking.. :nono:
I'm wondering if the phenomenon might be a set-up or structure-borne feedback problem..?
Have you tried increasing VTF and/or anti-skate?
Regards
I am dnath on Audiogon. Like AC (and most message boards) I've been on for over decade, but rarely have the time to post.
I wrote it off as my two tonearms perhaps being too light for the Zyx? One was a Scout JMW-9 the other Ace Space from Nottingham. I tried about everything from different protractors to anti-skate, and VTF. I'm now using Soundsmith cartridge (owned 2) which I have found gives me that tonal color of the Zyx, but the tracking now approaches the famous MM cartridges; both SS will pass all HFN+ tracks except the very last torture track. And more important no mistracking distortion on music LPs.
-
Hi J-Pak,
"I started threads years ago on Audiogon asking about tracking of a Zyx Airy3 (an old one before the X, S coil wire designation) and the threads weren't approved. I experienced quite poor tracking with it and a R50. On some loud dynamic tracks I would hear audible mistracking. Confirmed with the HFN+ test record where the carts would buzz on even the first track of side 2."
It's more likely you'll find the reason if you look at the source of the carts. They were defective or damaged. All Nakatsuka designed carts were good trackers including the older Accuphase. If you bought them new they should have been returned.
Lots of defective carts floating around out there give people an erroneous impression about a particular model. I'm not saying you J-Pak, but one reads wild and seemingly definitive opinions. Carts are like snowflakes, no two are identical. I guess if you searched long enough you could find two identical snowflakes, and so it is with carts. Buy a used cart and keep your fingers crossed. It's just as likely to be someone's reject as a "good" specimen.
Regards,
neo
-
I guess I should be embarrassed not realizing recommended VTF of SAS styli, but I'm not. I am glad Halcro pointed it out though.
Last night I switched to the Unitrac and set it up at 1.25g - tail up. It sounds even faster and more effortless. This cart is more fun than a barrel of monkeys. [Not sure how that expression got started, and I wonder if a barrel of monkeys would actually be fun, but you know what I mean.]
Your sitting there listening and stuff like drums or bass maybe a horn, jumps out at you and the cart puts it in your lap. This is involving like a 3-D movie.
Haven't checked out any of the problem piano records, but the Z1/SAS never had the problems with those like the X1. I really think the ill-fitting stylus was to blame. The Z1 still seems to give up a little in the tonal department. I'll check that out again and get back to you.
neo
-
I'm enjoying this in-depth 'real-time' auditioning process Neo......
Waiting for the next instalment... :D
-
Just received a Victor X-1IIE
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120857)
which I bought from HiFiDo and it has the original stylus all in mint condition
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120858)
I mounted it on the DV-507/II on the Victor TT-101 and have played about three albums...
Without stealing Neo's thunder, and hoping not to be premature....this cartridge is at least the equal of the Z1/SAS...and possibly even better... :flame:
I will run a commentary alongside Neo's...
Tried to remove the stylus but it either is glued in or is not removable..? Anyone know....?
-
Congratulations on the purchase.
"Tried to remove the stylus but it either is glued in or is not removable."
I said all along I thought the loose stylus was the problem, and that problem was only with a few records. Obviously the original owner of your X1 identified the same problem. Good luck removing it, but since there's no SAS anyway you can get it retipped? That looks like a beryllium cantilever, but different from the MK I.
Watched Game of Thrones last night. So far this season sucks. The show keeps getting slower and more stupid each week. Now they have water lizard zombies. Get touched by one and you join them. Wonder if they'll fight Queen Blondie's castrated army. About time they killed off another main character.
neo
-
Watched Game of Thrones last night. So far this season sucks. The show keeps getting slower and more stupid each week. Now they have water lizard zombies. Get touched by one and you join them. Wonder if they'll fight Queen Blondie's castrated army. About time they killed off another main character.
Becoming bored with audio..?... :deadhorse:
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120858)
I was looking at your stylus, is the cantilever flat or tube? Do you have magnification to look at the tip?
Even though the body indicates elliptical, that glued in stylus could be an upgrade. The X1 Griff loaned me, had a stock, but very different cantilever. Maybe this is a difference between the MKI and II. It looks like beryllium with the discoloration.
Nothing much to report with the Z1. I've been switching components and it's back to the tubes and a line stage. I increased VTF a hair due to some minor mistracking*. Everything sounds a little better with an extra .05 or .1g. This cart has speed, detail and dynamics like crazy and it's enjoyable as hell. I still think it gives up something in tonality and texture, but nothing's perfect. I'll keep at it for awhile and let you know if I change my mind. In the mean time, it really is great on the vast majority of records and I'm still wondering if I should get one. Guess I'll have to prioritize cause I want a new table, arm, another phono stage, an ART9, and that's just the top of the list. Guess I've got the bug.
neo
*minor mistracking - still in groove, but momentary lapses.
-
Neo,
The cantilever is a tube but must be hollow beryllium as the 155LC beryllium tube is far thinner...?
I think you're right. The stylus appears to be a more aggressive cut than a mere elliptical...?
The sound of the X-1/IIE is now very similar to the Z1 but unlike the Z1 which had a pronounced bass and lower midrange in my system thus necessitating a 60K Ohms loading and a 200-250pF added capacitance.....the X1/IIE is happy at 40K and zero added capacitance. I'm also tracking it at 1.6Gm VTF but may go back to 1.25Gm due to the doubt on the elliptical question...?
I agree with you....these cartridges are great fun to listen to... :banana piano:
Regards
-
Wow, this is kind of exciting, like discovering something. It sure looks like a tube, that's why I asked. AFAIK there are no tube beryllium cantilevers. They're all boron, possibly ruby/sapphire, but it doesn't remotely resemble sapphire. To the best of my knowledge AT never made an exotic tube cantilever. They're all flat rods like the ones we see today. A couple were tapered rods, but they don't taper them any more.
This brings up another question, is it even a JVC stylus? I wonder if another company made a stylus that would fit the X1 MKII. Maybe it was owned by some guy who worked at Namiki and he custom made a stylus. :thumb:
Here's a photo of a Technics boron tube:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=101844)
Notice how far the stylus sticks out. That's the one J. Carr said would tend to rotate because it protrudes too much, and I said it would also resist rotation because it was more rigid. Guess I pissed him off cause he shut up after that, but his analysis was getting too self-serving IMO. The justification of that giant mounting block on Atlas stylus, was about money not performance. Pay $10K for a cart and get HOMC tip mass?
Anyhoo, that's probably a boron tube. If not, discolored aluminum? Doesn't seem likely, most AL alloys don't discolor like that. I assume the stylus goes all the way through the tube and there's a blob of something on the other side of the tube holding it?
Looks sort of like the cantilever/stylus on the Genesis 1000:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=120962)
Saw another Genesis photo that looked a little different - didn't protrude as much. Maybe one is a MKI and the other a MKII.
Wonder if David still reads this thread.
neo
-
I had another look through my 10x lupe (it's all I've got)...and the tube is in fact virtually the same thickness as the 155Lc solid beryllium one but is a darker grey (almost black) compared to the mid-grey AT.
There is a slight thickening on the rear of the tube where the stylus is fixed but the thickening extends a lot further than any I've seen and is much shallower than when the glue is generally visible. The stylus is certainly not visible sticking through.
There is no flattening of the tube where the stylus sits (as there is on the 155Lc) with the tip simply extending from the angled cantilever. This would have required an angled slot drilled through the tube... :scratch:
-
Both boron and beryllium will discolor differently depending on the impurities in the mix. Most of the ones we see (AT) have gold, vapor deposited on the surface. A couple of companies had diamond dust on the surface. Most were made by Namiki. They had a patent on the microridge which was used by Nakatsuka (Accuphase, Monster, ZYX). The AT microline, microridge, and SAS look identical, although the dimensions might be slightly different. I believe the patent has expired.
So, this might be a short rod - not tube? If the stylus is glued on the bottom it's probably a rod. Whatever it is it's very different from the MK I which seems slightly curved and flattens out at the end. Interesting stuff.
neo
-
Having ascertained the worthiness of the X-1/IIE I decided to move it from the Dynavector arm to my SAEC WE-8000/ST
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=121017)
Now I love this long straight 12" knife edge bearing arm from SAEC... :drool: It competes at the very top of all the arms I've had in my system but it comes with a very special thin ceramic headshell which is close in its properties to glass... :wtf: and as such, it sounds hard and bright with all my metal-bodied cartridges. Luckily....by using the wood Yamamoto or Ortofon headshells...I'm able to twist the cartridges to achieve the required off-set angle together with far better sound with most of my cartridges...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=121018)
The SAEC ceramic headshell does match superbly with wood-bodied cartridges like the Clearaudio Virtuoso
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=121019)
And it also sometimes works well with plastic-bodied cartridges....
So does it match well with the X-1/IIE........?
:banana piano:
-
Ever try a wood shim between cart and headshell?
I have a 3.3g lead spacer from yesteryear. It's obviously designed to add mass, but it also seems to be a good damper. It's nice and thin.
I didn't order the Achromat yet because I thought I might need a smaller sized (1200) one for the TT-71. Now I'm not sure about getting that.
Playing around with mats last night I remembered your Agon post about the leather mat designed to go under a glass or metal one. I have a hard acrylic mat about 2mm thick and I put the deerskin underneath - best I've heard that acrylic sound, really pretty good.
Familiar with the JVC UA-7045 or 7082 ? I heard a 7045 a long time ago on a nice sounding table, but I couldn't sort out the contribution of the arm. They look a little massy, but well made.
neo
-
Have never experienced a Victor arm but their engineers are surely above average IME....
Depends how much you can buy one for?
An underrated arm in my opinion is the Micro Seiki MA-505 and particularly the 505s (with silver wiring)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=121071)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=121072)
The 505 should be had for approx. $800 with the scarce 505s probably near $1000...
Regards
-
Here are some Links for you..
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Micro-Seiki-MA-505-MkI-Tonearm-with-Original-Headshell-Phono-Cable-/251955818676?rmvSB=true&ul_ref=http%3A%2F%2Frover.ebay.com%2Frover%2F1%2F705-53470-19255-0%2F1%3Ficep_ff3%3D2%26pub%3D5575084939%26toolid%3D10001%26campid%3D5337478673%26customid%3D24215662%26icep_item%3D251955818676%26ipn%3Dpsmain%26icep_vectorid%3D229515%26kwid%3D902099%26mtid%3D824%26kw%3Dlg%26srcrot%3D705-53470-19255-0%26rvr_id%3D831101699674&clk_rvr_id=831101699674
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Micro-Seiki-MA-505-Dynamic-balanced-universal-Tonearm-Arm-/251782465312?rmvSB=true&ul_ref=http%3A%2F%2Frover.ebay.com%2Frover%2F1%2F705-53470-19255-0%2F1%3Ficep_ff3%3D2%26pub%3D5575084939%26toolid%3D10001%26campid%3D5337478673%26customid%3D24215662%26icep_item%3D251782465312%26ipn%3Dpsmain%26icep_vectorid%3D229515%26kwid%3D902099%26mtid%3D824%26kw%3Dlg%26srcrot%3D705-53470-19255-0%26rvr_id%3D831111473454&clk_rvr_id=831111473454
-
Here is a place that specialises in Micro Seiki and SAEC arms.
Most of their advertised ones are already sold but if you contact them, they will be able to get you one..
http://www.fonolab.com/obchod.html?category=2&page=1
-
Thanks Hal,
The 505 has been mentioned a lot in the past few years. Lots of love for that one. That headshell looks a little different than others I've seen, what's up with the mounting holes? Looks like you mount the cart sideways. :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
It also looks like I might have to move in the next couple of years which leaves me conflicted. I still have an old Sota Sapphire - rehab awaiting completion. It needs a metal chassis/armboard configuration and a new drive system. I've already scuttled the suspension. I figure it might be pretty good with a Teres Verus rim drive, but that alone is $1800. Maybe I'll get the Victor and sell off a few lesser tables to finance the ill-conceived Sota.
See any Verus driven tables on the Timeline thing? Just wondering.
Regards,
-
Neo,
http://www.hifishark.com/search?q=victor+tt
Japan's Yahoo Site seems to be the place for Victors....
-
Halcro,
I've come back to this thread a couple of times recently, and each time I start looking around on Hifishark. Check out this Kenwood:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/201348498398?rmvSB=true
made by Micro Seiki
I'm not sure what I'm doing right now. I feel like I should fix up that old Sota, either with a Teres rim drive or even a motor on a pod with a controller. It's got a nice platter.....
How are you loading the X1 MKII ?
neo
-
Hi Neo,
Looks pretty nifty.. :D
Unless you have Auction Sniper....it's hard to win these sorts of auctions when there seems to be plenty of interest?
I'm playing the X1/II at 40K and zero added Cap.
Can you explain why it works with different loading to the Z1? I thought they were similar generators...? but maybe inductance etc are different?
Regards
-
AU fleabey has some cool stuff. Look at this Teac:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-TEAC-idler-wheel-transcription-turntable-16-33-45-78RPM-rare/321757108362?_trksid=p2047675.c100010.m2109&_trkparms=aid%3D555012%26algo%3DPW.MBE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D30987%26meid%3D918010eb4fd44fc2a2f2f86d084374cb%26pid%3D100010%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D11%26sd%3D201348498398
If you enter your max bid - most you're willing to pay, they will keep you as the high bidder in the minimum increment, until/unless you max is exceeded.
I never trusted them though. What's stopping them from entering a phony bid, knowing your max will automatically be higher? The user names are all phony, so who's to know if the bidding history is legit? Do they still get a percentage of the sale? Then it would be in their interest to do just that.
Maybe a bidding service(s) doesn't get paid on a percentage of the sale, but they're probably in cahoots with fleabey. They could augment their small user fee with a small piece of fleabey's percentage and dramatically increase income.
The internet is a slaughterhouse and we're the cattle. Look at the retailers selling new stuff for list price. No competition on the retail side is price fixing and high end audio companies are guilty as charged. They think they shit chocolate drops, but.....
neo
-
This is the only Sniper site I use..
http://au.auctionsniper.com
They don't make a bid till 5 seconds before close and they only go 5 cents higher than the high bid (as long as your max. bid is still in the race.)
You get three free auctions to try them out with.. :thumb:
They have no affiliation with EBay or anyone else and are strictly working for you.
I have lost only two auctions out of nearly 30 by using them.
Don't be afraid to make your max. bid reasonably high. It won't get there unless someone values the item highly and that's a good reason to pay the right price.
Regards
-
Never seen a TEAC idler like that one Neo.... :scratch:
Some real goodies Downunder... :D
-
Cart response is a combination of mechanical response and electrical parameters. Loading is changing electrical parameters and the type of affectation is different for HO and LO carts. I know you're primarily interested in HO carts, but first I'd like to clear up a LO misconception. That is, capacitance loading has no affect on a LOMC. It does.
One thing that many EE's get wrong, is assumptions about high frequency resonance and the interaction of mechanical and electrical parameters. An EE over at asylum thought electrical parameters defined high frequency resonance, and the low inductance put it somewhere in the hundreds of thousands of Hz. We know this is wrong.
LOMC HFR (high freq res) is completely mechanical. It is the cantilever resonance and is only extended upward by mechanical damping, which also broadens the area affected and also extends it downwards.
Even though LOMC inductance is typically 20 - 50uH, it will interact with capacitance and create its own RFI. This was pointed out by Atmosphere over on agon. Many phono preamps are bandwidth limited and this might not be a problem. As you load down a LOMC, if you get noise reduction and/or reduction of mid-high glare, then that's what is happening. In the absence of RFI, LOMC loading has no affect on frequency response. It's all about stage vs. focus.
Be back shortly,
neo
-
"I'm playing the X1/II at 40K and zero added Cap.
Can you explain why it works with different loading to the Z1? I thought they were similar generators...? but maybe inductance etc are different?"
I was looking up our measurements for the JVC carts. On page 47 David measured around 400mH and 490 ohms (DC) for X1. I measured around the same for the X1 Griff loaned me, although I didn't find the post. Conjecture is, the X1 and X1 MKII are the same. The stylus/cantilever is redesigned and that's all we really know at this point. The Z1 is said to also use the same generator and I haven't measured the sample I'm playing with now. I think David has a bunch of Z1's and said they're the same.
To paraphrase CarlosFM (VE cart loading thread), mechanical response is the overwhelming determinate of MM response. Unless or until we know otherwise, we have to assume the difference is the stylus/cantilever. In a sense it doesn't matter. You hear the difference and load appropriately. Without test record and gear, the why of it takes some conjecture. You're loading down the X1/II because it's a little bright or forward where the Z1/SAS was a little bass heavy so up it goes. It's the capacitance part that takes some conjecture. In general, adding capacitance lowers high frequency resonance and rolls off the extreme high end. Adding a "normal" amount of capacitance will often reinforce mid-treble response by augmenting it with the lowered resonance. This works great with many carts and treble droop, which is common - a natural mechanical response. But, there's also a 180° phase shift at HFR so you have to do it right. This phase shift tends to cancel response. When combined with the high frequency roll off it drops like a rock. It's this aspect David was working with on the V15/SAS. It took 700pF @ 27K to tame it.
Unless you have an inductance/capacitance meter or a multimeter with inductance, you can only measure DC resistance. To do that you need a DIGITAL METER ONLY. Put the test leads on the +/- of each channel just long enough to get a stable reading. The cart can't be connected to anything else at the time.
neo
-
Quiet around here lately.
Want to mention, that VE thread is quite interesting. It's called Cartridge Loading Explained. CarlosFM is an EE, as is another poster Werner, who wrote the TNT article Load the Magnets. Luckydog was active in that thread, although I think he's identified as Ld or guest. All my posts have been deleted by the management, but you're not missing much.
VE is like the ancient Egyptians in that respect, their history is edited. No matter, it's worth reading.
Taking my usual stroll around Agon and Audio Mart, I ran across this:
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649194952-different-mm-cartridges-for-sale/
Nothing earth shaking, but a couple of interesting items including EPC w/original Technics stylus and AT23. I don't know all the cross fitments of the Technics MM's, but if they're boron tubes..... The AT23 is one of those low inductance models David mentioned. I think the 23 is one that plugs into an S arm like a standard headshell would. There's also a Victor Z1-S for $50 Canadian.
neo
-
Thanks for the explanation of loading Neo....
Seems to make sense....
Just picked up a Victor Z-1s with stylus guard on HiFiDo for approx. $25.00.. :lol:
Will see whether it's worth buying a SAS transplant for it as a gift for a friend....but the stylus guard is worth the $25 alone as my working Z1/SAS came without.... :thumb:
-
I like how you think Halcro. I just don't understand how all these stylus guards just disappear! I have in the past, bought 'junk' cartridges just to get the stylus guard.
-
The $25 stylus guard together with the 'free' Z-1s cartridge arrived...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=121804)
and I attached it to the DV-507MkII arm to hear it.
Whilst it had the distinctive punchy Victor signature sound...it lacked the finesse and detail of both the Z-1/SAS and X-1/IIE as was to be expected... :thumb:
I tried to remove the stylus but there must be a tradition in Japan of gluing these in.... :banghead:...so I carefully used a tool to remove it as I remembered I had the original Shibata on beryllium stylus assembly from my first Z-1 purchase...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=121805)
It slid in easily including the tension wire and I once again loaded it onto the Dyna arm and ensured that it indeed played.... :violin:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=121806)
I will report after due evaluation time has passed....
At this stage....these have all been fortuitous and timely purchases... :bounce:
-
Halcro,
Great photos as usual.
For future reference, sometimes the close contact of metals, even dissimilar ones, will cause them to form a bond over time. If the plastic is actually glued to the body, superglue seems to be preferred. Acetone (contained in nail polish remover) will break the superglue bond and shouldn't hurt hard plastic.
These plastic stylus holders seem to be made from somewhat different formulations and you could test it first to be sure.
I got an Achromat - 3mm, as discussed on Agon. For those unfamiliar with Halcro's Direct Drive - Are We living Dangerously? thread, my plan is to use approx. 2mm of lead underneath. The 5mm mat is said to be much better, but the addition of lead would make it 7mm, a bit thick.
Initial inspection was surprising. The mat seems to be made of some kind of fiberboard, sort of like fine cardboard. :roll: It's very light weight. I'll weigh it before and after the application of lead. It is well finished with what seems like a slightly deeper than usual depression for the record label. I couldn't help but think, over $100 for a piece of fiberboard? I could have had a couple of those $50 records. There's no fool like an audiofool. Imagine paying $50 for a record and it isn't even direct to disc!!
I hope you find the above description amusing because Achromat seems to be a serious contender. This lightweight punches like Cassius Clay vs. Sonny Liston. I just got it yesterday and I plan to try it out awhile before the lead, but my initial impression is very positive.
To be continued.....
neo
-
Some kids always want to stay up past bedtime, even when they're tired and the next day is school. They must finish the chapter or watch that show and not to, would be the height of frustration in a boring existence. Even when older, I didn't want to miss anything. Going to bed is like dying - another day done and gone, never to be relived.
That's how it is for me with the Z1/SAS. I keep devising tests and comparisons even though I really have a handle on the differences at least in a general way, although it's the specifics which are fascinating. I'm in the other room where I have a wall bracket. That facilitates arm adjustments as the table is higher. I don't have to get on my knees as with the converted end tables. I'm using the Alphason which seems to suit the JVC better, even though the SAS must be higher compliance than stock? This comparison is with the 440, first with an ATN140LC, then a MR5.0ML stylus. Switching carts on this set-up is time consuming and then the mat showed up, but I didn't need to start over.
There seemed to be a significant difference with the JVC/SAS in reducing VTF from 1.4g to 1.3 or approx. 1.325g. The stage opened and it got faster and more dynamic. At 1.25g tracing seemed iffy, and a less than perfect record, warped or wrinkled, would be more prone to mistracking. That coincides with results on the Unitrac and seems more critical than most.
Unlike Halcro, I found the best arm height within the usual range of near level to tail up slightly. Maybe it's the micro stylus on a boron cantilever, but there seem to be ranges (I call nodes) of tail up settings which can sound excellent on specific records or group of similar pressings. This seems more common with the Genesis than an AT-boron/ML, which brings up another point. I realized I had been mentally comparing the sound to my favorite, the Genesis 1000 LOMC, not other MM's. The Genesis is a seriously underrated cart. This is a cart that made Raul say WOW. IMO it's significantly better than the Sigma 2000 and carts like the 17D3, Koetsu Black/Goldline, Kisiki Blue, Ortofon MC10/20, etc. That list includes ZYX under $4K, although my listening to these hasn't been extensive, I can tell. I haven't heard the Universe, but I suspect the cantilever is too short to compete in my ballpark, with my preferences.
When you get to the Rosewood Signature or some VDH you might prefer another flavor, but that's a matter of taste or synergy which is no small matter.
The "error" of the JVC is mostly one of proportion. Those extra dynamics in the midrange can also put the background or quiet passages too far back. This is not always noticeable, and specific to the recording, but this "error" is what gives the cart its unique presentation. Quite frankly, it's a lot of fun even if not appropriate for every record. For detail it's top notch with excellent transient response and high frequency resolution. As reported before, some tonality which impacts harmonic intricacies is a little less than perfect, but not far off.
Where does this leave us? Not quite sure. I definitely prefer Genesis, but when I substituted Z1 for 140LC, the Z1 seemed significantly better. I'm almost through with these comparisons and I'm still on the fence about buying one. I just got an AT mono cart and haven't even tried it. The Achromat needs lead, tables need caps ..... I'll let you know.
neo
-
I'm almost through with these comparisons and I'm still on the fence about buying one.
Well unlike Neo, there's no fence in sight for my rear end.... :surrender:
In fact I must admit to a major embarrassment...
After 5-6 years of buying, testing and selling over 50 cartridges....I have finally settled on my 'perfect' mix for the Raven AC-2
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=122248)
The Fidelity Research FR-7f/Lc is on one FR-66s arm with the AT33Mono on the other one and the Signet TK-7LCa on the Copperhead.
The first being the most lyrical and expansive LOMC I have yet heard whilst the Signet is truly hard to fault.
On the Victor TT-101 however...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=122249)
despite trying dozens of my other 'keepers'....I can do no better than the Victor Z1/SAS on the FR-64s, the Victor X1/IIE on the SAEC WE-8000/ST and the Victor Z-1s with original Shibata stylus and beryllium cantilever on the DV507/II....
Call me boring or call me stupid but as the Ad for Mortein goes......"when you're on a good thing, stick to it"... :beer:
-
Well unlike Neo, there's no fence in sight for my rear end.... :surrender:
Hi Halcro,
Shouldn't that read front end? :wink:
In fact I must admit to a major embarrassment...
After 5-6 years of buying, testing and selling over 50 cartridges....
Major embarrassment? What's there to be embarrassed about, that it only took 6 years and 50 carts? Are you in your twenties? If so, I really am envious!
What's Mortein, just an ad with an appropriate tag line?
I think you're smitten and madly in love. Ain't love grand? In this case love is cheap, considering what you paid for those JVC carts. :thumb:
There's no arguing with results. These Victors are seductive and even though I haven't heard every variation, I get the idea.
My problem is more like long term planning and priorities. If this was a couple of years ago I'd buy one or two of these and play around with the styli etc. and I still might get one. But my goal is to downsize out of necessity, not choice, and like it or not I'll have to deal with it eventually. I bought the mono cart because I didn't have one and I have mono records.
So rock on my friend. It's great to read about your latest flame. It looks like your candle is burning from three ends (?) You know how it goes.
Regards,
-
Hi Neo,
Mortein..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEsRKCemF4U
I think you're smitten and madly in love. Ain't love grand? In this case love is cheap, considering what you paid for those JVC carts. :thumb:
You're right....love IS grand... :angel: My admiration for Victor as a company keeps growing the more of its products I use....perhaps I should try one of their arms.... :scratch:
No no....my arm collection I think is complete.... :kiss:
What's happening with your turntable and arm decisions... :violin:
Regards
-
Table & arm decisions are complicated. It seems like Teres Audio is completely out of business. I thought they were still selling motors/controllers. It's on their site but the contact email doesn't work. I guess I could get a belt drive motor and put it on a pod, but it's not what I want. Origin Live makes an overpriced DC motor/controller set-up as an "upgrade" for belt drivers?? I have a new metal subchassis figured out for the Sota. It wouldn't be hard to implement, but w/o a motor..... That Sota is a teaser. It looks so pretty but is a lousy design, like a sexy hooker who gives you the clap.
I'd rather not discuss what I'm looking for on the used market, not until after I acquire it.
Insecticide? Not sure how I should take that. I'm not crazy about the yellow guy playing the violin either. There's some other minor developments - maybe after breakfast.
neo
-
Have you thought of the VPI HRX motor and flywheel (which can be purchased separately)?
http://www.vpiindustries.com/table-hrx.htm
I have a friend in Bavaria who has used this motor to drive a Micro Seiki RX-5000 turntable....
-
VPI rim drive on a Seiki 5000? Seems odd, did the 5000 motor quit? I assume your friend likes the new set-up?,
I haven't used these rim drives, but I've read that Teres is better. Maybe with a speed controller the VPI is as good? There's an AC motor controller called Falcon (I think) that's supposed to be better than SDS. I'm sure the HRX motor pod/flywheel won't fit in the Sota space unless I abandon the wood sides and dust cover. Maybe it's destined to be a hot rod, but my plan was to have the sides and dust cover lift straight off for use and just reinsert in 3 holes in the chassis to button up. I called my friendly VPI dealer last week, but I didn't get him. Maybe I should get a 300 RPM motor and controller and sell it. I'm tired of thinking about it.
On another front, I made a mistake trying the Achromat in the middle of a comparison. Without going into all the gory details I now suspect the 3mm version has serious deficiencies when used on a 1.5Kg DD platter. I think the lead sub-mat will change that. Maybe the 5mm version is better by itself.
neo
-
Not rim drive....a belt.
See Link..and it has the SDS speed controller built in.
Yes...my friend prefers it to the Micro motor. So much so that he designed his own deck using another HRX motor....
The Achromat I agree has deficiencies.....and they are instantly audible compared to my references.
-
Not rim drive....a belt.
See Link..and it has the SDS speed controller built in.
Yes...my friend prefers it to the Micro motor. So much so that he designed his own deck using another HRX motor....
The Achromat I agree has deficiencies.....and they are instantly audible compared to my references.
I thought you meant the VPI rim drive option on the HRX.
http://www.vpiindustries.com/manuals/TNT_HR-X-12_7.pdf
Did you try the mat on top of the metal one? Is it the 5mm version?
I mentioned that I'm a chronic arm height adjuster, and when the mat arrived I had the arm lowered. I made a minor adjustment for the new mat and it seemed pretty good. Subsequently, I couldn't integrate the sound with other LP's. Last night I put on Ron Carter's Piccolo album (2-LP). Great sounding live album and I raised the arm. The sound was amazing but seemed like the arm was a hair high. This triggered a progression of adjustments that ended with loading the Z1 at 32K. :duh:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=122313)
The album is highly recommended. I'll have to see about the mat + lead.
Ron Carter plays piccolo bass which is a little smaller than a regular 3/4 size upright. Buster Williams is on acoustic bass, Kenny Barron piano and Ben Riley drums. Recorded live at Sweet Basil NYC in '77. The playing on this album is great - catchy and it swings. The sound is phenomenal.
neo
-
Hi Halcro,
I have a question for you in regards to your FR-7f/LC. I have been under the impression that the 'f' model was conical? I am not all that convinced of that because of the 'cf' version. A person would think that the 'c' would stand for conical of the 'f' model. I own a FR-7 Line Contact (late model). I find some of the understanding of these models rather elusive hence the question! (grin)
BTW: Out comrade Nikola in The Netherlands has the 'fz' model. He considers it one if not 'the' best cartridge he owns!
Regards,
-
Hi Griff,
Yes it is quite confusing if you look up Vinyl Engine's specs on the Fidelity Research FR-7 range of LOMC cartridges... :scratch:
It was always my understanding that the FR-7f was held in higher esteem than the plain old FR-7...and sometimes even higher than the FR-7fz..... :weights:
It wasn't till I acquired my FR-7f and sent it to Dertonarm for re-tipping (as he knows the original technician in Tokyo who did them for the factory) that I realised that the original stylus for the 7f was in fact conical....
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=122346)
After the re-tip to original specs....whilst the cartridge sounded quite good, it wasn't clearly ahead of the UNIverse or even the XV-1s I already owned.
Unfortunately...or fortunately as it now turns out....one day when I lowered the 7f onto the lead-in groove, a crackling noise was the only result. Under the 10x loupe, it was revealed that the 'new' conical stylus by the 'Japanese Master' had sheared in half... :guns:
Sending it to Axel for a new 'new' re-tip...his recommendation was to replace it with a Line Contact which was done.
The result was nothing short of revelatory.... :banana piano:
Now the specs on VE say that the FR-7 has a Line Contact as does the FR-7fz with the FR-7f having the conical. This simply doesn't make sense to me.. :violin:
Why do the FR-7 and FR-7fz have exactly the specs (other than impedance and compliance)...and we know that the FR-7f cost a lot more than the plain 7 and fz more than them both... :banghead:
There needs to be an authorised account of the differences between these models to clear up this 40 year mystery....
It's hard for me to say that I have now turned my 7f into an fz (simply by changing to a Line Contact stylus) as the load and output impedances are different... :scratch:
What is your opinion of the plain old FR-7?
Regardless of all this....my FR-7f/Lc is simply the most convincing LOMC cartridge I have ever heard. Nuff said.... :dance:
Regards
-
Maybe Dertonarm can help with the mystery if you're still in touch? I'm a little surprised you guys don't have more magnification. You don't need a fancy microscope to tell a spherical from a line contact. 100X would be more than adequate, but I'm one to talk - now with 30X.
There are mistakes on the database, but not that many considering..... The FR7 was the first (1978?) and not surprisingly, is really spherical. .2mV, 3 ohm generator is modified to 2 ohms on the 7F & 7FE with same output. If the data is correct it's hard to tell what the change is. 1 ohm difference isn't much, but it's 1/3 of the total.
I guess it's safe to assume the 7E is elliptical. It looks like the 7FZ came later ('84) and is further modified to .24mV, 5 ohm. Looks like longer coils make more voltage. We don't know what internal changes were made if any, but it's a little different.
I'll have to get a new scope. Last year I got a used conventional scope with USB capability. The thing doesn't seem to work which was a big disappointment. It's an expensive piece. I'm pretty sure I can modify a USB scope to check for wear. It's easy to take beauty shots but checking for wear is tricky. I used to do that professionally with an AT scope. BTW, most of the USB scopes have half of advertised magnification. The other half comes from the software. I've seen shots where people think it's 200X and it looks like about 80.
Another project. :roll:
neo
-
Hello Halcro,
I find it quite difficult to explain what it is about my FR-7 that I find so enchanting. When compared (A/B type testing), to some of my other cartridges, it seldom comes out on top. These comparisons reveal that it sort of sounds slightly rolled off on the top and lacks a little detail. Yet I find it one of my most enjoyable cartridges to spend time with. There is something magical about it that I just can not quantify. It is a quality that no other cartridge that I have owned or heard has. How is it possible for it to sound so 'right' but then when directly compared to other cartridges, it sounds so 'wrong'? Perhaps we have been lead to believe in the wrong things to 'judge' by.
Personally, I think it has something to do with those huge Anico magnets in the FR.
Regards,
-
Hi Neo,
Good to hear you also have discovered the special qualities that the JVC/SAS brings to the table.
When I think about how much money I have spent on some of my cartridges that this Z-1/SAS outperforms, I begin to think of myself as a fool! (grin)
To state that it outperforms above its price point would be a major understatement!
Neo, I think many of us do own test equipment with higher magnification. It is not that difficult to determine a Conical from a Line Contact but when you get into comparing the Elliptical with a Supper Elliptical or a Supper Elliptical and a Line Contact, it get more difficult. How about telling the difference between an Fine Line and a Line Contact? Or the various Shibata's. It takes a very good trained eye to see these differences. To actually determine wear! Well we are kidding ourselves when we run out and buy one of these high power microscopes if we think we are going to be able to determine life expectancy of a stylus or actually see wear this way. You Neo can see and determine this. It is because you have received the training and have had the experience working in the industry. But those of us that are only in this as a hobby, well, ignorance is sometimes bliss!
Regards,
-
Hi Griff,
Regarding magnification - Low power magnifiers are useful for alignment, stylus inspection, and a variety of tiny jobs where it's a big assist to actually see what you're doing, but you really need a variety of powers. 10X might be a little strong as an alignment aid. The focal length is a bit short for that. There's something called a linen magnifier, a low power lens that sits upright on an angled stand. They come in around 2X to 8X. You have to make sure you're not just looking from one angle, or the lighting is uneven, but it helps immensely.
10X is good for seeing if the stylus is caked with crud, while it mounted on your table. People used to bring in styli so caked up I couldn't see the tip. Sometimes it looked like a volcano with a little diamond top. With 30 to 50X (small hand held scope) you can see a bushing or nude mount, the way it's fixed to the cantilever etc. You can usually see a crack or chip in the diamond with this magnification. Spotting something like this could save an irreplaceable record. Advanced shapes and micros are often smaller and more susceptible, with sharper edges. A chipped stylus can tear up a record. It might sound okay for awhile but when you lift the cart at the end there's a long curled up ribbon of vinyl hanging from the tip. Make your blood run cold? It can happen. It happened to me with an ML. My hand slipped and it landed on a metal platter. I checked and the tip was still there, but little did I know..... When I saw that ribbon of vinyl I nearly shit myself.
There's many sizes of LC, FL etc. and I'm not sure why you'd need to tell one from the other.
Checking for wear is a whole other thing and requires side lighting only. You're looking for the reflection off the business part of the tip. Like a lot of other things unfamiliar, it's only an obscure mystery until you find out about it. Yes, you'll need some help interpreting what you see, especially at first, but that's what these forums are for.
Regards,
neo
-
While I had the Z1 on the table I did an experiment with the mat, which involved using another mat underneath. This was with an old one made of "woven" expanded foam - silicone or polyester. By itself the foam mat seems to outperform stock rubber mats, but ultimately falls short. With Achromat on top, the whole seemed greater than the sum of the parts, much better than either by itself. Is this like Herbie's? Still, it doesn't perform like a Goldmund platter or Sota Supermat, but gives hope that replacing foam with lead could be even better.
I dismounted the JVC to send back to Griff. (BTW, thanks again for this loan.) I then set-up the 440/beryllium ML on the same table. The difference took some getting used to. For one thing the Z1 was louder. The 440 w/Signet MR-ML stylus should be around 4.5 to 5mV. AFAIK the Z1E is 4mV. The spec is taken at 1KHz which could explain some of it. When I turn up the 440 that piano in the background is now more forward. Even with ensemble playing (as opposed to solo) the piano is much more prominent. It's hard to second guess a mix, but the Ron Carter LP's are live. Although the JVC is more exciting, I think the AT is more accurate in presentation - more like live. A lot depends on the music and personal preference. The Z1 makes the music come alive in a different way. The bass solos are right there, prominent and real sounding, so are the cymbals. All the other things I've said about transient response and detail hold true, including a slight lack of tonality.
The Z1/SAS is a seductive cart. After using one for awhile it's easy to see how Halcro can put a different variety on all three arms. I don't rank carts the same way as some others, and while I think some carts are clearly better than others, good ones are different. I'd like one of these because it's fun and enjoyable, not because I think it's the best MM. I probably won't get one because I really want a 50ANV or ART9 or 7, or maybe even a PTG II. Right now the ART9 has a special interest for me. On the other hand the 50ANV .....
neo
-
BIN anyone?
LpGear has 2 HOMC's which seem to get some respect, even accolades. Anybody try one?
http://www.lpgear.com/product/BIN215.html
http://www.lpgear.com/product/BIN323.html
1.7mV, 2.0g, 10cu @ 100Hz .3 x.7 or nude square shank LC.
I'm in the process of making a lead mat. The stuff is a little tricky to work with. It has to be flattened, cut out, and drilled. Looks like it will be more like 1mm thick than 2mm. The 3mm Achromat appears to be more like 2.5mm. It weighs just under 4 oz - 112g. The lead looks like it will come in around 510g - 1.1 lb.
The AT MONO3 isn't broken in yet. Played a Japanese pressing of a '50's Ray Brown LP and it was remarkable how much quieter it was, even with a good pressing. The difference is even greater with a noisy copy.
neo
-
Hi Neo,
Both those Bin (LPgear) cartridges sound interesting. I hope someone can add some highlights!
-
Hi Griff,
Not sure if you noticed the story with these:
http://www.lpgear.com/category/BIN.html
I was looking around VE and saw this:
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=73133&start=45
Bobinaz7 has something interesting to say.
Not many HOMC's make it to the big time. :dunno:
-
Hi Neo,
First I would like to let you know that the JVC/SAS arrived and all is good on the Western front! (grin)
Thanks for the search attachments. Interesting cartridge. You are right. Seldom does a HOMC ever make it to a recommendation.
The extra winding's to create the extra output also creates extra mass so most of them sound sort of sluggish to me. Not all though, but most!
I might have to give one of them a listen. I'm a little busy right now but I have earmarked it for a later purchase. I will keep you and everyone else
informed when I do.
Regards,
-
Saw a thread on Asylum about Stanton/Pickering stylus failure.
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=vinyl&m=1112841
Tell you the truth it doesn't make sense to me. It's about rubber damper failure. I don't know about all the models, but my 981 stylus doesn't seem to have a rubber damper, so how is that stylus failure? I assume there's a damper inside the body and if that dried up any stylus would be bad.
I suspect it's more a case of re-break in. It usually takes at least a few hours to get a cart going again after it's been sitting. At least that's been my experience..... any thoughts?
neo
-
Hi Neo.
I completely agree with your comment in regards to this required 'mini' break-in after a cartridge has sat for a while . Some of you may be asking yourself, just how long is this
'for a while'. Well, I had cartridges that don't sound quite as I remember them sounding only after a couple of days of this sitting. Others take several weeks before this same effect takes place. To me, the cartridges sound is a bit thin until it 're' settles in. I can not say for sure that it is the suspension that is making the change from sitting, or if it is the coil wire being energized when placed back into use. I do know of some audiophiles that will not even move their speaker wire for fear of having to 're' break them in. A lot of Voodoo in this hobby of ours but I do know what I hear. Something does definitely change in the sound of a cartridge when it sits.
Regards,
-
Wow! what a great site. I found a LOT of interesting info :thumb:
I found this site looking for info about the Victor Z-1s cartridge, which came with a Sansui TT that I recently bought.
Seems to be that it's a nice cartridge and with a JICO SAS stylus will sound very nice!
I have a question about it and I hope you can help me.
I have a Victor QL5-r TT with a Victor MD-1016 cartridge and I'm waiting for a JICO SAS stylus for it.
I wonder if the difference between the Z1s and the MD-1016 could be big enough to buy another JICO SAS stylus for the Z1s :?. What do you think?
Thanks a lot! and greetings from Chile
Esteban
-
Hi Esteban, welcome to the thread and Vinyl Circle.
How does the MD1016 compare to the Z1 ? Good question. I suspect you'll have to tell us. Maybe Griff knows something about it. All I know is that the X1 and Z1 were TOTL carts. I couldn't find any specs on the 1016, but with the Shure type stylus fitment it might be similar? That's a long shot, but if they make an SAS for it, it's a definite maybe.
neo
-
Hello Esteban,
I think Neobop has answered your question about as good as anyone on this thread could. The fact that Jico offers a SAS for the MD1016 does say a lot. If you already have one on order, I would wait and give us your impressions of it. After sufficient warm up time is given of course to that new SAS. I would hate to recommend you spend another $133 for a SAS for the Z-1 and only receive small improvements or perhaps 'no' improvements if your remaining components (phono stage. tone arm, cables, etc. are not up to the task of fleshing out those slight improvements. I am using the term 'improvements' in a very loose sense. In many cases, what you will recieve will be just changes in flavor. Easy to make something sound different, but to make it an improvement, well, that is another thing altogether!
-
Thanks a lot! I'll wait for the MD-1016 SAS, and then I'm gonna decide if a new SAS for the Z1s would be worth.
I can't compare the MD-1016 with the Z1s because the stylus on the MD-1016 it's a Shibata and the one on the Z1s it's a elliptical and isn't in a very good shape. I think any comparison it's unfair in these conditions.
These are the specs for the MD-1016:
Output: 3mV (1kHz)
Frecuency response: 10 to 25.000hz
Separation: Better than 25 db (1kHz)
Channel Balance: Within +/- 1.5dB
Load Resistance: 47 to 100 kohms
Compliance: 20x10'6/dyne
Tracking Force: 1.5 to 2.0 grams.
What can I say it's that I have a Jelco MC-14d with a elliptical stylus and sound much better than the Z1s (bass definition and clear highs). I doesn't exist much info about the Jelco neither, but JICO also made a stylus for it, so must be a decent cartridge.
These are the specs for the Jelco:
Frequency Response 10~27,000Hz
Sensitivity 4mV at 1,000Hz/50mm/sec
Channel Balance 0.7dB at 1,000Hz
Channel Seperation 26dB at 1,000Hz
Impedance 2k ohms at 1,000Hz
D.C. Resistance 350 ohms
Load Resistance 47K ohms~100k ohms
Compliance 12x10`6cm/dyne
Needle Pressure 1.5gr ~ 3gr
Any opinions?
I will tell you my impressions about the MD-1016 when the SAS arrives.
Best regards
-
Hello Multirock,
There is something that I think you are missing or not understanding when you think of the SAS. JICO only has (1) SAS cantilever/stylus but they install it in many different housings. They also manufacture the housings. When you receive the SAS for your MD-1016, what you will be looking at will be the exact same cantilever and stylus that is in the SAS Z-1 and all other SAS applications. Only the housing's will be different which could also include the shaft that inserts into the body of the cartridge. Also in regards to your Z-1. If it is the 'S' model, then it is spherical or better known as conical (round). If is the 'E' model, then it is the elliptical. You have stated that the MD-1016 has a Shibata. The SAS will be a Micro-Ridge. You should find the Shibata to be a little sweeter sounding, but the Micro-Ridge should provide more detail. The difference between these two will not be as great as what you would discover on the Z-1S. Going from a Spherical to a Micro-Ridge is a major difference. I would think that the MD-1016 with a Shibata would be a good cartridge to spend quality time with! Perhaps more so with the SAS. Let us know what you discover.
Regards,
-
...I'm not sure what I'm doing right now. I feel like I should fix up that old Sota, either with a Teres rim drive or even a motor on a pod with a controller. It's got a nice platter....
neo
Please post link if there some established method to add rim drive to the Sota TT. That sounds like a fantastic idea. The plinth, platter, and cabinet are fantastic starting points.
On older Sota TTs the wow and flutter is quite audible, and bothersome. I suspect the current models are much improved in that area, but have not heard them.
I have concrete floor, which minimizes or eliminates floor bounce. I know of persons who owned older VPI HW-19 TTs (suspended and in other ways similar to Sota) and strongly felt replacing the springs with visco-elastic (AKA rubber) grommets vastly improved performance. Sota now makes and sells the Jewel, same as the Saphire w/grommets replacing the springs. The Jewel is my favorite current Sota. If I bought an older Sota, I'd purchase the Saphire and convert it to a Jewel.
It may not look great, but the $6500 Merrill TT may be the world's best high end TT value.
-
Please post link if there some established method to add rim drive to the Sota TT. That sounds like a fantastic idea. The plinth, platter, and cabinet are fantastic starting points.
On older Sota TTs the wow and flutter is quite audible, and bothersome. I suspect the current models are much improved in that area, but have not heard them.
I have concrete floor, which minimizes or eliminates floor bounce. I know of persons who owned older VPI HW-19 TTs (suspended and in other ways similar to Sota) and strongly felt replacing the springs with visco-elastic (AKA rubber) grommets vastly improved performance. Sota now makes and sells the Jewel, same as the Saphire w/grommets replacing the springs. The Jewel is my favorite current Sota. If I bought an older Sota, I'd purchase the Saphire and convert it to a Jewel.
It may not look great, but the $6500 Merrill TT may be the world's best high end TT value.
There is no established method for converting a Sapphire. I already defeated the suspension and was about to make a new chassis as the old one was warped. This project dates back a couple of years and it seems like I took too long. Teres is out of business. Used Teres Verus motors are few and far between. The only viable rim drive motor I know of is Trans Fi and I don't know if they sell motors/controllers separately. I don't think a VPI rim drive will fit and I suspect they're overpriced with a controller. Plus, I'm not convinced of the quality with an AC motor. Here's what the insides of an old ceramic platter Sapphire look like:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=119851.0
As you get into the thread you'll see what a poor design it is. The plinth is 1/2" MDF and holds the entire weigh of the table. It flexes with the weight on the suspension. My mod took virtually all the weight off the suspension and put it on the subchassis - 4 spikes. Now all I need is a motor, but I'm not partial to belt drive so it sits unfinished. The only really nice thing about a Sota is the cabinet, dust cover, and platter /bearing is excellent, but the drive system is crap. Current models have better motors but are little improved. The thin little belt is too flexible and wow and flutter is still bothersome.
Any time you have a suspension with a fixed motor, you have a problem. If the suspension is excited the belt will stretch and contract with the movement.
neo
-
speaking of Sota sapphire turntable,i just pick one up without power supply but it come with sme 309 and goldmund matt and clamp.just wondering if it worth it to keep as it is ?or upgrade it with something else from the factory?Thanks
lapsan
-
Hi Lapsan,
I think you should get it functional and decide if it's worthy. The real old ones have a 24V DC supply, but Sota changed this on various vintages. If you call them or email their service department with your serial number, they'll tell you what it is. If you need a 24V supply to get it going, you can borrow mine which is rebuilt.
It's unusual to see them with a Goldmund mat/clamp. Sota sold a Supermat and a big reflex clamp which is more usual on these. The Supermat is similar to the Goldmund methacrylate mat. The Goldmund clamp is a screw-on with their name on top. The big Sota clamp has a lever on top to tighten.
Let us know how you make out.
neo
-
There is no established method for converting a Sapphire. I already defeated the suspension and was about to make a new chassis as the old one was warped. This project dates back a couple of years and it seems like I took too long. Teres is out of business. Used Teres Verus motors are few and far between. The only viable rim drive motor I know of is Trans Fi and I don't know if they sell motors/controllers separately. I don't think a VPI rim drive will fit and I suspect they're overpriced with a controller. Plus, I'm not convinced of the quality with an AC motor. Here's what the insides of an old ceramic platter Sapphire look like:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=119851.0
As you get into the thread you'll see what a poor design it is. The plinth is 1/2" MDF and holds the entire weigh of the table. It flexes with the weight on the suspension. My mod took virtually all the weight off the suspension and put it on the subchassis - 4 spikes. Now all I need is a motor, but I'm not partial to belt drive so it sits unfinished. The only really nice thing about a Sota is the cabinet, dust cover, and platter /bearing is excellent, but the drive system is crap. Current models have better motors but are little improved. The thin little belt is too flexible and wow and flutter is still bothersome.
Any time you have a suspension with a fixed motor, you have a problem. If the suspension is excited the belt will stretch and contract with the movement.
neo
Wow, that really takes the air out of my Sota balloon. I'm glad I know now, though. The cabinets sure look great. Have no idea why I thought the plinth was aluminum.
A Linn LP-12 replaced and outperformed my Sota Sapphire. Ditto Sony's marvelous PSX-8 outperformed the LP-12 by even bigger margin. Do you like the custom rim-drive TT made in GB?
In the late 80s/early 90s at CES, Fanfare Magazine's then-audiophile reviewer Niel Levinson visited our room and mentioned how terrible is the Sota's wow and flutter, and how much better is the Linn's. It's funny I never noticed it till he mentioned that, then afterwards that's all I heard every record I played. All the press and awards the Sota won and it took an almost unknown author to point out the obvious.
The Sota certainly sounded "big," and was impervious to acoustic breakthrough of any kind, not the case with the LP-12 if set up incorrectly, which was easy to do compared to the Sota.
-
Wow, that really takes the air out of my Sota balloon. I'm glad I know now, though. The cabinets sure look great. Have no idea why I thought the plinth was aluminum.
A Linn LP-12 replaced and outperformed my Sota Sapphire. Ditto Sony's marvelous PSX-8 outperformed the LP-12 by even bigger margin. Do you like the custom rim-drive TT made in GB?
In the late 80s/early 90s at CES, Fanfare Magazine's then-audiophile reviewer Niel Levinson visited our room and mentioned how terrible is the Sota's wow and flutter, and how much better is the Linn's. It's funny I never noticed it till he mentioned that, then afterwards that's all I heard every record I played. All the press and awards the Sota won and it took an almost unknown author to point out the obvious.
The Sota certainly sounded "big," and was impervious to acoustic breakthrough of any kind, not the case with the LP-12 if set up incorrectly, which was easy to do compared to the Sota.
People have and develop different sensibilities when listening to a stereo. It's about music, but exists as a medium unto itself, a minifying of a live musical event or reproducing a studio session designed for the medium. It's only in comparison to the sound of live music that obviates strengths or deficiencies.
Many hobbyists are unfamiliar or only moderately familiar with the sound of live instruments. If someone is comparing the sound of an electronic pop record on two different tables and they both sound good but different, which is correct or more right, the one you're used to hearing?
When going from an inexpensive table to one with a more massive platter the improvement in deep bass, depth and solidity is usually impressive. Unfortunately, this is often accompanied by speed stability problems that might go unnoticed. The heavier platter requires a torque delivery system that often is deficient. Look at the old Goldmund Reference - servo controlled belt drive with a stout belt and a tachometer. My business partner had a Reference. I heard it many times - used to help him set the VTA on his VDH. It didn't have the speed problems of some lesser tables.
I also had an LP12 in the '80's. It was pre Valhalla and ran slightly fast, but steady. I got used to that presentation. When I realized that, I sold the table and got a Goldmund DD. The Linn had a presentation more like an idler than a belt drive. I guess it's no wonder the Sotas' would drive me crazy. The deck is also overdamped and with a vacuum can be downright tortuous. People would put an SME V (heavily damped arm) on a Star or Nova and I tried to be diplomatic. About the most I could do was tell them to use minimal vacuum if at all, and lose the damping fluid in the arm.
I suspect Trans Fi is one of the better bargains of high end. The table started out using a Teres Verus motor until that was improved with their own design. The arm is an air bearing linear tracker. I haven't heard the table, but I would buy it unheard if.....
I'm not familiar with the Sony PS-X8. The 7 is a very good table and the 9 is awesome.
neo
-
Maybe I had the PSX-7, RAM is failing at this date, too lazy to check images.
It's funny to think back about the sound of the Sota Star/SME V I heard decades ago. That combo received dozens of pro accolades, magazine cover shots including the old beloved Audio (US). I clearly remember nothing about the sound made me jump up and down. The sound was big, bold, and lacked any trace of feedback no matter how big the speakers, how deep the bass, and how loud was playback level. But it lacked emotional spark.
At the time I had no knowledge of the points you listed. But now, with decades more experience, I can not more heartily agree with everything you typed defining what's wrong with that particular over damped presentation.
I have a Frank Vignola live jazz trio CD, playing a guitar my friend builds (F.V. Signature). I've seen Frank play this guitar live several times, and I played one of Frank's guitars, not that arch top, but Frank's mahogany/spruce flat top he played with David Grisman. Guitarists may find this difficult to believe, but Frank flattened the frets in six months, and he plays a cadre of guitars. The flat top was in the shop for re-fret.
It's great to sample systems with that CD. Maybe 2-3x I heard Frank's guitar reproduced with enough realism to generate similar emotional response as live. Similar, but not the same, like you mentioned above. One o the times was ModWright 150SE/AudioMachina speakers (made in CO, solid alloy 2-piece enclosures), another was Aesthetix/Vandy 5A (mid range to die for, right where the arch top lives).
Another example that demonstrates your point: my friend/guitar luthier Ryan Thorell is a good guitarist, mostly jazz, played in his HS band, won an award in HS. Even though most professional jazz guitarists have more technical prowess, just hearing Ryan play some riffs in his studio is infinitely more appealing, enjoyable, and satisfying than most reproduced jazz guitar, even by some of the best pros.
So much of the "touch" and "nuance" of a superb instrument played by a good musician comes across only live, and even the best recording played on a superb cost no object system somehow falls short.
-
Would a SME 309 tone arm be better match with Teres turntable or With Sota sapphire turntable?currently the Teres have audiomod tone arm on there now.i also have a lenco L75 sitting around ,I'm thinking about move audiomod tone arm to lenco and SME to Teres.thank you
Lapsan
-
Would a SME 309 tone arm be better match with Teres turntable or With Sota sapphire turntable?currently the Teres have audiomod tone arm on there now.i also have a lenco L75 sitting around ,I'm thinking about move audiomod tone arm to lenco and SME to Teres.thank you
Lapsan
Hi Lapsan,
Interesting proposition, 3 tables and 2 arms. Assuming the Sota isn't operational yet can we consider the 2 arms on the Teres and Lenco?
You say the L75 is sitting around. Is it refurbished, idler wheel in good shape and nice plinth? I think that deck has a ton of potential. Do you frequent Lenco Heaven?
What about the Teres, belt, rim, or DD ? Off the top of my head my instinct would be for the 309 on the L75 (damped + lively), but you'd really have to try it. It also depends on your carts. The mass of the 2 arms is similar so I think you'd have to find that synergistic combo with either set up. I'd be making armboards for each arm on each table but it requires a bit of work.
Some years ago at one point all I had was the Sota w/Alphason 100S. I found a NOS Sonus Formula 4 on fleabey, made an armboard and mounted it on the Sapphire. The combo had better synergy with med/high cu carts than with the Alphason, and the 100S is no slouch. BTW, before I forget, the Sota does much better with the original heavier belt from the '80's. The newer belts are about 2mm wide and almost thin enough to be transparent. The original belt was 1/4" wide and maybe 1/8" thick. It had much better speed performance with the heavier belt. I don't know what they were thinking but..... You might get better performance with a dental floss belt. You tie it in a square knot with the bulge on the outside. I never tried that. By the time I read about that I had pretty much given up on the Sota.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=48392)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=42506)
neo
-
I revisited the VE thread about the BIN 323 HOMC mentioned on page 57.
http://www.lpgear.com/product/BIN323.html
Without having heard this cart I think I have an idea of the sound. Very musical w/exceptional harmonic nuance, although generally not the most detailed. In the link it's likened to the Grace F9E for stage and 17D3 for overall sound - not bad company for a $330 cart.
On Halcro's vintage DD thread on Agon, speed correction timing and implications were briefly mentioned. This is a critical parameter and a large part of what distinguishes the sound of a 1200 from a L-O7D, two extremes of timing and abruptness. Timing refers to the amount of speed error necessary to induce correction. Abruptness refers to the amount of torque applied to said correction. Any thoughts?
One of the VE posters Bauzace50 had a cart audition/review thing a number of years ago on VE. He called this a bicycle. Participants would try a cart for a week or two, write a review and mail the cart to the next participant. It was very interesting and a lot of fun. People got to hear carts they normally wouldn't have, but there was an element of risk. What if someone had an accident or a cart got lost in the mail?
I think the last bicycle was a DL-S1. I participated in this one along with John the chair guy. BTW, John loved the cart. B50 is a member here but he doesn't post, in fear of getting kicked off VE (or something like that).
I doubt if that would work without someone like B50. I thought you might find it interesting.
neo
-
On Halcro's vintage DD thread on Agon, speed correction timing and implications were briefly mentioned. This is a critical parameter and a large part of what distinguishes the sound of a 1200 from a L-O7D, two extremes of timing and abruptness. Timing refers to the amount of speed error necessary to induce correction. Abruptness refers to the amount of torque applied to said correction. Any thoughts?
neo
There are many theories and thoughts about this subject Neo, but I doubt that anyone can offer more than subjective opinions?
Then again...how many have had the opportunity to hear side by side (within their own systems) many of the acknowledged 'great' classic Japanese DD turntables of the 70s and 80s to make any comparisons?
Models like the Technics SP10 Mk3, Kenwood L-07D, Pioneer Exclusive P3, Victor TT-101, or Denon DP100M?
I think there is a lot of confusion about the quartz-lock correction circuitry specific to each brand of turntable and to the actions of quartz-lock error correction in general? For instance most assume that the platter is never travelling at the correct speed and is always being corrected as it loses speed. I think this is far off the mark with the platter generally travelling at exactly the correct speed with the correction circuitry acting quite sporadically and benignly only when necessary.
I have no direct experience with any DD turntables in my system other than the
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=125523)
TT-101 and the
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=125524)
TT-81
Both these models use Victor's patented bi-directional servo control with correction applied in both the forward and backward directions.
I have no doubts that there are some who are more sensitive to the actions of DD decks than am I but to my ears there are little differences between well-implemented DDs and belt-drives.
I find greater differences between arms and cartridges but if I must choose a preference.....the Victor TT-101 DD (when it is working) would be it.... :thumb:
Regards
-
There's a lot more than subjective opinion, but you might need a tech or engineer to figure out the fine details. The most recent posts on the subject:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1317949815&openfrom&560&4#560
Dover's is particularly interesting:
"Page 4 gives you an overview - the L07D uses a dual mode speed control system - if the speed error is below 3% the phase is controlled with a wide lock range and large phase gain. If the speed error exceeds 3% the servo controls speed rather than phase, and applies higher torque. When the servo mode switches from phase to speed control, the coupling changes from DC to AC to minimise influences from the motor drive circuit and motor offset.
Clearly the L07D relies more on platter inertia and phase locking for coping with stylus drag unless the speed error is very high. This is quite a different design to the Technics SP10 solution which relies on a much more aggressive servo speed control system with the DJ market in mind – the ability to start and stop on a dime was more important to the Technics engineers than the Kenwood engineers. I have listened to many L07D’s and SP10mk3’s at length and in my view the difference in servo design and implementation forms a significant difference in presentation, particularly in timing and coherency."
Lewm:
"Dover, I've got a fully refurbished L07D sitting right next to a Krebs-modified SP10 Mk3 which I bought NOS (before replacing all electrolytics and having Bill Thalmann perform the Krebs mod). These are easily the two best turntables I have ever heard in my system, yet they sound very subtly different. Before the Krebs mod was performed on the Mk3, I would say the difference between the two was greater than it is now, in favor of the L07D. But of course, there are more differences between the two than those having to do with the drive system: The tonearms, tonearm wire, and phono cartridges are all different as well. They both feed into the same Atma-sphere MP1 phono stage. But it's fair to say that prior to the Krebs mods, I tended to favor the L07D (with an EMI/RFI shield installed between motor and underside of platter). The Krebs mod keeps the virtues and advantages of the Mk3, absolute firm sense of pace, while ameliorating the rather "clinical" nature of its sound, as compared to the L07D, which might in fact err on the side of romantic but intensely "musical". (I distrust that word, too.) These days, I could live with either, happily, but might now give the edge to Mk3. The Krebs mod is transformative."
This is a great description of the speed correction differences and is basically what I've heard on my Kenny vs most other DD's. It's not like you hear it all the time. It's not even noticeable except maybe on certain types of music (piano) when the correction kicks in. I was only aware of this a couple of times. This brings up another aspect. Can non-quartz servo control sound as good or better than quartz locked? It might be hard to generalize and hard to find a vintage servo DD in top condition, but I suspect so. The non quartz tables tend to be lesser models so it's even harder to figure this out. A top model with the option of turning off the quartz lock might give some illumination although the drive system is probably optimized for quartz.
neo
-
We know that Lewm has had the SP10Mk3 and the Kenwood L-07D in his home system for many years and he states that "they sound subtly different".
Dover I don't believe has had both turntables side by side in his home system for comparison, and is commenting from his listening experiences in other systems in other locations...and he states that..."the difference in servo design and implementation forms a significant difference in presentation, particularly in timing and coherency."
Harry Weisfeld of VPI has the SP10Mk2, the Kenwood L-07D, the Denon DP-80 and Victor TT-101 in his system and declares his preference for both the Kenwood and Victor.
The Victors have the lightest platters of them all and thus require less torque to overcome inertia.
What conclusions you can derive from all this are elusive....but all the above sounds and smells decidedly subjective to me... :scratch:
Regards
-
We know that Lewm has had the SP10Mk3 and the Kenwood L-07D in his home system for many years and he states that "they sound subtly different".
Dover I don't believe has had both turntables side by side in his home system for comparison, and is commenting from his listening experiences in other systems in other locations...and he states that..."the difference in servo design and implementation forms a significant difference in presentation, particularly in timing and coherency."
Harry Weisfeld of VPI has the SP10Mk2, the Kenwood L-07D, the Denon DP-80 and Victor TT-101 in his system and declares his preference for both the Kenwood and Victor.
The Victors have the lightest platters of them all and thus require less torque to overcome inertia.
What conclusions you can derive from all this are elusive....but all the above sounds and smells decidedly subjective to me... :scratch:
Regards
Of course preference is subjective. There are objective reasons for those differences in presentation of which Dover spoke. Do you think he was exaggerating or making up some of that?
It doesn't matter. The how and why these tables sound different is what I'm looking for, but somehow I don't think I'll get more information like the Kenwood speed correction timing.
Harry got his start building plinths for JVC DD (I think). I wonder if he had an SP10MK3 would his rankings change?
My Sony X-50 died. Well, not completely dead, it's running slow. I think the motor mount is shot and possibly some electronics. I was using it for mono.
I'm still contemplating a drive for the Sota platter and it looks like I might have to abandon the plinth and make something like you have. What are your arm pods made of?
neo
-
Do you think he was exaggerating or making up some of that?
Yes I do. Lew says...."subtle" differences. I believe him.. :duel:
Your Sony died and my TT-101 is with my Tech for speed issues. We're going to replace 3 or 4 PCB chips and hope for the best... :slap:
My TT-81 meanwhile, is doing an excellent impersonation. Who said complexity is necessary...? :surrender:
My armpods are made from solid cast bronze
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=125555)
which are then filled, sanded and painted with two-pack polyurethane in an automotive shop
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=125556)
after which a 10mm thick linished aluminium top-plate (drilled for the specific arm choice) is screwed in.
If you need drawings.....PM me...
Regards
-
Cast bronze - very nice. I was wondering about the black finish. Now I know.
I'm still not sure about the Sota platter. The drive system will dictate if I keep the plinth/chassis scheme, or not.
This thread is becoming a realization of your Agon - Living Dangerously. My Sony and your Victor must be around the same age (1980 or so?). Life expectancy extended with cap replacement, but the best laid plans..... Good luck with the chip substitution.
Somewhere I saw a list of DD tables with easy chip substitution (was it your thread?). Might be something to consider when thinking about a purchase.
I actually have two of these Sonys. I bought them around ten years ago and the first has what seems like a bent spindle. It has a wicked wobble that seems unnatural. That's now a parts table which I've never used except to give away a couple of parts. I always thought the platter/drive had much greater potential than realized. It's a brushless/slotless motor with a relatively substantial platter. I was thinking it might not be worth fixing, but maybe I'll take it to my tech to have a look. If the drive can be salvaged it might be a good candidate for the Halcro mod. :thumb:
Without the semi-auto crap (plastic cams on the tonearm) who knows, it might be a great table.
neo
-
We last left off with the vintage DD blues. It turns out my Sony seems to have intermittent AC going to the table - might be just the cord, but I think the arm is shot. It tilts inward and it's probably from the semi-auto cam pushing on the bottom of the pillar. The entire arm is loose including the VTA OTF adjuster. The arm is the weak part of the table, and I'll see if I can remove the arm and use it as a separate spinner. It has a substantial platter for a DD, and a BSL (brushless/slotless) motor.
Halcro, how did you make out with the 101 ?
Azimuth - Most people think the results of azimuth alignment are due to the horizontal angle of the needle in-groove. It's not. It's due to the physical orientation of the generator to the record, or a tilted moving system/coils. John Elison posted this on Asylum and he convinced me. If a needle is off angle it might twist or rotate the cantilever slightly, depending on type, , but crosstalk is dependent on horizontal orientation inside.
For those who didn't see the thread, I thought you might find this of interest.
neo
-
Halcro, how did you make out with the 101 ?
The Victor is still with the Tech awaiting the arrival of several replacement 'chips'.
I'm just hoping this may solve the speed-issue problem based on the 'trouble-shooting' page of the manual.
We have no real evidence that any of these chips is faulty.....
If this doesn't work....the TT101 is just an attractive doorstop.. :roll:
-
Man those arm pods are sweet.
Moderator is invited to delete this if too far OT.
Please recommend preferred arm board material for this TT, performance wise my all time favorite:
- Solid custom 1.5" plinth, aircraft grade aluminum, 32 lbs
- Empire 208 classic belt drive OEM bearing, motor, brass switch, platter underside lined with Dynamat
- Solid thick maple cabinet
- 1" MDF bass, topside with thick Dynamat lining
- Total 72 lbs
Currently only gravity secures the plinth/cabinet/bass; builder later adds fasteners to securely clamp these three structural members, said to increase performance on another identical TT.
Please also recommend arm board thickness: 5mm above the plinth, thickness exceeding 5mm is countersunk.
Board fastens with four screws into threaded plinth hole, one screw per corner, M6 or 1/4". Arm board dimensions 93mm x 93mm.
Thanks!
-
Man those arm pods are sweet.
Moderator is invited to delete this if too far OT.
Please recommend preferred arm board material for this TT, performance wise my all time favorite:
- Solid custom 1.5" plinth, aircraft grade aluminum, 32 lbs
- Empire 208 classic belt drive OEM bearing, motor, brass switch, platter underside lined with Dynamat
- Solid thick maple cabinet
- 1" MDF bass, topside with thick Dynamat lining
- Total 72 lbs
Currently only gravity secures the plinth/cabinet/bass; builder later adds fasteners to securely clamp these three structural members, said to increase performance on another identical TT.
Please also recommend arm board thickness: 5mm above the plinth, thickness exceeding 5mm is countersunk.
Board fastens with four screws into threaded plinth hole, one screw per corner, M6 or 1/4". Arm board dimensions 93mm x 93mm.
Thanks!
Hi James,
Glad you like the armpods...
Not sure if your following questions were directed at me.....but a few photos would allow for more meaningful input..... :scratch:
-
Good timing...I was just about to pack it for the builder/Master Machinist...will take image before I pack.
-
Noise reduction with mono cart:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=85331)
This is a record I found in my basement. I pulled it out of my gallery here. It was so noisy I couldn't listen to it with a stereo cart and mono switch.
I replayed it with a mono cart and you guessed it, almost dead silent. I put the needle down and I thought I had the wrong input selected on the preamp.
Might be hard to believe, but it's true. The SQ is still grainy and it's not my cup of tea anyhow, but the noise reduction is amazing. This record is old enough that it might require a fatter stylus, I don't know.
Still thinking about an ART7, ART9, and 50ANV. Griff likes the ART9 and I'm starting to come around to his way of thinking. The coreless ART7 and 50ANV might be better from a purist point of view, but I suspect the fun factor is higher with the 9. Just like the Z1/SAS only better?
neo
-
All the news that fits:
When we left off a couple of tables were in need of repair. Halcro's TT101 went to his tech and my X50 had arm trouble.
Thinking about the purchase of a vintage DD brings concerns about longevity and repairs. Many of these tables are around 35 yrs. old, and to avoid potential problems the electrolytic caps should be replaced. These caps might be functioning properly, but they are designed to last about 15 yrs. and if they fail they could take out another part like a chip that's no longer made.
I'm happy to report that Halcro's 101 is fixed - old solder joints on a complex board were faulty. I believe he is now redesigning the base.
I've identified a couple of problems with my PUA-7 tonearm. The arm has VTA OTF like a 1200 arm with a collet which loosens and tightens by thumbscrew. It's loose. It looks like the arm return mechanism which involves a pushrod and cam, is tilting the arm. I think the best solution is to remove the cams attached to the bottom of the arm and defeat the semi-auto function. Maybe the thumbscrew can be tightened and I won't have to put a sleeve around the arm pillar. More on this later.
neo
-
Noise reduction with mono cart:
This is a record I found in my basement. I pulled it out of my gallery here. It was so noisy I couldn't listen to it with a stereo cart and mono switch.
I replayed it with a mono cart and you guessed it, almost dead silent. I put the needle down and I thought I had the wrong input selected on the preamp.
Might be hard to believe, but it's true. The SQ is still grainy and it's not my cup of tea anyhow, but the noise reduction is amazing. This record is old enough that it might require a fatter stylus, I don't know.
In my experience this is the rule rather than the exception. It is part of what attracted me to the Denon 102 years ago (that, and the fact that I picked up a used one cheap). When buying lp's now, I'll take a chance on a VG or VG+ if it's mono that I wouldn't touch if it was stereo.
-
In my experience this is the rule rather than the exception. It is part of what attracted me to the Denon 102 years ago (that, and the fact that I picked up a used one cheap). When buying lp's now, I'll take a chance on a VG or VG+ if it's mono that I wouldn't touch if it was stereo.
Interesting comment and endorsement for used mono records which may be in questionable condition. The microgroove was adopted willy-nilly mostly throughout the '50s and a smaller modern stylus might track part of the groove further down than a larger vintage stylus. This could be even more effective than a long contact type on a stereo recording tracing more than the limited contact of an elliptical. That reduces the percentage of noise, but includes it in the output. There's a chance that a smaller spherical or elliptical will virtually eliminate it in mono.
This brings up a question of another budget mono cart, the Ortofon OM D25M. This cart can still be purchased at LP Gear for $89. It has a 1 mil spherical tip and low compliance. VTF is 2 - 3g. Obviously this was made for vintage wide groove records. The thing is, the body looks like the other OMs in which styli can be swapped. Ortofon has a single magnet configuration so this is a distinct possibility.
Someone on another forum suggested this is a regular cart like the Ortofon OM3, but in Ortofon historical specs, output is listed as lateral. This leads me to believe that OM type styli can indeed be swapped and an OM3 stylus (bonded .3 x .7) is $40. Other Ortofon styli get expensive though. When the tip wears out on my AT MONO3 HOMC, it goes to a re-tipper or in the trash.
If anyone knows about these please let us know. I'll see what I can find out.
neo
-
That didn't take long. The styli can be swapped according to someone on Lenco Heaven. You can play a modern reissue with a 1 mil spherical. You will have greater groove contact and many mono records are not pressed to the lead-out groove, so IND and pinch effect might be alleviated.
N.B. A cart takes on the VTF/cu of the stylus.
Funny thing about the Ortofon OM series, the more expensive OM Super generators have more inductance/resistance than the less expensive OM3, OM5.
I assume this is for better balance with preamp matching. Higher inductance tends to be easier to get smooth amplitude response. The less expensive OM might require more careful loading, but might have greater potential for extension and transparency with an appropriate stylus.
On another front, I now have a JVC Z1-S. It came with an upgraded elliptical stylus. As Griff reported previously, these are a little hard to source. The X and Z models were not sold in the US. Several months ago I saw quite a few in Japan, on Hifishark. It looks like they're drying up as I haven't seen many of them lately. Mine came from France - European fleabey.
neo
-
Hello Neo,
Good to hear about your purchase of the Z-1. I expect you will be placing an order for a SAS? :D
I have been watching also, not that I need extra spares but only to keep up with where to find them. I was surprise to read that you found yours in Europe! France of
all places. I guess it doesn't matter 'where' as long as 'did find'! There is one on the Jauce site in Japan at the moment. It is the Z-1EB version in case anyone is looking.
Regards,
Don
-
Hi Griff,
It's hard to ignore the impact of some of these threads like Who needs a MM/MI. Especially with the resurgence, people are looking for direction.
Do you think this influence is exaggerated? After all, the number of X1/Z1 listed, went from 10 or 12 to a single example in a few months, but that only means that 11 were sold, and Halcro and you account for 6 or 8 ? :wink:
Maybe it means that quite a few more were listed and disappeared as they were sold.
BTW, anyone searching should first look under Victor as the brand name.
I got mine recently and I just mounted it on the Alphason 100, but I haven't even played it yet. I had the Genesis on there with a 3.3g lead spacer to take the arm mass up to around 14g.
It didn't work out - over damped and bass heavy. Maybe if I put the weight on top of the headshell instead of between shell and cart, it would have been okay.
I'm taking my AHT phono out of the picture for awhile. It's about 25 yrs old now and needs a little TLC. I should learn how to DIY, but I don't want to practice on the AHT. I'm awaiting delivery of a custom Vista. Even if it's not the ultimate phono I suspect it's pretty damn good and should be an invaluable tool. Mine will have custom loading of both resistance and capacitance.
Stayed tuned to this thread for more exciting(?) developments. :thumb:
neo
-
Hi Neo,
Those Victor listings are being sold to someone other than I. :D I have a couple of X-1 bodies but only one of the Z-1 bodies. I do have spare (original) Beryllium cantilever/Shibata's for both of them. Those were hard to come by. Hard to believe but the Z-1 original Beryllium in NOS condition was won by me for only $25 on the Jauce auction. I still find it hard to believe that I got a NOS Beryllium cantilever for that cheap! Those things are worth more than Gold! :lol:
I do hope that our discussions convince people just how great of a bargain these JVC cartridges are. Both the X-1 or the Z-1 with the SAS. They are by far, the ''biggest bang for the buck'' of any cartridge I have ever heard. No cartridge is perfect but if you are going to spend your money, at least get your money's worth!
When I saw your statement about mounting on the Alphson 100 arm, I cringed. Excellent arm BTW. I owned one mounted on a SOTA Sapphire table but hated mounting and then adjusting cartridges on it. Definitely a mount and forget project. Currently I use 2 turntables so I do wish I had kept that Alphson. I would have mounted one of my top harem members on it and left it set up that way for ever. The other table would have a arm with a removable head shell so that I could rotate and try different new discoveries.
I also am waiting for a piece of equipment to return from upgrade work. My project is a Denon HA 500 head amp. I am having it converted to a 2 input design. Having the Capacitors bought up to date as well. I figured that if a Tech is in there, might as well get as much done as possible!
Cheers,
Don
-
Last night I installed the Z1/E and played Oscar Peterson Trio live in Chicago. I haven't heard the Z1 with a stylus other than SAS, and apparently I didn't do an adequate job of securing the X1 orig stylus when I had it here. With the E stylus the Z1 doe not have the awesome speed and resolution as with SAS. What it does have is a more relaxed, "musical" presentation, with many of the attributes formerly discussed. Even the frequency response seems better at 47K/100pF preamp. With a grand total of 1 record played w/E, I would say it's hard to go wrong obtaining one of these. It seems to have an eminently listenable sound with nice detail. This stylus might be Jico - not sure. The SAS is relatively inexpensive for a boron/MR which makes this a real bargain.
I have the 980LZ (30cu) set up on the Unitrac. My AHT stage wants no part in amplifying this cart. DC offset wouldn't stabilize. I'm not sure if this is due to the relatively high inductance, the ground strap on the cart, or the phono stage needs service. Anyway, I had it plugged into an old TOTL Mitsubishi tuner/preamp that John TCG gave me. MC load was 270 ohms. BTW, this preamp phono is better than you might think - nice results with a variety of carts.
Enter Vista phono to clear things up. I set gain at 60dB and load at 1K/0.pF. I expected the performance to improve significantly with optimum load, but not to this degree. This set up went from mid-fi to high end, in a hurry. I think this is another bargain at $300. I'm quite pleased with these last 2 acquisitions.
neo
-
Neo,
I have no problem with tuner/preamps. I've owned a few of them myself during my long life. Those that listen with their ears instead of their wallet would find many of them quite underrated. I had a Carver and a Adcom that was of this configuration and sometimes wish I still had them. Especially the Carver.
Out of all the audio stuff that I have owned in my entire life, the thing that I wish the most that I hadn't traded in were a pair of those David Bernings AE-230 amps. I had them wired in mono for 60 watts (tube watts), each side. I still to this day, want to kick myself for that mistake! Scary biasing those tubes though. You had to stick your hands inside of the unit while it was turned upside down and turned on to adjust the bias of those tube with the uses of a multi-meter. Many times I thought I was not going to live through one of those experiences! Entire thing was hard wired. No circuit boards and ran quite HOT! I traded it in for one of the first BAT VK60 amps to come to California. Auto-bias is what sold me on that trade.
Regards,
-
Griff,
That must have been one sweet sound - Berning OTLs turned into monoblocks. Were there speaker impedance considerations with strapping?
Those amps were legendary. The biasing routine was crazy, but it's a shame you traded them. Berning came out with a Z_ 230 which was self-biasing and had a mod for the AE to do the same.
Your experience reminds me of my electrostatic direct drive (OTL) tube amps built by Dan Fanny of AHT. Each amp had 4 big high voltage cap tubes. It had banks of storage caps each of which totaled 5KV, so it was not only relatively high voltage, but had some current as well.
One day I was in my usual stupor after work and one of the speakers stopped playing. Looking behind the panels I saw a wire between amp and panel was disconnected. Forgetting to turn off the amp I started to reconnect. The attraction pulled the wire across my hand and it sounded like M80 went off in the house. No big deal except I was glued to the wire and I couldn't let go. The electricity entered the side of my hand under my forefinger and came out the other side at my wrist, opposite my thumb. I couldn't reach anything to turn the beast off so I said my prayers. Then it came to me and I used my body weight by falling away from it, to break free. It threw me across the room and I hit the wall about 4 feet off the floor. It took a few days to recover.
I sold the amps after that, but I wish I hadn't. They were awesome.
Regards,
-
I was young back then Neo. I didn't care about speaker impedance. Yes, I did blow a few. I blamed it on the volume knob position (10+). :lol: The amps were bullet proof!
You didn't have to go rubbing it in by reminding me of that auto-bias mod!!!! After all these years, I had forgotten about those. I sure wish I had those amps today. I had some big Robins egg blue colored Capacitors installed in both of them. I forget the names of them but they were the hot ticket back then. I'll probably remember their names about 2:00 in the morning.
There has been a pre-amp by David Berning being listed lately on eBay. I have a hard time not hitting the 'Buy it now' button. That guy can build some great equipment. Some of his circuit ideas seem to be out there in left field but boy, they sure sound good! But I guess those strange ideas are what makes up a circuit from the mind of a genius.
Scary story about your panels. You could of bit the big one on that mistake. We have done some stupid things in our day in the name of furthering this hobby of ours! :thumb: With that kind of current those amps had, you could of taken up arc welding!
Regards,
-
Well Neo,
The names of those capacitors came to me but later than expected. About 5:00am. :icon_lol:
The were ''WonderCaps". Those things were massive!
Regards,
-
Griff,
Big blue caps - were they storage caps, like big electrolitics? They're often blue.
The Wonder Caps I remember were white metalized polypropylene - like non-polarized speaker caps. They were also used as coupling caps in amps.
Here's my tube amp:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=48064)
The big blue caps are storage and the yellow are Rel Cap polystyrene coupling. Maybe Wonder made some blue ones?
Regards,
-
I forgot to mention this the other day. I was using a Pickering D3001 - nude .2 x .7 on my 980. It seems to edge out the Jico D81 shibata most times.
I was playing a noisy used record and switched stylus to the shibata with a significant reduction in noise. The noise advantage of greater vertical contact was obvious in this instance. Many noisy used records were damaged with a worn elliptical or spherical stylus.
A .2 mil elliptical has the smallest contact area of any stylus. All things (quality/polish) being equal it will wear out the fastest.
I know we have gone over this before, but this is a long thread and it bears repeating. Extended contact types have the greatest longevity and are kinder to the record, spreading contact over a greater area. The downside is more critical set-up - alignment and VTA/SRA variations.
neo
-
Neo,
You are probably right. But it is those big blue ones that always were in the way when I had to stick my hands inside to adjust bias so that is probably why I vividly remember those so well. I shutter now just thinking about doing that necessary process.
Regards,
-
I haven't lived with Vista long enough to give you anything more than a preliminary, but I think this little guy has some potential. With the 980LZ there seemed to be a noise problem at higher than listening levels (volume), and connecting the ground wire to the line stage made a difference for the better.
Note - there is no ground lug on Vista. You either float the ground or connect it to your amp or preamp. Connecting it could be a problem for those with painted chassis screws and no ground connection. I used the phono ground on the preamp.
I didn't realize I had a bad cable from preamp to amp which could be the entire problem. After I fixed the cable the ground didn't make much difference, but there was still noise above loud listening levels. I loaded it at 1Kohm, 0.pF. That could be the problem with low level noise. Little guy might need some capacitance to filter out ultra high frequency noise. Despite past misinformation, a cap in parallel is a low pass filter, not high pass, but it also lowers high frequency cantilever resonance - some bad with good?
I still have the 980 set up and I'll get back to that and be more definitive about noise/capacitance loading. BTW, gain was at 60dB. 980LZ output is .3mV.
I wanted to check out Vista and Z1E so I set it at 47K/100pF/40dB to compare to Revelation phono section. If there's one thing the Revelation II does right, it's the phono and I was surprised when Vista seemed to beat it easily. Shades of my AHT??
Lets see how it can drive the amp through a passive preamp. I upped the gain to 50dB and removed the caps. I have a 1m Ultimate tonearm cable + the 100S internal wire for capacitance. Enough? Apparently not. For a couple of minutes Vista sounded remarkably like AHT. It was blowing my mind until it started getting congested and went into oscillation. I'm pretty sure this was due to no caps. I put 50pF in there and it seems to be cured.
I've since reset to 40dB gain and I think 100pF was better with the Z1. I'm awaiting a shipment of resistors and caps so higher capacitance will have to wait.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=129799)
Vista atop AHT with a lead brick holding it down.
neo
-
A couple of developments - I tried some new (to me) load resistors for Vista. They make a difference, perhaps more of a difference than with AHT. Maybe that's because AHT is so well regulated? You couldn't buy the parts for anything close to the price of Vista, which makes it such a remarkable value. I'm not saying Vista is as good, but it's clean, neutral and eminently listenable.
Anyhoo, these load resistors are KOA Speer 1/4 watt 1% metal film. They're better than the supplied Dale IMO - cleaner, more neutral and transparent. They disappear and get out of the way. Here they are:
http://www.mouser.com/KOA-Speer/Passive-Components/Resistors/_/N-5g9n?P=1z0wljoZ1z0zlrrZ1z0z819Z1yzbpod
I order extra and match them exactly.
Some carbon or tantalum resistors sound sweet, sort of like tubes. Parts Connection has some nice ones if you want a softer sound. For gain resistors I like IRC RC55 series 0.1% metal film. These were my go-to resistors for everything, nice sound and no need to match:
http://www.mouser.com/TT-Electronics/Passive-Components/Resistors/Through-Hole-Resistors/_/N-7h7z5?P=1yvjsv8Z1z0z819Z1z0vpm5
They might not have the exact value you need. They stock one value for Vista gain (20.1 ohm?). The other value is 47.5 ohms, which they didn't have.
Audiofreaks with lots of money like Vishay nudies:
http://www.partsconnexion.com/resistors_vishay_var.html
Old school:
http://www.partsconnexion.com/resistors_shinkoh_half_watt.html
http://www.partsconnexion.com/resistors_tantalm_half_watt.html
I've tried tantalum - they sound nice. I don't know what to tell you.
My version of Vista has custom loading for both capacitance and resistance. This involves two sets of sockets next to each other where the load resistors go. My impression thus far indicates it's better with some capacitance loaded and the double load is a bit of a PIA. So, I would recommend ordering it with the value you want for your MM(s) if that's feasible, 50 to 100pF for most. If you need some, I use silver mica 1% if I can find them. Try to keep the voltage rating down, the leads might not fit in the socket. Here's some:
http://www.mouser.com/Passive-Components/Capacitors/Mica-Capacitors/_/N-5g97?P=1z0z7l5Z1z0wljo
On another front, I picked up a Victor UA7045 arm. She is a beauty babe, nice and curvy w/big skate knob and removable headshell. Maybe a tonearm should be considered male, in which case he's strong and rigid.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130577)
This isn't my arm. Mine is in surgery - should be fine.
neo
-
On another front, I picked up a Victor UA7045 arm. She is a beauty babe, nice and curvy w/big skate knob and removable headshell. Maybe a tonearm should be considered male, in which case he's strong and rigid.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130577)
This isn't my arm. Mine is in surgery - should be fine.
neo
Neo,
:rotflmao:
Just know that my thoughts are with your tonearm as it goes "under the knife".
Have a new development in my search for a mono option after my trip to P-town and will post shortly.
Best,
AC
-
In these endeavors I enlist the help of a personal assistant and my lifelong inspiration:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130634)
neo
-
Nice arm Neo...
When does he go to recovery?
Regards
-
Hi Henry,
Not much wrong with the arm, most of it is cosmetic. A couple of things like the rubber bushing on the counterweight stub is wiped out, and the set screw for the weight is missing. The set screw is 4mm standard thread, so no big deal. I want to keep the rubber coupler and I'm figuring out a way to fix the stub permanently in the most forward position - the VTF applier thingy.
The anti-skate spring is disconnected from the knob (my fault) and I'm thinking of hooking up a bucket and string. I like that arrangement. It's easy and precise to add or subtract lead shot. Old springs are a PIA. I modify most of my arms anyway, at least the counterweight. The Unitrac is the only one I didn't mess with.
The important thing is the bearings seem like they're in good shape. Now to figure out where I'm going to use it. I'd like to get that Sapphire platter on a pod, but I don't want to invest in a BD motor/controller. The arm on the Sony X50 is messed up and I'm not using it, so I'm thinking of defeating the semi-auto function and using it there. It's a decent table with a brushless/slotless motor. I think the arm and the semi function are the weak parts of the table.
I can probably fix the Sony arm, but that might be a project. The pillar is loose in the VTA adjuster and the semi function has it tilted. I might have to shim the pillar with a sleeve or maybe Teflon tape. That arm is weird. About a dozen or more tiny horizontal bearings surround the pillar beneath the plinth. If you're not careful when removing, the parts that hold them in place separate, and the bearings go flying. Don't ask me how I know this.
I should probably get a TT81, but your thread has them scarce. There's a 441/505 MKII on A-mart, but I have to get rid of something first.
Thanks to Griff for helping figure this out. I think this will be a great arm.
Regards,
-
I should probably get a TT81, but your thread has them scarce.
I know it's strange.....but the TT81 seems almost as rare as the TT101?
Compared to the thousands of Denons and Yamahas that are available on the used market (without even mentioning Technics), it is such a shame that Victor appear to have made so few.. :shake:
-
AFAIK the TT71, 81, and 101 weren't exported to the US. The Y7, 8 and 10 were, I believe. I was looking at a special TT71 - 120V. It had a giant clear plinth and a 7082. I decided against it. I figured the arm might be too heavy and I'm really looking for an 81.
I probably shouldn't be writing this stuff. Now I'll never find one. :duh:
Ever hear the Brit table Trans Fi, the one with the Terminator linear tracker? Some guys get the arm and not the table. It's rim drive like Teres Verus only supposed to be better. He makes the base out of slate and it probably weighs a million and costs a million to ship. Interesting table. Maybe I could buy the motor/controller for that platter of mine collecting dust.
-
Haven't heard the Trans Fi but like you, I have read many raves for their arm.
I've been meaning to sell my Micro MA-505s tonearm since getting the 507/II....but somehow I never get around to it..... :duh:
-
Hey Neo....
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649230581-jvcvictor-tt81-direct-drive-turntablemotor-deck/
-
Halcro and Neo,
Sure like watching your banter. Feel like a kid again at the barbershop. Only at an audio store.
Anyway, reading and learning. Thanks!
P.S. That JVC drive is nice looking. It's got me thinking about another project using something like this...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130684)
-
Thanks Halcro,
Somehow it didn't show up on shark. Maybe I missed it.
neo
-
AC,
Is that marble or corian on the bottom? If that's for a plinth I'm not sure if it's the best choice. Weight/mass definitely helps, but marble, like slate is good at transmitting vibrations. The game changes with combinations and I don't know what you're planning.
You know those Kenwood faux marble plinths, the KD500, 600 ? Those are actually made of ground limestone and polyester resin. Very effective.
neo
-
AC,
Is that marble or corian on the bottom? If that's for a plinth I'm not sure if it's the best choice. Weight/mass definitely helps, but marble, like slate is good at transmitting vibrations. The game changes with combinations and I don't know what you're planning.
You know those Kenwood faux marble plinths, the KD500, 600 ? Those are actually made of ground limestone and polyester resin. Very effective.
neo
Neo,
I have a 3" slab of curly maple that I thought might make a good turntable plinth. The maple slab is sitting on my assembly table, which has a Silestone top I reclaimed from our kitchen remodel.
Our sink is made up of a composite with quartz and granite dust--very dead vibrationally (makes for a quiet garbage disposal). It could definitely make a good plinth.
AC
-
Halcro and Neo,
Sure like watching your banter. Feel like a kid again at the barbershop. Only at an audio store.
Anyway, reading and learning. Thanks!
P.S. That JVC drive is nice looking. It's got me thinking about another project using something like this...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130684)
Glad to hear ACH....
As far as plinth material goes for a DD like the Victors, I have proven that it makes little difference to the sound as long as the motor unit is simply resting on rubber pads and not rigidly fixed.
What turntable are you working with?
-
Glad to hear ACH....
As far as plinth material goes for a DD like the Victors, I have proven that it makes little difference to the sound as long as the motor unit is simply resting on rubber pads and not rigidly fixed.
What turntable are you working with?
Halcro,
No Frankentable yet. Right now I'm just adding a second arm onto my WTT 'table. But all that barbershop talk between Neo and you have me scheming ;-)
Seriously: I don't have any plans for another table, but am enjoying my dive into the rabbit hole, and Neo's musings have me thinking about direct drive. Of course, a nice idler would work well in that slab, too :icon_lol:
AC
-
What car is that in your moniker ACH?
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130731)
I love my Porsche 356B Super.... :thumb:
-
Halcro,
That's a beautiful Speedster! My avatar is a 1966 AC high performance 289 (ACHiPo--get it?) in Rangoon Red with Borani alloy wire wheels--the British (but with LH drive) street version of Shelby's 427 AC Cobra. If I ever stop dumping money on hi-fi stuff, I might actually be able to afford one!
AC
-
Porsche 356B Super 1963? Looks clean as a whistle.
Hey, look at this '66 427 Cobra:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130737)
Has the steering wheel on the wrong side. Silly Brits, shift with your left hand? Is the clutch on the far right? :duh:
My favorite car was a '72 Firebird 350:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130739)
Like this, only sundance orange. Love those old GM small block V8, but you could drop a big block into just about anything and fly.
So Henry,
How is that new pod working out? I'm thinking of building one out of steel and that Kenwood limestone/resin stuff. I figure I can add acrylic paint to the mix and sculpt it over a rebar like frame. Your pod design has inspired me to new heights of insanity. I want a giant dust cover that lowers over the whole deal, like the Cone of Silence in Get Smart.
Seriously, I might be getting that TT81. Thanks again for the tip.
neo
-
You know your cars Neo...
It is indeed a 1963 model :thumb:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130740)
Also with the wheel on the wrong (right) side....
The new granite cradle
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130741)
is a revelation :drool:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130742)
I'm having another one made which has a larger internal and external diameter to allow the innards to 'breathe'. I'll also be sticking a layer of cork around the inside.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130743)
This fully polished cylinder is carved out of a solid hunk of granite in China and delivered to me in Sydney for US$300..... :P
I sure hope you get the TT-81 Neo....
I cannot say that I can tell the difference between it and the TT-101... :scratch:
-
The new granite cradle
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130741)
is a revelation :drool:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130742)
I'm having another one made which has a larger internal and external diameter to allow the innards to 'breathe'. I'll also be sticking a layer of cork around the inside.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130743)
This fully polished cylinder is carved out of a solid hunk of granite in China and delivered to me in Sydney for US$300..... :P
I sure hope you get the TT-81 Neo....
I cannot say that I can tell the difference between it and the TT-101... :scratch:
Halcro,
That is a stunning set up! Making the ring out of the composite stuff might be better sonically, but wow, that is beautiful audio jewelry! Hard to imagine getting it made for $300--think we paid $500 for the sinks!
Neo,
Like the Cobra. Prefer the understated street cars with under car exhaust, wire wheels, and no roll bar though. Or I'd gladly take a Sunbeam Tiger--kinda the same idea of sticking a big engine in a little car. :thumb:
AC
-
Henry,
That really is a sharp set up. Thanks for the dimensions. Did Victor make any provision for ventilation with their wood plinths, other than underneath? Seems like a good idea though. With composite material I could have vent holes - wouldn't want to drill through granite, probably just mess it up.
What's the deal with the 3 rubber duckies under the motor unit? That's a critical part of the set up. Concentrate the weight of the motor unit onto 3 small areas? That, in effect becomes the suspension - constrained rubber. How much does the motor unit weigh?
neo
-
Neo,
The TT101 weighs 10Kg (22lbs) so no big deal when sitting on three pads just as it did on the steel cradle.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130964)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=130965)
Both Victors sound audibly better in my system without the steel shroud so ventilation is improved even further.....but what the granite cradle clearly demonstrates is that there is a marked centrifugal action to the platter spinning which needs to be resisted by 'mass'.
In their wood plinths, there is quite a bit of space around the metal shroud. I can't recall if there is also ventilation under the QL-A7.... :scratch:
Did you buy the TT81? I noticed it was 'sold'.....
-
Interesting - I like the metal cylinders/receptacles for the spikes on the steel frame. Can't see exactly what couples them in the granite one, a threaded insert in a drilled out part?
The granite certainly will resist the motion of the platter, but overall the coupling is as stable, in terms of relative motion, as the interface between motor unit and base. That's why I asked. I'm not saying another method would be better, I'm just thinking out loud.
My conjecture is that that the heavier base would be better anyway, and improvement might not be attributable to better resisting platter motion.
The 3 rubbers mass couple the motor unit and is semi-compliant, depending on rubber composition. I was thinking a bead of silicon caulk or some kind of gasket might be better. Have you tried other means of coupling the motor unit?
neo
-
Okay sports fans - up for bids with almost 3 days to go:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/231749676413?rmvSB=true
I stopped using the lead under-mat - it wasn't completely flat. It seemed pretty good with the 3mm Achromat, but that has to be taped down to work properly. So I turned a hard acrylic mat upside down and taped the Achromat on top. It was horrible, like everything mid developed a nasty sibilance. Funk Firm says the 5mm is much better, but I think I've had enough.
On the other hand, the lead mat might have some potential, seemed to improve any mat on top of it. It would have to be cast, unless perfectly flat sheet lead can be sourced. I think Applied Fidelity sells Delrin mats. Might have to send them your platter.
neo
-
Neo,
The body of that JVC cartridge sure looks like the Grace f-8 that was used several OEM applications.
FWIW: The best mat, bar none I have ever had was an old Sumiko lead/acrylic mat...unfortunately I stupidly glued it to a platter, can't get it off.
Have been looking for another for years.
-
Hi Louie,
I've been told that JVC produced a lot of their own carts, yet go to LpGear and look at replacement styli and there are a bunch made by AT. Many of the Japanese companies worked together as OEM and retail supplier and even shared technology in sort of limited partnerships. Western companies were more likely to have an adversarial relationship.
With a Shure type stylus fitment I guess there are a lot of carts which resemble the F8. I don't know which are made by Grace. Perhaps you know or have read about this? I think the F8 has higher output than either the Victor X or Z. The F9 does resemble the X1, especially the body at the back near the pins. There might be an old Grace test report buried somewhere in this thread. Can't say I remember specs of any of these right now. Maybe I can find them.
Old favorite mats seem to fade away, never again to be seen. Can't find any Goldmund or Sota Supermats any more either. Seems there's a void, considering the abundance of all things vinyl these days. I'll have to try a Herbies. I have a cheapie polyester woven mat which sounds remarkably good. Maybe Herbies will be better.
A mat is an odd shape to cast and lead doesn't stay flat. Maybe it can be flattened in a press. Delrin type acrylic will also sag with age I believe.
The Achromat is a piece of cardboard. Boston isn't making them anymore. Providing a warranty for a $200 mat might be a problem?
neo
-
Okay sports fans - up for bids with almost 3 days to go:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/231749676413?rmvSB=true
What do these usually go for? $5 $50 $500?
-
The Z1 usually goes for < $50, depending on stylus. A Jico elliptical for this one is $35. The SAS is around $140 from Japan. The elliptical is at LpGear or TT-Needles.
This is one of the last great bargains out there IMO. Supply seemed abundant 6 months ago, but they're getting rarer.
neo
-
I need a cart for my new to me HW-19 with Audioquest PT-8 tonearm. Don't have much of a budget, but want to keep a lookout for a good match. Right now I am using a Shure MX97xe that I would love to retire. :oops:
-
GB,
If you can load the M97 at 62K/250pF it improves a whole lot. Jico makes an SAS for it too, but I can't say I've heard it. They say with it, it's back to 47K and at a whole other level.
The Z1 w/E stylus sounds sweet and natural. Maybe with a bit extra bass but basically flat. With the SAS stylus it will go up against just about any MM ever made, although you might have a preference for a different sound. This is fast, detailed and dynamic as hell.
The AQ 8 is straight low/med mass arm? Should be great match. With SAS I track at 1.4g. 1.75 W/JVC stylus.
I see the bid is up to $10.50 - don't bid too much if you go for it. They still show up from time to time, but mostly in Japan. These were not US models.
http://www.hifishark.com/search?q=Victor+z1+cartridge
neo
-
I will change the load on the phono stage to see what that does. What would be the most you would bid on the Z1? What and where would I find the stylus for it? Thanks you for answering my never-ending questions... :)
-
If you're looking at the one that Neo referenced, I've got a bid on it just north of $40. $30 for what it was worth +$10 not to have to fart around with another bid. Figured that was the max it was worth with no stylus. The last one sold for $11.
It's the boron cantilever shibata style stylus that is the big cost... about $140.
-
If you're looking at the one that Neo referenced, I've got a bid on it just north of $40. $30 for what it was worth +$10 not to have to fart around with another bid. Figured that was the max it was worth with no stylus. The last one sold for $11.
It's the boron cantilever shibata style stylus that is the big cost... about $140.
No problem. I will keep my eyes open for another opportunity, but where would you recommend purchasing the correct shibata stylus? What about the highly rated X1?
-
I was looking at this one...
http://www.jico-stylus.com/product_info.php?cPath=8&products_id=1506
-
The SAS is a microridge on a boron cantilever:
http://www.jico-stylus.com/product_info.php?cPath=8&products_id=1293
Those 2 look to be the same. Some have a different size tube that holds the cantilever.
Looks like someone just won it for $43. Yahoo auctions can hook you up with Japanese sales. I don't know all the ins/outs. Griff uses another expediter, Jaunce?
neo
-
Well, it wasn't me. I gave it up at $42 and change. A couple of weeks ago one with no stylus sold for $11. :o
-
Well, it wasn't me. I gave it up at $42 and change. A couple of weeks ago one with no stylus sold for $11. :o
I was following that bid to see what it would end up at. The snipers were out in force! I was looking at this one, but it is hard to tell exactly what you get in translation. You could ask though... http://yahoo.aleado.com/lot?auctionID=s472530014#enlargeimg
-
That's an X-1 IIE. TOTL, but there's no SAS for the X1. Here's a Z-1S:
http://yahoo.aleado.com/lot?auctionID=j369763203
You have to register with Yahoo or some other bidding service and there are additional fees. Will occasionally show up on US/Canada sites. Mine came from epay France. Hifishark found it. Look under Victor rather than JVC, or each individually.
neo
-
I've looked a couple there, but can't find a real shipping fee. Certainly it isn't $76 to ship a headshell and cartridge to the US.???
-
The shipping fee is an estimate. It looks like premium service calculated for international rates. There are other fees involved also. I think it's better if you can find what you want on a more accessible venue. Griff uses this one:
http://www.jauce.com/
There are a couple of prominent sellers on epay from Hong Kong, Taiwan, etc. and maybe an inquiry could have them for sale. Considering the fees and shipping, it might cost about the same.
http://stores.ebay.com/2juki?_trksid=p2047675.l2563
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Victor-JVC-UA-7082-12-Tonearm-with-Sub-weight-Manual-Template-/321908355368?hash=item4af33bb128:g:rmMAAOSwZd1VbWp5
http://www.ebay.com/itm/KENWOOD-L-07D-TURNTABLE-/321632630780?hash=item4ae2cc77fc:g:d1QAAOSwc0FUp5Bq
Something else of interest, at least to me - TT81 in house!! Look out. Thanks to Halcro for spotting this and providing inspiration.
Looks like I need a 120V to 100V supply.
neo
-
Congrats on the Victor TT. That's a nice one indeed! Does it have a plinth?
Where are the Pics????
-
Neo,
Congratulations on the TT-81. I am smiling while I type this. You are absolutely going to love it. How did the repair on the JVC-7045 go?
That combination is going to be killer but the right mat is a must!
Best regards,
Don
-
Thanks guys,
The TT81 is just a motor unit - no plinth. I'm leaning toward Henry's plinth-less design, but it means a lot of building (arm pods too). I saw a Victor 2 arm capable plinth for sale and it's tempting. Haven't decided yet, but I'm leaning toward a Halcro type or maybe a variation with attached armboards. I have access to misc. steel parts like brake rotors in assorted sizes. Could build up the motor unit and weld on arm supports.
The 7045 seems functional, although I haven't mounted or tested it yet. Right now I have more projects than I can deal with, but it's always like that for me. I'm thinking of selling my Denon 1250 w/o arm. It's cut for an arm mounted at 219mm, perfect for a Rega type moved 3mm closer for alignment. The projects are piling up and too many loose ends. But I've been saying that for the last 25 years.
Glad I got the TT81. Would it hurt a 100V unit to run it at 120V ?
neo
-
I know I've seen adapters for running 100V. Here is one on Amazon http://www.amazon.com/VCT-VT-500J-Japanese-Transformer-Converts/dp/B000PC4JL4.
-
Thanks GB,
I ordered a smaller one. The table is 8 watt and that one is 500 watt.
Just saw another vintage goodie:
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649235290-empire-top-model-4000-diii-cartridge/
$290 Canadian is $219 US.
3mV
30cu
.75 - 1.25g
I'd get it myself but I'm a little backed up. That would be nice on my Sonus arm.
neo
-
Thanks GB,
I ordered a smaller one. The table is 8 watt and that one is 500 watt.
Just saw another vintage goodie:
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649235290-empire-top-model-4000-diii-cartridge/
$290 Canadian is $219 US.
3mV
30cu
.75 - 1.25g
I'd get it myself but I'm a little backed up. That would be nice on my Sonus arm.
neo
Neo,
You're part enabler and part private shopper! :thumb:
AC
-
Neo,
You're part enabler and part private shopper! :thumb:
AC
For sure! :lol: Now let's see if I have learned anything. That Empire would be better matched for a low to medium mass tonearm, right?
-
The Empire 4000 III is held in high regard. Using a high cu cart on a heavy arm is controversial. Usual wisdom is to shoot for a resonant frequency of 8 - 12Hz which means low mass arm for this cart. Having a res. freq. lower than 8Hz can work out, depending on equipment and set up. The arm must have high quality bearings w/low friction, and the set up must be relatively immune to acoustic and mechanical feedback.
Peter Pritchard (ADC, Sonus) advocated a res. freq. of 6.5Hz. Some of his designs were as high as 50 cu. Shure and Stantering put a damping brush on the stylus assembly for heavy arm compatibility.
I believe the 4000 weighs 7g. Using screws 2g, res. freq. estimate is 6.49Hz w/11g arm. With a 7g arm - 7.26Hz. If a med mass arm has fluid damping the amplitude of the resonance is lowered considerably. If the arm bearings have too much friction, the cart will sound sluggish on a heavy arm. Even w/high quality bearings, on a heavy arm you might hear anomalies, especially in the bass. I wouldn't hesitate with a high quality med mass arm even w/o fluid damping. With a high quality high mass arm YMMV, and res. freq. might be in the record warp region.
Hi Neo,
I've used the following cartridges: Grace 9E, Monster Cable Alpha 2, Monster Cable Sigma 1000, Fidelity Research FR1 Mk3 original and a Soundsmith FR1, Accuphase AC1 and an AC1 retipped by Soundsmith, Denon DL107, Denon 103 original and with UWE wood body, Empire 4000D mk3, Koetsu Black with vdh tip, AKG P7, Nagaoka MP50.
My favourite of the lot is the Empire 4000. It has all the detail of the moving coils carts with none of their agressiveness. Im looking forward to trying the Victor Z1.
Regards,
Pat
neo
-
I believe I have an Audioquest PT-6, 7 or 8. It is medium mass I believe. I don't know how to tell exactly which one. It does have fluid damping, if needed. How would the Empire/Audioquest combo work out theoretically?
-
GB,
I think your arm is on the low side of medium (10g?), but I'm not positive. I think it will work. I'm not sure about replacement styli.
My experience is limited here and I don't want to throw you a curve. Are you a member of Karma? They have a giant Empire thread:
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/anyone-else-running-vintage-empire-carts.468129/
You could check with them. Somebody could probably comment about the arm.
neo
-
GB,
I think your arm is on the low side of medium (10g?), but I'm not positive. I think it will work. I'm not sure about replacement styli.
My experience is limited here and I don't want to throw you a curve. Are you a member of Karma? They have a giant Empire thread:
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/anyone-else-running-vintage-empire-carts.468129/
You could check with them. Somebody could probably comment about the arm.
neo
Thanks for the link, I will scan through the 91 pages to see what I can find. I think this is a Jico replacement for the Empire 4000 III http://www.jico-stylus.com/product_info.php?cPath=6&products_id=1535.
-
GB,
Saw your post on the alien thread. Something like this is more important right now, IMO:
http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=RDV
or $169 at KAB. You supply the vacuum:
https://www.kabusa.com/ev1.htm
neo
-
What cleaning fluid do you recommend?
-
I've been using Nitty Gritty Pure 2 for years. It's noticeably quieter than VPI fluid. Now I use an enzyme cleaner first. I think it's called Audio Intelligent One Step.
I'm going to try Mobile Fidelity. They have a Super Enzyme cleaner that's supposed to be well, super. The other Mobile Fidelity formulas are supposed to be good. I use their record sleeves. It's important to lose the paper sleeve.
http://www.needledoctor.com/Nitty-Gritty-Pure-2-Pint?sc=2&category=1181
http://www.needledoctor.com/Mobile-Fidelity-Original-Masters-Sleeves-50-pk?sc=2&category=52838
http://www.soundstagedirect.com/super-record-wash-vinyl-lp-mfsl.shtml
Mobil Fidelity has another deep cleaning solution for really dirty used records. I haven't used these so I can't comment. The important thing is to get started. It makes a tremendous difference.
neo
-
I use the Spin Clean solution (not sure if it has enzyme in it?), followed by diluted Pure II on the NittyGritty as a final rinse.
I used to use what is now MoFi solution (can't remember what it used to be called), both the Power Cleaner and 1-step by itself and really liked it with the NG. I just ordered a bottle of the MoFi solution since I'm almost out of Pure II.
-
GB,
If you can load the M97 at 62K/250pF it improves a whole lot. Jico makes an SAS for it too, but I can't say I've heard it. They say with it, it's back to 47K and at a whole other level.
The Z1 w/E stylus sounds sweet and natural. Maybe with a bit extra bass but basically flat. With the SAS stylus it will go up against just about any MM ever made, although you might have a preference for a different sound. This is fast, detailed and dynamic as hell.
The AQ 8 is straight low/med mass arm? Should be great match. With SAS I track at 1.4g. 1.75 W/JVC stylus.
I see the bid is up to $10.50 - don't bid too much if you go for it. They still show up from time to time, but mostly in Japan. These were not US models.
http://www.hifishark.com/search?q=Victor+z1+cartridge
neo
I'm assuming 65K is a combination of 47K and the 250pF. Below are the instructions for my phono stage. Please correct me if I am wrong.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=132225)
-
No. You have 2 different parameters here. One is impedance/resistance and the other is capacitance. 47K is the only MM resistance option here. In order to get 62K you would have to remove a set of resistors and replace them with 62K. It looks as if you could do that, or have a tech install them. If there is a resistance value you don't use, like maybe 1K, you could replace those with the 62K. You could also replace them with 100K and use loading plugs to get any resistance you want. Use a parallel resistance calculator to figure out net resistance.
The other is capacitance - that's the total value of preamp + cables + internal arm wire = capacitance load. In this case (M97) you want to maintain at least 250pF, but not much more. Depending, your wire/cables might be 125 - 150pF. Combine that with 100pF on your preamp and you should be close. Only thing is you cable capacitance is unknown.
The way it is suggests an SAS is the way to go. It probably is anyway. The M97 is said to be one of the most successful SAS couplings. I think you should get the RCM first and get that out of the way.
I know this stuff is confusing and I didn't explain much. If you have questions don't hesitate to ask. If you don't understand parallel resistance and capacitance, all this must seem like voodoo.
-
I know this stuff is confusing and I didn't explain much. If you have questions don't hesitate to ask. If you don't understand parallel resistance and capacitance, all this must seem like voodoo.
Are you suggesting this is not some form of voodoo? :lol: I am slowly learning some of the principals involved, slowly. I've been itching to buy a RCM for quite some time and your suggestion just put it above all else. Once I have that, I will work on cartridge and the Phoenix Eagle and Roadrunner tachometer.
-
I think you should get the RCM first and get that out of the way.
GB,
Neo's advice is solid. :thumb:
Pick up a NittyGritty or equivalent, some deep cleaning enzyme stuff, some Pure II or MoFi 1-step wash, MoFi sleeves, and get cleaning. 8)
-
Once you have a vacuum cleaning machine, so many of the tics and pops go away. The little KABUSA machine works very well using your vacuum... I used one for over a year before moving to one with vacuum built in. For an extra $30 I recommend this one suggested by Neo. It's nearly as small as the KABUSA unit and, being self contained, is more convenient. http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=RDV&gclid=CKmDp53QpskCFVQ2aQodstUMlg
-
The other is capacitance - that's the total value of preamp + cables + internal arm wire = capacitance load. In this case (M97) you want to maintain at least 250pF, but not much more. Depending, your wire/cables might be 125 - 150pF. Combine that with 100pF on your preamp and you should be close. Only thing is you cable capacitance is unknown.
The capacitance of my RCA cable to the amplifier is roughly 21 picofarads per 2 ft, which since I have 3ft makes 31.5pF. Does the output to the amplifier even count? I wouldn't think so. The Audioquest tonearm is connected by an unknown SME tonearm cable that connects to the phono stage in. Any idea of how to identify it, or is that not really necessary?
-
The capacitance of my RCA cable to the amplifier is roughly 21 picofarads per 2 ft, which since I have 3ft makes 31.5pF. Does the output to the amplifier even count? I wouldn't think so. The Audioquest tonearm is connected by an unknown SME tonearm cable that connects to the phono stage in. Any idea of how to identify it, or is that not really necessary?
The cable to the amp has nothing to do with this, but it's more likely 21pF/ft. The capacitance the cart sees is the arm wire + arm cable + preamp.
Can't say for sure but an SME V cable, which is a VdH 501 is 155pF. If yours is like that one (silver wire) then you should be fine with the 100pF switch.
It's also hard to estimate the arm internal wire. KAB says the 1200 internal wire is only 10pF. But this could go as high as 50, so between 10 and 50pF. :scratch:
You're still probably fine with 100pF. You can determine what's best by listening. If the capacitance is too low it will sound distant, rolled off - depressed in the treble region and loss of extreme high end. If capacitance is too high it will sound too bright upper mids to treble, with even less extension.
Check this out:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/load_the_magnets_e.html
You can see where 62K/250pF comes from. Some years ago a member here, Felix came up with 62K. BTW, I read a very positive review of the Budgie.
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=vinyl&m=1122066
neo
-
Here's another one:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/262150184691?rmvSB=true
Lotta love for this one. Not a whole lot of money so far.
neo
-
You're still probably fine with 100pF. You can determine what's best by listening. If the capacitance is too low it will sound distant, rolled off - depressed in the treble region and loss of extreme high end. If capacitance is too high it will sound too bright upper mids to treble, with even less extension.
neo
I haven't had much time to dedicate to critical listening, but that is exactly what I will do. So far switching between 250pF and 100pF, I have leaned toward 100pF. This afternoon I should have enough time to figure out what I like best. Does raising the gain from 40db to 46db have any known negative effects? After an hour or two of straight listening I find myself almost maxing out the volume on the amp, maybe a few drinks help with this. If I bump the gain up a bit, will it hurt the sound or is this something to experiment with as well? :scratch:
-
If you're nearly maxed out on the volume control, by all means increase the gain. The only possible negative effect is to overload the input. In this case I think you would be safe from that. I'm guessing you'll also get an increase in SQ, but you'll have to tell me.
neo
-
A bit of controversy on the Agon MM/MI thread regarding the JVC carts, resulted in a request for any additional information. I thought it might be easier to show information here. A recent thread on Karma did yield a little:
http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/jvcs-4md-10x-possibly-the-goofiest-looking-shibata-cartridge.690211/
http://www.owarano.jp/HP_5asobitai/HP_5%20cartridge1/cartridge%20victor/cartridge%20victor.htm
neo
-
Hi Neo,
Thanks for the links. Yes, different group of folks over there. One in particular is starting to spread his B/S again.
Do you know anything about that JVC Laboratory line of cartridges? Is it a separate company like Highphonic was with Denor or just a upscale division like Signet was to Audio Technica?
I'd actually appreciate any information in this regards. I've done a search and find it hard to discover any thing relevant. It amazes me sometimes just how much information is "NOT' available on the internet considering I have no problem discovering what my neighbor had for breakfast by just reading his Facebook posts! :roll:
What a World we live in!
Regards,
-
Hi Griff,
We're going back to the '70s, before there was an internet. It's especially hard to find info on models not imported to N. America. It seems like the 4MD-10X and 20X were the first Victor 4-ch carts. Apparently they had different bodies that used the same stylus. Not sure when they came out with X1,Z1. Didn't you have a link to an old promo sheet for them, you posted on Agon?
I'm also not sure about the laboratory series. AFAIK, most JVC MMs were made by other Japanese companies and all were sold under the Victor (JVC) name. I'm guessing that laboratory series is either the TOTL X1, Z1, or the 4-ch carts with shibata tips and response to 50 - 60K. Victor made a number of MCs. These might have come a little later. In the '80s the Japanese started producing MCs like crazy and grabbed a large share of sales for the new demand.
Regards,
neo
BTW, for what it's worth, there were a couple of 4-ch carts that had a .2 mil elliptical. I don't believe Victor had one, but isn't the Grace F9E a .2 elliptical?
-
Hi Neo,
I have one of those 4MD -20X cartridges. It is identical to a At 14s or ATs14. I don't remember exactly which one but it is the one that has the wider housing and has the odd mounting post position. Great sounding cartridge but the At 14's were! They (the stylus and housing), was supplied to JVC in white but got painted a gold color. The paint didn't stick very well and flaked off rather easily. That is why when you see one listed for sale, they look rather beat-up. Its really just the poor choice of paint that was sellected to paint them gold so that they didn't 'look' like an AT cartridge.
On the VE site there is a promo sheet that show and describes both the X-1 and the Z-1 on the same promo page. Quite similar in all regards as far as specs. I have it saved but not to sure of how to post it to this forum. I could and would have emailed it to you if I remembered your email address :)
I have seen the Nivico name associated with Nagoaka. Also that MicroRidge tip that Jico supplies for their SAS I beleive is a Nagoaka product. Getting to be a rather small world with this hobby of ours.
Yes, .2 mill is what my F-9e states. I forgot that it also was usable for 4 channel. Maybe that is why is sounds so good on the phono stage I had converted to 100K resistance? More in line what was considered essential for 4 channel designs.
Regards,
-
Speaking of which, there is a JVC 4MD-20X listed on fleabay
http://www.ebay.com/itm/JVC-4MD-20X-AT14S-4-CH-CD-4-Cartridge-amp-Original-Shibata-Stylus-/221958578738?&_trksid=p2056016.l4276
Easy to see that it is a AT cartridge. Those 'V' magnets are a dead giveaway! Also in regards to that gold paint issue I mentioned. Stylus is creased but still a good example to see in regards to what one looks like.
Regards,
-
I was looking for a chart of AT15 specs when I saw this old post by David in 2013. This is around the time when Griff was transplanting AT styli.
Hi Neo
what I am saying is
1) low inductance designs tend to expose cantilever resonance (as it is not balanced by LCR loading..)
2) basic aluminium cantilevers have resonances causing a boost at anywhere from 11Hz to 16Hz (examples Ed Saunders V15V stylus - 11Hz, Shure & Jico standard elipticals circa 16Hz), high quality aluminiums will place the resonance at 18Hz to 21Hz (examples Pickering Z7500s, Ortofon OM20/30/40) - exotic cantilevers can place the resonance higher (Jico SAS - circa 28kHz, Dynavector Karat 50Khz to 70kHz depending on model)
3) Audio perception is a beast! - amplitude boosts in the very directional higher frequencies can be perceived as broadened soundstage
4) Brightness is not a reflection of a linear boost across the high end - but a reflection of a boost between around 5kHz and 10kHz - boosts above 10kHz don't tend to be perceived as "brightness"
5) a cantilever with a resonance in the lower highs eg: 11kHz - is very likely to sound "Bright" even if the high end above 16kHz drops off dramatically - counter intuitive I know... - So a basic relatively heavy aluminium cantilever in an MC can be a bad thing (assuming you don't like "brightness")
6) A cantilever with a resonance around 16kHz will boost frequencies from around 8kHz (within the brightness range) up to around 32KHz - resulting in both brightness and strong soundstage perception.... the cues for both are boosted.
7) A cantilever with a resonance around 19kHz (eg Pickering 7500) will boost frequencies starting from around 9.5kHz.... so negligible impact on the brightness zone - but substantial impact in the soundstage cues - this is common for many high quality MC's
The very best MM/MI designs are mid inductance - not as low as true low inductance designs - so it does not expose cantilever resonance quite as harshly, but does not depress the high end as much as high inductance designs do. Fit a traditional 6mm or 7mm high quality cantilever to one of these - adjust with the right loading, and you can achieve theoretically very very good results without resorting to technological or engineering extremes....
eg: CA Maestro, V15VMR, Technics EPC100/205, many others
But these are just my ruminations.... and maybe I ate just one hash brownie too many....
bye for now
David
neo
-
Thanks Neo,
A lot of information their! I had to re-read your post (Davids), 3 times for it all to sink in. The information helps in understanding what is actually happening when I compare several cartridges an hear differences in them.
Regards,
-
Griff,
One thing not adequately taken into account in David's post, is exotic cantilevers with low inductance generators. It's true that low inductance motors tend to be harder to load, but cantilever resonances also tend to be above the audio band. For example the TK10ML has 85mH and can peel the paint off your wall, but the cantilever resonates around 30K. Find the right resistance load and it's an amazing cart.
This is one post sort of taken out of context and I must say, I miss David's input.
Regards,
neo
-
Neo,
I have also read posts that praises the TK-10ML's paint removal abilities, but I never could understand why people felt that way based upon what I was hearing with my 10ML? I have always found it to sound quite excellent. Very similar to my Keiski Gold Spot in most regards which is very similar to the Koetsu's. With the TK-10ML being a M/M and the other two being M/C's, it became the cartridge that convinced me there just might be something to that thread Raul started. I had entertained the notion of selling it based on the un-attainability of replacement stylus's until I found a NOS AT-25 (which I keep as a spare for replacement). It is now in my display case, waiting its turn in rotation! :D
BTW: I also miss Davids posts. He just seemed to have dropped off the face of the earth? You two gave me many things to think and ponder about.
Regards,
-
So I traded my old AT LP120USB for a new Ortofon OMB20 and was looking for a bit of guidance. Being new to this I don't want to waste time and energy doing something I would regret. I have this mounted on an Audioquest PT-6, 7 or 8 and was curious if adding damping would be beneficial. The cartridge has not been dialed in totally yet, but was looking to get some feedback. I will spend time setting it up without damping for now. The info from Vinyl Engine says it has a 30 x 10-6cm/Dyne dynamic compliance and I believe the tonearm to be a low/medium mass arm on a VPI HW-19.
-
Griff,
It was in the '80s and I bought the 10ML II new. I wasn't prepared for the break in period and the cart seemed relentless. I guess that's where the perception of overly bright comes from. Once settled in, the cart was amazingly detailed and accurate.
Funny you should mention Kisiki. A Silverspot was my next cart. I found it romantic and not at all appropriate for my music. I already sold the Signet and regretted it. The Kisiki didn't last long. I went through a session of carts, none of which measured up to the Signet. I should have bought another one, but I guess curiosity got the best of me. I had an Adcom HOMC with a microridge, which I liked, but it wasn't until '88 when I got a Genesis 500, then 1000 my favorite.
David's situation now - he is unable to set up his record player due to family considerations. Under the circumstances his absence is understandable. I wish him well. Maybe he'll join us before too long.
Regards,
-
GB,
OMB-20 ? I don't know how this differs from an OM-20. It has a nude elliptical stylus?
AFAIK you should be okay with your arm. How does it sound? cu = 30, what other info do you have?
neo
-
It is the same as the OM-20 sold in bulk directly to manufactures. Here is what I found so far. So far it already sounds much better than the Shure M97xe. After tearing everything apart several times I took a close look at the styli and it seems to be off center and pushed to the left (from the front). :scratch:
Ortofon OM 20
Type moving magnet
Output Voltage 4mV
Frequency Response 20Hz - 22kHz
Tracking Force 1.0 - 1.5g
Mass 5g
Channel Separation 25dB
Channel Balance 1.5dB
Load Impedance 47k ohms
Output Impedance 750 ohms
Stylus Stylus 20
Stylus Tip nude elliptical
Cantilever ?
Dynamic Compliance 30 x 10-6cm/Dyne
Static Compliance ?
Notes
5gm cartridge mass includes a removable brass weight of 2.5gm. Lateral Dynamic compliance is at 10Hz. Inductance 450 mH, Recommended Capacitance Load: 200-500pF
-
Which stylus goes off to the left, the OM20 ? Try tracking at 1.5g and reducing anti-skate to near zero and see if it straightens out. I assume you mean the front, the stylus is off to the left. Was it like that when you got it?
LpGear still sells the cart:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/OROM20S.html
All the OM Super bodies are the same and you can upgrade the stylus. I believe Ortofon stopped making OM styli, but you can still find them. They're a little pricey compared to AT, but high quality. Let us know how it's working out.
neo
-
It is the Shure cartridge that is a bit off skew and yes bent to the left or almost twisted when viewing from the front. I apologize for being unclear. I've had that cartridge since 2012 so it is probably time to replace the stylus, but I want to save up for the Jico SAS which is about $70 more than the OEM.
I would like to know which cart to look out for as a future upgrade that would be well matched to the table/arm. I have a hard time justifying cartridges over $500, but if some come highly recommended I will look into them. My budget prevents me from buying a bunch of different cartridges to experiment plus I hate wasting money. I wish there was a cartridge loaning library site that is similar to "The Cable company" http://www.thecableco.com/content.aspx?iid=5777. It could be dangerous to an audiophile, but then I could make an educated decision.
I've finally learned to do just one round of adjustments at a time to prevent frustration when setting up the turntable. It becomes entirely too stressful when I try to continually adjust everything at which point nothing sounds good. :duh:
-
Neo,
It does seem we have had several of the same cartridges over the years. As well as tone arms and turntables. I had a Sigma Genesis 2000 MKII which I sold back when I had the Alphason HR 100S mounted on a SOTA Sapphire table. At that time for some strange reason, I felt that owning only one or at most two cartridges was the norm. I regretted selling that one. About a year ago, Nikola (Nandric), mentioned of a dealer in Italy who was selling her late husbands cartridge collection. I bought several, one of which was a NOS Sigma Genesis 2000 MKII. I am quite happy to have it back in my rotation. Definitely front row contender!
Yes, Kieski's are on the sweet side. Just like Koetsu's, my Miyabi, and many other highly regarded cartridges. My choices would be neutral first, then sweet over ruthlessly revealing. :)
Regards,
-
GB,
What cart to look out for? At this point I don't know what to tell you. Let us know how things are working out with the OM20 and Shure/SAS. These things are often revealed as you progress and form opinions about what you like and dislike.
neo
-
Griff,
Yea, but I had the Genesis 1000 on a Studietto/Zeta. In the mid '90s I traded that table for the Sota/Alphason and a pile of money. Bad move I've always regretted, but I needed the cash.
Your description of the carts seems to fit. The 1000 and 2000 are the same cart except the 2000 has gold coils - is silkier, smoother. The 1000 is faster but also more ruthless - unforgiving. I like that. Tells you exactly how it is. Not for every record though.
neo
-
Have recently added three cartridges to my arsenal....
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=133542)
The Grace F9E. A really fine performer deserving of its long time reputation :P
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=133543)
The Ortofon SPU Silver Meister. At last a LOMC which captures the soul of music as well as the best MMs can.... :thumb:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=133544)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=133545)
The London Decca Reference. Can be quite magical..... :banana piano:
-
Have recently added three cartridges to my arsenal.... :banana piano:
NICE!! I see you're stretching out.
Can't go wrong with the Grace. I always liked that cart. I was a little surprised when Lew said the new Soundsmith stylus wasn't to his liking. I wonder if the stylus is too aggressive or maybe it needs different loading or VTF ?
Is the SPU vintage or new? I read something about their reissuing the Silver. Should be a great match for the FR arm.
Nice bottom shot of the Decca - wild looking beast. I like the Yamamoto headshell too. Must be a good match with the Decca.
Congratulations,
neo
-
Thanks Neo...
Can't imagine what the ruby cantilever might bring to the party for the Grace, but I'd like to hear one.
The Silver Meister II is a rework of the MkI and is in their current lineup.
It was cheaper buying new directly from Ortofon than buying it used from anyone wanting precious US dollars... :scratch:
The DLR is quite an experience to listen to. Nothing quite like it in my experience and I haven't yet rung its best set-up out of it I believe..
-
AFAIK the F9E and F9Ruby were the same except for the ruby cantilever. This is the only cart I can think of, off hand, that used a .2 elliptical for 4-ch.
Extension spec was the same for both carts so it's not like the ruby has a much higher resonance? Could be it's what we don't know that defines the difference.
When I had Soundsmith put a level 2 rebuild (ruby/LC) on a DL304, the difference was dramatic, like amazing. It had phenomenal detail, but was quick to point out imperfections. I was adjusting arm height for every record and it got a little tedious. The 9E and Ruby weren't that different as I remember. Great cart! Wish I had checked it out more back in the day. I was into coils and dismissed it as another decent MM.
Soundsmith must get his ruby cantilevers and styli pre-mounted from Ogura or Namiki. Sometimes SRA might be different. This can be corrected mostly by arm height, but often not both SRA and VTA at the same time. This could be the difference between good and great.
neo
-
Halcro,
On page 56 we briefly discussed loading the Victor X1 MK2. At that time you were loading at 40K w/no added capacitance. Has this changed, and has it changed relative to the MK1?
The specs I have indicate they're very similar. The MK2 seems more compliant and has 0.3mV greater output. DC and impedance is the same. Both have response to 60K. Any other info?
Griff?
Regards,
-
Neo,
I have been running my JVC's at either 47K or 100K. I prefer the slightly more open sound with the 100K. Cap. at 100 when using either resistance load.
Not sure if this completely answers your question, but still my 2 cents! :lol:
-
Neo,
I generally start off with approx. 40K and zero Cap on both X1/II and Z1/SAS and they both sound well at that loading but although I have Cardas Golden Reference very low capacitance phono cable.....the length is 1.8 metre to connect to the phonostage. So I basically start with some added Cap on all my MMs (except when using the Raven AC-2).
But I'm not a cartridge 'Loading Nazi'...... :lol:
Because of my many choices of available cartridges, I began writing down all the loadings I settled on for each individual cartridge, so that I could save myself the task of re-doing these after an absence.
Trouble with this was, that often I would re-adjust after listening for a while... :dunno:
Because I can infinitely vary both Impedance and Capacitance on the Halcro DM10 by simple twists of the knobs.......I no longer consult my 'Loading List', but simply adjust the settings during the first record.
And even then, I might change the settings between different albums and even between different 'cuts' on the same album.... :banghead:
If you think about the differing Eq and processing applied by different engineers during different recording sessions........why shouldn't there be a difference in the loading required for a particular track to sound its best?
Regards
-
I was trying to get a handle on any differences between the MK1 and MK2. The 32 bit bandito is back on agon. Maybe it's good stirring things up, but it seems like their is nothing new, just bandito reasserting himself.
People think loading is common to a cart model, but it's just as much about the phono pre.
Halcro,
I looked at the DM10. That's quite a piece. I couldn't find the capacitance of the Cardas, but 1.8m has to be at least around 90pF, but probably closer to 120pF. That's a long run - 6'.
neo
-
Neo,
The DM10 is still the only preamp I know of that contains a built-in phonostage with both MM and MC capability AND adjustable loading for resistance and capacitance together with fully balanced differential inputs and outputs and well as single ended.
When I see modern day 'High End' designers produce MC 'only' high priced phono stages (which include inbuilt transformers no less).....it reveals their pissant credentials together with cloth ears and snobbish pseudo-intellectual pretentiousness.
How's that for a mouthful.... :thumb:
Incidentally the Cardas Golden Reference phono cable in XLR configuration has 7pF per foot.....less than 50pF for the 1.8 metre length... 8)
-
Hey Halcro,
In regards to phono cables. I am using 2 foot lengths of the Signal Cables Silver Resolutions. The have 18.9 pf/ft and are not only good sounding and well made, but are also rather inexpensive. They replace the XLO Signatures. Hundreds of dollars in price difference but more open sounding.
Regards,
-
The Cardas @ 7pF/ft is lowest I've heard about. I thought Blue Jeans was low @ 12.1pF/ft. I see the Cardas is discontinued. Maybe they have a low capacitance replacement.
The Signal Cables looks a lot like Ultimate Cables. I wonder if the companies merged or morphed. All their cables look like a good value. 17 to 19pF/ft is pretty standard for low capacitance cable, but I guess a lot depends on wire thickness and winding. I think the Cardas was 24ga. Lots of interconnect and microphone cable is 20 to 22ga.
I saw a couple of used DM10. Still around $11K.
neo
-
Cardas tried replacing the Golden Reference with the Cardas Clear (which I've got for both interconnects and speaker).....but there has been some sort of backlash and you can still apparently get Golden Reference.
I wouldn't buy used Halcro gear unless you lived in Australia.
They don't publish their circuit designs (which are under patent)...and they even cover their PCBs with resin so that no-one can copy them.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=134345)
The amp designer in Adelaide will service and repair them as a sideline business but I don't believe anyone else is capable of this.... :scratch:
Really annoying..... :guns:
-
I wouldn't buy used Halcro gear unless you lived in Australia.
They don't publish their circuit designs (which are under patent)...and they even cover their PCBs with resin so that no-one can copy them.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=134345)
The amp designer in Adelaide will service and repair them as a sideline business but I don't believe anyone else is capable of this.... :scratch:
Really annoying..... :guns:
I didn't know that. It looks almost like a page out of the Mitch Cotter playbook. He used to fill up his electric blue boxes with expanding foam. There was good reason, as I later found out. The big companies will steal your design whether you have a patent or not. The little guy doesn't stand much of a chance against a team of high priced lawyers. It might not matter anyway, by the time your case came up you'd probably be out of business.
A good patent that covers all bases is expensive. In the late '80s it was around $50K. That's a lot of money for an upstart mfg. Why spend the money if they'll put you out of business anyway? I guess Mitch figured a can of expanding foam is around $5.
BTW, I listened to an old and partially broken Cotter preamp and compared it to some high end gear (Spectral, Threshold, CJ, ARC, etc.). It sounded more like music than any of them. Beautiful piece.
neo
-
In today's market, all that is required to 'improve' a product is to change it color! :roll:
Regards,
-
I found this old post by J Carr. Some might find it of interest:
08-16-2014
Hi Fleib: Cartridge suspensions should only allow vertical, horizontal and 45-degree flexing modes, but in reality nearly all cartridge suspensions also allow twisting, and if a given suspension doesn't contain a tension wire, fore-aft motion as well.
If you measure crosstalk on an oscilloscope using a test LP, you will see that it causes the test signal waveform to break apart and spreads the sections over both channels rather than one. Breaking a waveform apart is never a good idea for sonics, since doing so generates high-order distortion products which are unpleasant to the ear. For this reason I consider cartridge crosstalk to be a type of distortion, rather than merely a channel separation problem.
No matter how rigid the cantilever and secure the the stylus tip mount, the flexible nature of the cantilever suspension allows the cantilever and stylus to rotate as a unit, leading to worsened crosstalk. As opposed to normal crosstalk which is due to misalignment of generator and stylus, crosstalk such as this is dynamic in nature, and increases and decreases as the LP groove modulations rise and fall.
Therefore, although a cartridge with a lurking dynamic crosstalk issue will probably measure OK and sound OK on simple music, on big orchestra peaks, congestion and imaging problems may occur.
The farther the stylus protrudes from the centerline of the cantilever, the more effective it is as a crank, making it easier for the LP groove to twist the cantilever and generator around (with the suspension acting as the pivot). A very short stylus reduces the level-dependent twisting effects by being less effective as a crank. At the other end of the cantilever, a large surface-area boss (typical of many MCs and the Audio-Technica MMs), combined with a large diameter damping system will act in a similar manner as a disc brake, reducing cantilever and generator twisting.
Although not much can be done with rigid cantilevers (sapphire, boron, diamond etc.) to reduce the twisting effects other than shortening the distance that the stylus protrudes from the cantilever centerline, it is possible to design an alloy tube cantilever to circumvent this effect - if the cantilever is made with a kink in it (corresponding to the VTA angle) which starts to bend a little farther back than is normal for alloy tube cantilevers, the patch where the stylus contacts the LP groove can be placed directly on the cantilever longitudinal axis. This avoids the dynamic crosstalk issue by removing the crank effect of the stylus.
In more ways than one, it is easier to make a high-quality phono cartridge when the cantilever is made from a ductile material rather than the rigid, brittle materials that are commonly viewed as "better". Rigid cantilever materials have no "give", meaning that the slot, hole or surface for the stylus mounting must be made larger than the stylus, and this necessary oversizing forces the mounting tolerances to be poorer. A ductile cantilever material can be fitted with an undersized mounting hole so that the stylus is press-fit into place, and this will help keep the position (front-to-back, side-to-side) and angle (azimuth, SRA) of the stylus closer to the intent of the cartridge designer. And since the ductile cantilever can be bent without damage during forming, it is possible to cancel out some of the geometrical effects that would otherwise occur (per the above paragraph).
Returning to rigid cantilevers, please look at this.
www.accuphase.com/cat/ac-3en.pdf
If you compare the photo of Technics cantilever to the cantilever cross-section drawing in the Accuphase AC-3 pdf, the Accuphase drawing suggests that the contact point between stylus and LP groove was kept closer to the center axis of the cantilever, and it also shows that the stylus block passes through both upper and lower cantilever walls, which should help keep consistent stylus mounting accuracy.
This doesn't mean that a long stylus only has downsides to - it confers advantages as well. A longer stylus makes it feasible to reduce the cantilever length (for a given cantilever rake angle), so if the designer's top priority is to reduce cantilever length, a longer stylus (and/or higher cantilever rake angle) will be effective.
Most notably, a longer stylus will be far more resistant to jamming due to dirt accumulation than a shorter stylus would be, and this is important for a volume-sales product that may see a fair amount of casual use. Back when Lyra was making cartridges with 0.06x0.06mm stylii (smaller than what is on the Technics, and up there with the Denon DL-1000A), we'd get back cartridges where the user claimed that the stylus was broken off. In many cases, the stylus was intact and perfectly fine - it was simply that the tiny stylus size made it prone to vanish in accumulated dirt, and once that happened, the cartridge wouldn't play - the cantilever would just slide across the LP as though the stylus was missing.
Here is also a link for the AC-1 pdf. You can see how it used an alloy tubular cantilever which was bent into shape (although for crosstalk purposes it would have been better if the bend started a little further back).
www.accuphase.com/cat/ac-1en.pdf
FWIW, tubular cantilevers are not more rigid than rod cantilevers of the same material, unless the outer diameter of the tubular cantilever is larger than the OD of the rod cantilever. But a larger OD will cause the stylus to protrude by a greater distance from the cantilever centerline, which we have seen is a disadvantage when it comes to crosstalk.
Finally, allow me to point out that most design choices in a phono cartridge bring side-effects. Very few design choices only confer advantages with no negatives. As one example, it is no accident that the great majority of phono cartridges ever made have converged on a cantilever length of around 6mm. Any designer can specify a shorter cantilever, but doing so brings direct and indirect performance penalties which need to be carefully considered, and doing so also inevitably forces design work-arounds in various areas which may upset the balance of the design as a whole.
On a different topic, here is an online simulation tool for RLC circuits.
http://sim.okawa-denshi.jp/en/RLCtool.php
It allows for the user to enter their own values for resistance, capacitance and inductance (thereby making it feasible to do a simple electrical modeling of an MM, MI or MC phono cartridge), and it can show the phase response, step response, overshoot and other parameters in addition to the frequency response. This is a nice tool to complement Jim Hagerman's cartridge loading page, to get a better idea of phono cartridge behavior in the electrical domain.
Hope this was of interest.
kind regards, jonathan
Great guy. BTW, quiz of Friday.
neo
-
Great, informative post Neo! Thanks for dredging this out of the archives.
-
I've been going back through the MM/MI thread looking for informative posts. Is it me, or does it seem to have degenerated lately?
I suspect the Peter principle applies.
Someone here once asked about the difference between a Delos and Kelos. Better late than never?
08-18-2014
My experience with test LPs is that they often don't agree; sometimes the differences are minor, sometimes they are bigger. Use two different test records (of good quality) and you'll get two different frequency response curves. Likewise for crosstalk, distortion, IMD etc.
This could be because cutting lathe amplifiers almost never contain resistors that are accurate to 0.1%, or capacitors that are accurate to 0.5% (according to the LP cutting engineers that I have spoken with), this could be because the RIAA lookup tables (that an EE would use to help design phono stages or cutting-lathe electronics) in various engineering articles didn't always agree with each other. Whatever the reasons, differences between the RIAA EQ curve (as defined by equations rather than look-up tables) and what individual cutting lathes are wont to produce should be expected.
For example, two days ago I received a set of test measurements from a highly-regarded tonearm manufacturer. These were of the Etna, tested in his latest tonearm. Comparing his measurements to Stereoplay's Etna measurements, and you would think that a different cartridge was involved. This doesn't necessarily prove that either test is better, or less valid. But it is proof that test measurements do not always give the same (or even similar) results, and this is neither unique nor a surprise.
OTOH, the differences between cartridges tested at the same facility should be comparable (unless X cartridge was tested in January and Y cartridge was tested in August). For example, going back to the HiFi News group test, the lift in the presence band shown by the 17D3 does not appear with any of the other 6 cartridges tested, so that particular observation may be applicable to situations outside of the HFNRR test.
Then again, the important question is - how much of these measured differences are apparent to the ear? Based on my own experiences (including blind testing with various listening panels), I don't think that there is a single answer. What I can say is that cartridge body construction (materials, shapes, voids, densities etc.) and magnetics have a big impact on the subjectively perceived frequency response. A measured frequency response that sounds neutral with one body construction may not provide the same subjective response with a different body construction.
Conversely, the same measured frequency response (or very similar) may not sound the same at all if the body construction or magnetics are different.
Case in point - the Delos and Kleos have very similar frequency response measurements, but they sound strikingly different, and that includes the treble range. The Kleos has a very pure and quiet-sounding top end that is kind to worn records, while the Delos sounds more exuberant at the top, and is more likely to reveal that a given LP has seen better days.
So why the sonic differences from such similar FR measurements? First, the magnetics are different on the two - a permalloy armature on the Delos as opposed to a chemically purified iron armature on the Kleos. Second, the Kleos is machined from a harder alloy than the Delos, and adds internal resonance traps that have been strategically placed to prevent the spent mechanical energy (originating from the stylus and cantilever) from being reflected back into the coil region, and funnel that energy into the headshell and tonearm.
As another example of how materials and construction can affect the subjectively perceived sound, normal LPs are mastered on an lacquered disc, while DMM LPs are mastered on a copper disc. This change results in a very different sound for DMM (as compared to traditional lacquer-based LP masters), to such an extent that the choices taken during the mastering processed need to be changed (or at least should be changed) in order to produce acceptable sound quality.
Measurements are very useful, but due to differences in test LPs, LP groove diameter (of the test track), operating temperature, tonearm setup and whatnot, it can be misleading to read too much into the importance or validity of one particular test. My recommendation would be to perform multiple tests in multiple setups, and hope that the average of those multiple tests will provide some objective understanding.
And, there is much more to the sound of a cartridge than what test LPs are designed to measure.
kind regards, jonathan
-
Thanks for 'digging' that Jonathan Carr Post out Neo....
I can't recall having read it in the Thread, but it makes many valid and interesting points... :beer:
I think the MM/MC Thread began degenerating two years ago when Raul 'discovered' digital....after finally admitting that he really preferred MC to MM anyways.... :duh:
His resurfaced belligerence prompted heated arguments which finally led to him being 'moderated'...and so he left. Only to return when his moderation was 'cut' with the new A'Gon Format.
I discovered long ago, that Raul and I hear things quite differently and whilst many on the Forum, thank him for his recommendations.....most of the arms and cartridges I had bought because of Raul's advice, are 'sleeping with the fishes'... :uzi:
There are still many things we need to be grateful for because of the MM/MC Thread that Raul started way back...
The rediscovery of the value of the humble MM cartridge (vintage in particular) is one....but another is the realisation that there is no single 'perfect' cartridge out there. There never has been, and there probably never will be because there are so many things that so many cartridges do slightly differently to others....that only by listening to dozens (or more) can we appreciate the sheer options there are.
That's why I don't have a 'favourite' cartridge per se....but a favourite group of perhaps ten.
And if I were forced to limit myself to one....I would be a miserable turkey.
And that seems to be where the MM/MC Thread seems to have gone a little awry with some now trying to claim the 'title' for the 'best and fairest' rather than the 'latest flavour of the month' which used to be an enjoyable highlight of this once valuable Thread.
Regards
-
Halcro,
I tend to agree with what both you and Neo have stated pertaining to the M/M thread over on that other network. :D Raul's return had welled up feeling that make me wish he would just go away. Some of the ignorant things he comes up with and his arrogance just makes me want to take him by his serape and give him a good slap! But he does get conversations started. Perhaps his abrasiveness is not only what keeps that forum going, but is done so for that very reason?
BTW Neo: I also want to thank you for those Posts from JCarr. That guy should right a book!
Regards,
-
Well, it looks like AT has replaced the 440/120 generator and they're being mysterious about the specs. Here's the deal:
AT-120E & 440MLa - 490mH, 790 DC, 3.2K Imp. AT published specs for AT-120Eb & 440MLb - 610 DC.
What AT cart has 610 ohm DC ? The only one I could find:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/AT5V.html
The 5V is close to the 150MLX. It might be a better motor, but definitely harder to load than the 120/440. The 490mH motor is being phased out. This is virtually the same motor as the 160ML, 155LC, and many more classics.
neo
-
Oh man, can the MM/MI thread degenerate further? Now 32 bit coined a new acronym, TEA - true expert audiophile. I like what Atmasphere said about that, "Raul, IMO/IME as soon as someone tries to set themselves up as an expert in this field, they run the risk of Audiophile Guru Syndrome (AGS), wherein if the knowledge does not emit from their mouths then it must be some form of blasphemy. I think we have all seen this at one point or another. IMO true mastery is the understanding of how little one actually knows."
Is this the new TEA party? Instead of conservative politics it's Audiofool Experts? :roll:
I first encountered 32 bit shortly after he started the MM/MI thread, which I wasn't aware of. He came on VE and declared MM superiority. I said neither was superior, it depended on design. We had a running battle which was truly bizarre. Instead of someone quoting out of context and twisting things around, it was broken English which seemed deliberately imprecise, with unspecified distortions attributed to virtually all MCs.
Fast forward a few years and 32 bit modifies his high gain stage and declares MCs superior. :duh: He did heighten awareness of MMs and he tried lots of carts. Have to give credit for putting it out there, but now it seems played out. I'd like to hear more from Chakster. He has the energy and enthusiasm.
neo
-
Well, it looks like AT has replaced the 440/120 generator and they're being mysterious about the specs. Here's the deal:
AT-120E & 440MLa - 490mH, 790 DC, 3.2K Imp. AT published specs for AT-120Eb & 440MLb - 610 DC.
What AT cart has 610 ohm DC ? The only one I could find:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/AT5V.html
The 5V is close to the 150MLX. It might be a better motor, but definitely harder to load than the 120/440. The 490mH motor is being phased out. This is virtually the same motor as the 160ML, 155LC, and many more classics.
neo
Now it seems this announcement was in error. 2 AT European sites have the new b models listed wrong. The Japanese and US sites still say the 490mH generator lives on.
neo
-
I have a theoretical question for the high compliance MM experts. I have a Towhshend Rock mk3 TT with a Rega rb300. This table incorporates a damping trough at the headshell. The damping assembly weighs ~3 grams. Adding this to the mass of the Rega brings it into the 15 gram region. I understand that this arm is ideally too heavy for some of the high compliance MM's. My question is will the headshell damping widen the range of potential compatibility or would I be better off ditching the outrigger in favor of a lighter arm? I am planning on finding a nice arm more suitable but for now, until my daughter graduates college, I'll need to make the Rega work. Thanks for any help with this.
-
Hello Smctigue,
Welcome to vinyl circle, home of the obsessive vinylphile.
There are a lot of aspects to that question and much depends on the particulars and the physical set up. While many consider a resonant frequency outside of the recommended zone an anathema, there are instances where it can sound fine. In this case you're talking about a prospective situation where the resonant frequency might go below the recommended range. Normally (w/o damping), if it stays above the warp region, and the set up is stable, and you have high quality arm bearings it might be okay.
What it boils down to: is the perspective cart better on a damped 15g or undamped 12g Rega 300 ?
One thing you didn't mention, what carts are you talking about? There's a big difference between modern hi cu carts and those of yesteryear. Some vintage carts were 50cu. Today, about the highest they go is 22cu.
I think this might be an important aspect. While the RB300 is a good budget arm, it doesn't have the bearings of a top arm. What have you used on the arm till now?
neo
-
Thanks Neo, I have three cartridges on the way:
AT20afl
Z-1s w/SAS
A&S P77 w/SAS
The cartridges I've run over the years are:
Benz Glider
Shelter 501 (with added mass)
Dyna 17D3
Denon 103 (with added mass)
-
Smctigue, I like your moniker. It seems to roll off the tongue.
Would that be an AT20SLa ? If it's an AT 20 series it doesn't matter, they're all slightly less compliant than a 150MLX or 440.
It tracks max 1.75g. I think it would be good either way, probably better with the damping.
The other two are a little trickier to guess. The SAS stylus is more compliant, but I don't know how much more. Max VTF is 1.5g and compliance is 20 - 25cu? I have no problem with a SAS on an 11g arm and it worked on one of approx. 16g, which leads me to believe they will be fine without the damper. I suspect they will be just as good, perhaps better, with the damper.
Is the paddle easily removed from the headshell? If so, you tell us. You must have had this set up for awhile so I guess you know the importance of the right amount of damping. Can you vary the surface area of the paddle? Do you ever change fluid viscosity?
Regards,
neo
-
AT20afl
Z-1s w/SAS
A&S P77 w/SAS
Nice selection of MM cartridges sm...... :D
-
Nice selection of MM cartridges sm...... :D
Thanks Halcro, deciding on the P77 & the Z1 was largely due to the experiences that you shared in the epic Raul thread. The AT20SLa arrived today. I installed it with the damping outrigger. Breaking it in now, first impressions are quite positive. I really didn't know what to expect having not heard an MM in thirty years and never a higher end model. Frankly, I am a bit blown away by what I am hearing. More to follow.
-
I actually didn't like the AT20ss (Limited Edition) when I bought one. It was strident and quite brittle on top with little midrange warmth or bass to compensate....but maybe I just had a bad sample :scratch:
The other two cartridges you are expecting, are two of my favourites..... :thumb:
Waiting to hear your thoughts...
Good luck
-
I think it's easy to get an erroneous impression of a cart model, especially a vintage sample. The AT 15/20 series are old round plugs. The round plugs were phased out in the early/mid '80s. Any sample will be 30+ yrs. old.
As long as the suspension and stylus are good (no small thing), age does not disqualify from "proper" performance, but it becomes more likely the coils are damaged. Jonathan Carr told us that laminated coils are more likely to be damaged. A TOTL AT is likely to have them.
How do coils get damaged? Accidently dropped on a hard floor is one way. The cart might still produce sound, but..... Sometimes people get frustrated and throw stuff across the room. A cart that still works, but suffered abuse or doesn't sound right, is likely to be sold.
That Signet MR5.0ML I bought is a good example. The 490mH generator sounds bad. Luckily, there's still life in the stylus and that's what I bought it for.
neo
-
I actually didn't like the AT20ss (Limited Edition) when I bought one. It was strident and quite brittle on top with little midrange warmth or bass to compensate....but maybe I just had a bad sample :scratch:
The other two cartridges you are expecting, are two of my favourites..... :thumb:
Waiting to hear your thoughts...
Good luck
I have no issue with the highs or bass with my sample (NOS) but I do agree regarding the midrange. A bit lean for me. The P77 arrives today, I'll let you kmow how it goes with it.
-
I think it's easy to get an erroneous impression of a cart model, especially a vintage sample. The AT 15/20 series are old round plugs. The round plugs were phased out in the early/mid '80s. Any sample will be 30+ yrs. old.
As long as the suspension and stylus are good (no small thing), age does not disqualify from "proper" performance, but it becomes more likely the coils are damaged. Jonathan Carr told us that laminated coils are more likely to be damaged. A TOTL AT is likely to have them.
How do coils get damaged? Accidently dropped on a hard floor is one way. The cart might still produce sound, but..... Sometimes people get frustrated and throw stuff across the room. A cart that still works, but suffered abuse or doesn't sound right, is likely to be sold.
That Signet MR5.0ML I bought is a good example. The 490mH generator sounds bad. Luckily, there's still life in the stylus and that's what I bought it for.
neo
A valuable point to remember Neo....
However.....taken to its extreme, there would be no 'poor' cartridges. Only good ones and damaged ones.. :duh:
-
Not sure if we talked about this on this forum - UNIDIN alignment is a legit alternate alignment. Nulls - 66.3, 112.5mm
Here are more conventional nulls:
Stevenson - 60.325, 117.42mm
Baerwald - 66.0, 117.42mm
Loefgren(B) - 70.3, 116.6mm
You can read something about this in Stereophile or Analog Planet and see the alignment error curves. It looks pretty good. I was playing with the numbers and what you won't read is that the alignment is nearly identical to Loefgren, but moved inward about 5mm. The distance between Loefgren nulls is 46.3mm. UNIDIN is 46.2mm.
Nice to get away from Agon. What'shisname is really a block head. Guess every forum has one.
neo
-
I like the new avatar Neo... :D
I have had Dietrich's UniProtractor for four years now and for every arm I have had (maybe 10-12).....there is a snap-in template which is aligned for Unidin.
My Dynavector DV-507/II is the only arm where I use Dynavector's jig (which I suspect is Stevenson alignment).
The adjustment of the FR-64s to 231.5mm P to S from the nominal 230mm I don't think is necessarily related to this alignment. It's just that Dietrich Brakmeier believes it sounds better at that slightly greater distance.
As for the Unidin alignment.....I have no complaints but then I have my suspicions about the claims some have made about hearing VAST differences between the various alignments.
I do not hear such differences and I have no problems with inner groove distortions....
-
In case you didn't recognize her with the er, hair that way, the new avatar is Scarlett Johansson. I'd rather listen to those old jazz guys, and look at something pleasing in a different way.
According to VE the nulls for the 507 II are 60.1 and 116.6mm. That puts the inner null next to Stevenson at the lead out, and the outer null is Loefgren. This should optimize the middle and end of the record.
Hey Smctigue,
Get a chance to check out more carts? We'd be interested in your thoughts.
neo
-
In case you didn't recognize her with the er, hair that way, the new avatar is Scarlett Johansson. I'd rather listen to those old jazz guys, and look at something pleasing in a different way.
Like what you've done with the place :thumb:
-
I thought some eye candy might boost morale, but I'm not sure. Have you noticed this circle seems to be dying?
In the last digital vs analog war I had about 4 or 5 posts deleted by the thought police. I should have ignored the thread, but how do you ignore something so prominent? They come out of the woodwork to piss on our parade. After finally succeeding in having the thread removed, they clean it up and reinstate it. I got in a couple of good shots especially with FullRangeMan, but he's a member of the thought police..... I followed their rules with that one, but it was deleted anyway. Did you notice, the thought police were entirely digital supporters?
Definition of a volunteer - 1) a politically correct Nazi with a little authority 2) One who volunteers because that's what they're worth 3) A jerk with a blister on his hand who tries to rub up against you.
By the time Sunnydazed attacked in your thread, I guess I was burned out. How do you respond when you're quoted out of context, claimed to have said things you didn't say, and characterized by embarrassing names? Maybe Scarlett looks too good for this place. I'm sick of it.
Back to biz.
neo
-
Careful. You're attracting attention.
(http://31.media.tumblr.com/ecdb04d0453d39d22ddc229ddc1cbc16/tumblr_inline_muu3612czZ1rw6eeb.gif)
-
Careful. You're attracting attention.
(http://31.media.tumblr.com/ecdb04d0453d39d22ddc229ddc1cbc16/tumblr_inline_muu3612czZ1rw6eeb.gif)
:rotflmao:
-
Holy sirens of Ulysses, Batman. I feel a strange attraction to that vortex. Only know of one way to resist.
neo
-
In case you didn't recognize her with the er, hair that way, the new avatar is Scarlett Johansson. I'd rather listen to those old jazz guys, and look at something pleasing in a different way.
She isn't aging well.
-
Jeff,
You're a little late. I had to substitute Thelonious Monk to keep us from being lured to our demise. If you're being chased by the boogie man, I suggest Rahsand Roland Kirk.
Now that we're on the next page I think it's safe for another shot of Scarlett.
neo
-
Good evening, Mr. and Mrs. America from border to border and coast to coast and all the ships at sea. News Flash!!
Excel corp. long dormant in the phono cart biz, is once again making carts.
http://www.dagogo.com/hana-cartridges-of-japan-now-available-in-the-u-s
https://www.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-hana-mc-cartridge-from-japan-great-performance-for-an-affordable-price-2016-02-14-analog-92307-apple-valley-ca
User reports are positive, indicating they blow away the competition at their respective price points. Stay tuned to this channel for breaking news.
neo
-
Good evening, Mr. and Mrs. America from border to border and coast to coast and all the ships at sea. News Flash!!
Excel corp. long dormant in the phono cart biz, is once again making carts.
http://www.dagogo.com/hana-cartridges-of-japan-now-available-in-the-u-s
https://www.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-hana-mc-cartridge-from-japan-great-performance-for-an-affordable-price-2016-02-14-analog-92307-apple-valley-ca
User reports are positive, indicating they blow away the competition at their respective price points. Stay tuned to this channel for breaking news.
neo
Thank you for posting this. I've been researching a better cart and saw these, but was skeptical. Record cleaner and supplies are first on my list, but a well performing inexpensive MC is exciting. Glad to see you posting in the circle again. :)
-
By the time Sunnydazed attacked in your thread, I guess I was burned out. How do you respond when you're quoted out of context, claimed to have said things you didn't say, and characterized by embarrassing names?
neo
GRRRRRRRRR.........RUFF RUFF........BARK BARK!!!
Sic 'em boy!
I guess one could respond by being a whiney lil skirt? :roll:
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
-
.......would I be better off ditching the outrigger in favor of a lighter arm? ..........
My advise is.......
Don't do this! I've owned my Rock 3 for almost 20 yrs. I've tried quite a few arms and carts on it. The front end dampending, along with the built-in seismic sink, are the main elements that make it sound sooooo good. The silicone trough will elevate the performance of a pedestrian arm such that it performs beyond its price point.
On the Rock I have used what I guess are considered medium mass arms: Rega 300B, SME V, Linn Ittok, Linn Basic, Kuzma Stogi, Kuzma Stogi Reference, Clearaudio Satisfy. Combined with mostly MM carts in the medium compliance range: CA Virtuoso Wood, CA Maestro, Cartridge Man Music Maker mk3, SAE 1000e. Also used some MC: Dyna 17d2 mk2 and Dyna 20x (both LO and HO). Every combination I tried has worked just fine.
-
Thank you for posting this. I've been researching a better cart and saw these, but was skeptical. Record cleaner and supplies are first on my list, but a well performing inexpensive MC is exciting. Glad to see you posting in the circle again. :)
GB,
Maybe this can help you get there sooner. User reports say this is every bit as good as a 16.5.
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649240538-canadian-made-rcm-3d-printed-parts-you-supply-the-shopvac/
The wand will accommodate 2 sizes of vac hose and has a pressure release valve to adjust suction.
neo
-
My advise is.......
Don't do this! I've owned my Rock 3 for almost 20 yrs. I've tried quite a few arms and carts on it. The front end dampending, along with the built-in seismic sink, are the main elements that make it sound so so good. The silicone trough will elevate the performance of a pedestrian arm such that it performs beyond its price point.
On the Rock I have used what I guess are considered medium mass arms: Rega 300B, SME V, Linn Ittok, Linn Basic, Kuzma Stogi, Kuzma Stogi Reference, Clearaudio Satisfy. Combined with mostly MM carts in the medium compliance range: CA Virtuoso Wood, CA Maestro, Cartridge Man Music Maker mk3, SAE 1000e. Also used some MC: Dyna 17d2 mk2 and Dyna 20x (both LO and HO). Every combination I tried has worked just fine.
Leave it to Moron Man to oversimplify a complex question. Smctigue is not able to replace the RB300 at this time, but to say damping will make the Rega arm perform like a much better one, is stupid. It's all right not to be intelligent, but maybe you could learn something instead of spouting 20 years of experience and still without a clue?
Every cart you named is med or low compliance. Not sure about Music Maker, that's a damped Grado - originally 20cu. Will damping improve the bearings on the lowly RB300 ? Of course not, but less offensive. Mediocrity is not the goal.
I can't stop you from posting your dumb shit on this thread. First, try to put your thinking cap on. I imagine it would be hard for someone of your intelligence, but it might save us both some time and trouble.
neo
-
Leave it to Moron Man to oversimplify a complex question. Smctigue is not able to replace the RB300 at this time, but to say damping will make the Rega arm perform like a much better one, is stupid. It's all right not to be intelligent, but maybe you could learn something instead of spouting 20 years of experience and still without a clue?
Every cart you named is med or low compliance. Not sure about Music Maker, that's a damped Grado - originally 20cu. Will damping improve the bearings on the lowly RB300 ? Of course not, but less offensive. Mediocrity is not the goal.
I can't stop you from posting your dumb shit on this thread. First, try to put your thinking cap on. I imagine it would be hard for someone of your intelligence, but it might save us both some time and trouble.
neo
Angry much? :roll:
You my friend, are an elitist superior arrogant know it all snob. Been reading your posts for years. Comes across loud and strong.
And yes, in my direct hands on experience the Rock's dampening trough does make every fixed bearing arm sound better. Quite easy to listen both with it and without it in place, and compare.
Perhaps climb outta your vintage cave, remove the blinders, and go listen to it? But I suspect you prefer the pompous pontificating approach that condescends and berates.
And if you weren't so anger frenzied you'd see my response was quite direct and relevant to his query. He asked if eliminating the trough is worthwhile. I replied that IMO it's not a good idea. That it's a critical design element, and a main reason the Rock sounds so good. My opinion, and it's one held by many others.
Then in a general way I recounted my arm / cartridge experiences. Maybe give him some other cartridge or arm options. Stuff I know works. Not theory, senor sliderule. That's what these boards are for. You don't control the exchange of ideas, Mr. Nazi.
That you have such a problem with this speaks more to your smallness and mean streak, than says anything about me.
Have a good day.
-
GB,
Maybe this can help you get there sooner. User reports say this is every bit as good as a 16.5.
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649240538-canadian-made-rcm-3d-printed-parts-you-supply-the-shopvac/
The wand will accommodate 2 sizes of vac hose and has a pressure release valve to adjust suction.
neo
I've had one of these for month, now. It came to $125 USD delivered. Works great! Really easy to use.
-
Neo, whats with all the condescending and name calling here?
I see no misinfo and this is just getting damn foolish. We're all entitled to our views.
Really out of line where's the prefect of discipline so liberally used otherwise?
-
Jeff K,
Thanks for the testimonial. I've read nothing but positive things about the RCM. The other bargain machines (vacuum) are KAB and Audio Advisor (Record Doctor?). I like working and vacuuming on the top side of the record so I find this more appealing, although you can get good results with a Nitty Gritty type.
Like the KAB machine you supply the vac. A mini shop vac is around $30. Normally this would be too strong, but with the pressure release valve this looks like a winner.
neo
-
I couldn't find the $12 Stinger vac referred to in the video (Home Depot was sold out, here), but picked up a 1.5 gal. Shop-Vac on Amazon. I could have just used my full-size one, but wanted a dedicated vac.
I wanted top-side cleaning and a full-size platter. I'm using the fluid formula discussed in the "You're Doing it Wrong" thread on AK and getting great results.
-
I tried a DIY cleaner fluid, but I couldn't get the results as with commercial products. We had a couple of threads about that and there might be a sticky. I saw a library of congress archive formula. I think I had trouble finding the right surfactant. There's some problem with Photo Flo. It's hard to remember.
I use 2 cleaners, a regular and an enzyme. I've read good things about Mobil Fidelity fluids, might be worth a try.
I used to have a VPI, now I use a DIY with an old player to support the record. The 1.5hp shop vac is way too powerful and I had to put a bunch of vent holes in the wand. I think I'll get one of these Canadian machines. A new 16.5 is now $650. You can get a decent cart for that.
neo
-
Bacobits,
Prefect of discipline?
Did you see Smctigue's original post? It's on page 65, if you care to look. His plan was to eventually replace the RB300. Sunny was telling him not to, that the damping would improve performance.
This is very bad advise IMO. Part of the original question included the use of high compliance vintage MMs. Hi cu vintage carts go as high as 50cu - more inappropriate info. I suspect the best thing for that arm is send it to Audiomods, or sell it.
There's a little history here and Sunny has called me names many times. This is the first time I responded in kind.
Any member is free to come on this thread and say what they want. That includes me.
neo
-
Bacobits,
Prefect of discipline?
Did you see Smctigue's original post? It's on page 65, if you care to look. His plan was to eventually replace the RB300. Sunny was telling him not to, that the damping would improve performance.
There's a little history here and Sunny has called me names many times. This is the first time I responded in kind.
Any member is free to come on this thread and say what they want. That includes me.
neo
I said no such thing about keeping the Rega! You misunderstood me. To be fair, I see the confusion, but it's not what I meant.
I definitely did not tell him to keep the Rega. I would never presume to do that. My Rock came with same exact Rega arm, and I changed it out rather quickly. So why would I tell another to keep it?! Just another case of you not knowing the facts Neo, and talking outta your ass.
He asked if he'd be "better off ditching the outrigger". This is what I replied to, not the part about changing to a lighter arm. If you ditch the outrigger, then you ditch the dampening trough.......a critical element of the design. I simply meant he should keep using the trough, regardless of the arm.
This view is based on my almost 20 yrs experience w the Rock 3 -- using it with and without the trough -- and rotating thru several arms...including the Rega it came with.
Then, as a general aside, I noted that it improves just about any arm, especially budget ones. I was not implying he should keep Rega. Your interpretation only. BTW, anyone experienced with the Rock trough system will attest the same. As will Max Towhshend the designer. As do all the reviewers. If you care to look and be informed, you will find unanimous praise of the current Rock 7, and that it performs waaaaay beyond its price point. The front end dampening system is one of the main reasons.
Also, just as an aside and a testament to supreme owner satisfaction, the 7 virtually never comes up FS used. I know because for several years I've been targeting it for purchase. I've only seen one, and it got snatched up quickly. And I know for a fact they are out there. A local buddy is childhood friends w/ Dan Meinwald (the importer) and Dan says he sells many 7's.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and chalk it up to a simple misunderstanding. But it's clear you have some bug up your ass about me. If you didn't maybe you'd not be so quick to play gotcha, and be less eager to jump down my throat and criticize me for what you think I'm saying.
As far as personal attacks.......
I had put our previous dustup behind us, but you just had to go on the offensive again. Unprovoked, out of the blue, in a completely different thread. Your exact words earlier in referring to me, my opinions, and my comments:
Moron Man
stupid
not intelligent
without a clue
I post dumb shit
hard for someone w/ my low IQ to put a thinking cap on
And your tone was quite arrogant, sarcastic and snide. Especially the last one.
Time to give it a rest Neo. I know you just have to be the absolute authority on all things vinyl, and be right all the time, but you are really showing yourself in a bad light here -- petty, vindictive, and very unfair.
-
I think I had trouble finding the right surfactant.
I believe you're talking about a de-ionized detergent. Triton X-100 and Tergitol are available on ebay. The formula they are discussing is 0.5% Triton, and 5% ipa in distilled water. They also talk of adding a quat (???) to keep it from spoiling, but I haven't gotten into that. I just make a small batch at a time. Since you dilute the X-100 at 200 to 1, it'll last a loooong time.
A couple of the posters are chemical engineers and much of the discussion is over my head, but my records come out shiny and static-free.
-
As far as personal attacks.......
I had put our previous dustup behind us, but you just had to go on the offensive again. Unprovoked. Your exact words earlier in referring to me, my opinions, and my comments:
Moron Man
stupid
not intelligent
without a clue
I post dumb shit
hard for someone w/ my low IQ to put a thinking cap on
And your tone was really really arrogant, sarcastic and snide. Especially the last one.
Time to give it a rest Neo. I know you just have to be the absolute authority on all things vinyl, and be right all the time, but it's not becoming. You just make yourself seem petty and vindictive. And quite frankly, very unfair.
This thread has been running for years. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall your posting here before yesterday. What was your first post yesterday, something about a whiney lil skirt? Yet you say "Unprovoked".
The other descriptions like Moron Man happened after that, but in all honesty seem more like statements of fact. Truth is, I don't think you're too bright. Nothing to be ashamed of, but you have a nasty streak. You like to hit people when they're down, make fun of them, and make your point at someone else's expense. I try not to do that (digital alien threads excepted), and I held back on Evan's thread.
I'm the absolute authority on nothing, and I never claimed to be one. I've been wrong many times. One of the advantages of a forum is people have expertise in different things. If I misinterpreted your post I apologize, but I think the comments are apt.
It's ironic that you characterize me as elitist. My main specialty was getting mid fi equipment to sound like high end. In order to do that, you need to be familiar with high end sound.
Look, we don't like each other, agreed? At least I don't like you and by your comments the feeling is mutual. Wouldn't avoidance be the best policy?
neo
-
This thread has been running for years. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall your posting here before yesterday.
Yep. Is that a problem? Should I have requested your permission before posting?
What was your first post yesterday, something about a whiney lil skirt? Yet you say "Unprovoked".
Post #1296: You mentioned me, out of the blue, for no reason whatsoever. Said I did things I didn't do. Just to get in a dig for some perceived/imagined slights.......that BTW, happened months ago, on a different thread! Retribution. Attack. Because that's what you do. Gotta get in the last word. Can't just drop it, like I did. So yes, unprovoked.
Post #1304: Joking with you.....I implied you were coming off like a "whiney lil skirt". Because you were! (PS and FYI: all the laughing emoticons denote joke status). I was just "Taking the piss" as the British lads like to say. (Google it if you need enlightenment). You'd never survive there with your thin skin and MIA sense of humor. I bet you're a blast at cocktail parties.
Then you did your usual -- got all nasty, sarcastic and snide with your insults about my low IQ, stupidity, etc.
The other descriptions like Moron Man happened after that, but in all honesty seem more like statements of fact. Truth is, I don't think you're too bright.
I've clearly shown where you were mistaken. And I was gracious enough to chalk it up to a misunderstanding. Hey pal, you made the mistake not me! Yet you double down and call me stupid again?! You're a real class act.
Nothing to be ashamed of, but you have a nasty streak. You like to hit people when they're down, make fun of them, and make your point at someone else's expense. I try not to do that (digital alien threads excepted), and I held back on Evan's thread.
Show me where I did this.
Your exact words in Post #1296:
Definition of a volunteer - 1) a politically correct Nazi with a little authority 2) One who volunteers because that's what they're worth 3) A jerk with a blister on his hand who tries to rub up against you.
My friend, you have some cajones grandes to say I'm the one with a nasty streak, makes fun of people, and makes my point at someone else's expense!! :roll: Gimme some of your drugs, I too would like to escape from reality! :smoke: :lol:
And there are several examples of you getting just as nasty and insulting on Evan's thread.
If I misinterpreted your post I apologize, but I think the comments are apt.
Nice apology, pal. If??!! You definitely did, and I clearly explained it to you. Inability to proffer sincere apology when proven wrong = more classlessness and shows weak character. Continuing to call me stupid, when you and noone else acted stupidly, is just idiotic.
-
:duh:
:nono:
:flame:
:deadhorse:
:thumbdown:
-
Sorry man. You're right. But the guy lies and attacks me like that, I'm gonna say my piece and set the record straight.
I've said what I needed to. Cease and desist time. Unless he lies and attacks again!
:lol:
-
Chill dudes.
Take an hour break before writing something off your emotion. You guys have been good ACers for a long time. I am sure it's miscommunication somewhere.
Peace.
-
GB,
Maybe this can help you get there sooner. User reports say this is every bit as good as a 16.5.
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649240538-canadian-made-rcm-3d-printed-parts-you-supply-the-shopvac/
The wand will accommodate 2 sizes of vac hose and has a pressure release valve to adjust suction.
neo
YOU!!! You just had to push me over the edge. :nono: :lol: Well after watching a video or two I have ordered one too. It was tough to choose between this and the Record Doctor, but I like the fact that I can easily replace the vacuum if it dies. Now I am ordering supplies to make the DIY cleaning solution on AK. I will watch my step on the "Audio slide" around you. :P
-
:peek:
YOU!!! You just had to push me over the edge. :nono: :lol: Well after watching a video or two I have ordered one too. It was tough to choose between this and the Record Doctor, but I like the fact that I can easily replace the vacuum if it dies. Now I am ordering supplies to make the DIY cleaning solution on AK. I will watch my step on the "Audio slide" around you. :P
Guilty as charged. Let us know how it works out.
neo
-
The fallacy of quoting out of context:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoting_out_of_context
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/quotcont.html
"To quote out of context is to remove a passage from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its meaning. The context in which a passage occurs always contributes to its meaning, and the shorter the passage the larger the contribution. For this reason, the quoter must always be careful to quote enough of the context not to misrepresent the meaning of the quote. Of course, in some sense, all quotation is out of context, but by a "contextomy", I refer only to those quotes whose meaning is changed by a loss of context. The fallacy of quoting out of context is committed when a contextomy is offered as evidence in an argument."
I see this being done frequently on these forums, not just here, all of them. Contextomy, or quote mining, is common practice.
neo
-
Jico SAS discontinued:
http://www.jico-stylus.com/announcement_sas.php
"We endeavor to refine the original design and bring you the next generation of Super Analogue Stylus as soon as possible. Your continued patronage is much appreciated as we undergo this product transition."
neo
-
In case you didn't recognize her with the er, hair that way, the new avatar is Scarlett Johansson. I'd rather listen to those old jazz guys, and look at something pleasing in a different way.
According to VE the nulls for the 507 II are 60.1 and 116.6mm. That puts the inner null next to Stevenson at the lead out, and the outer null is Loefgren. This should optimize the middle and end of the record.
Hey Smctigue,
Get a chance to check out more carts? We'd be interested in your thoughts.
neo
Hi neobop, yes, I have tried the M20FL, Z1S-SAS and P77-SAS. Unfortunately the SAS on the P77 is shot. The seller told me "no more than 50 hours on it" but I have my doubts.
The M20FL was in the system for 3 weeks. I was loading it at about 100pF (best estimate of phono pre + cables) @ 47k. This cartridge has a natural, organic ease about it that I really like. I love the overall tone and the highs are really sweet and extended. I would like a bit more midrange presence, I'll play with loading to see if I can improve that.
The Z1-SAS is a completely different animal. I started out at the same loading and felt the lower midrange upper bass was thick but the speed and dynamics are were just amazing. My Joule Electra OPS1 has an arrangement on the MC input that allows me to make up loading plugs. It's a nice arrangement that I believe I'll modify to bring over to the MM input. That way I can play with both capacitance and resistance if necessary. In the meantime I soldered a 150pF cap across the inputs of the MM side to get an idea of the effect. I found it to be quite positive as it has removed the upper bass/lower mid bump that was creeping into the mids. This is fun cartridge! I listened to the AP 45 of Art Pepper Meets the Rhythm Section the other night. I just sat there and laughed at the speed and impact of every snare strike, just incredible. Cymbals very extended and sweet, great air. Nice sweet midrange tone. DEEP bass but tuneful and tight. I haven't decided yet if the cartridge is overdoing the dynamics or if is just conveying what's in the groove. Maybe I'll decide I don't care as it's so damn fun and alive, we'll see.
I would like to put the M20FL back in with the new loading to hear the effect. I really do have a sweet spot for that cart. Next I need to find a nice arm (after my daughter graduates college!).
-
Hi Smctigue,
In the old days I used to go through carts like they were expendable items. Of all the carts I got rid of, beside the Signet TK10ML II, the one I regret selling is the M20FL Super. I agree with your assessment about the sound. The high end is sweet and natural, but getting the rest to fit in is tricky. I forget the inductance, but it's high.
With MMs I start out at 47K and adjust from there. The original version of the cart came with caps attached to the back of the cart. These were either 300 or 400pF depending on model. Considering "standard" preamp capacitance in the old days was 225pF, the total is mind boggling. Because our version of the cart came w/o caps I figured not as much was needed and used as little as possible to tune it. At 47K the mids seemed like they were coming from across the street. I took it up to about 53K and 350/375pF total. I don't think you can get away with much less capacitance, but not sure at 100K. Apparently the cart has severe treble droop that extends down to the midrange. I usually like faster carts like the JVC, but the musicality, the relaxed and natural sound of the Ortofon is seductive.
I don't know the best course of action for the P77. Jico is supposed to come out with a new SAS. :dunno: Maybe Halcro can make a suggestion.
neo
-
Thanks for that neo, I'll try that loading and report back. As for the P77, no big deal, it's a "nice to have" at this point. I have the bases pretty well covered with the JVC and the Orto. It's funny, I usually gravitate towards the dynamic carts as well but I definitely miss the Orto when it's not in the system.
-
My advise is.......
Don't do this! I've owned my Rock 3 for almost 20 yrs. I've tried quite a few arms and carts on it. The front end dampending, along with the built-in seismic sink, are the main elements that make it sound sooooo good. The silicone trough will elevate the performance of a pedestrian arm such that it performs beyond its price point.
On the Rock I have used what I guess are considered medium mass arms: Rega 300B, SME V, Linn Ittok, Linn Basic, Kuzma Stogi, Kuzma Stogi Reference, Clearaudio Satisfy. Combined with mostly MM carts in the medium compliance range: CA Virtuoso Wood, CA Maestro, Cartridge Man Music Maker mk3, SAE 1000e. Also used some MC: Dyna 17d2 mk2 and Dyna 20x (both LO and HO). Every combination I tried has worked just fine.
I bought my Rock in '95. It's been my one and only table since. I've never run it without the outrigger in place. Not using never really crossed my mind until I starting playing with these vintage MM's. I have been thinking about a much lighter solution to the Townshend outrigger that should accomplish the same thing without adding 5 grams to the arm.
-
I bought my Rock in '95. It's been my one and only table since. I've never run it without the outrigger in place. Not using never really crossed my mind until I starting playing with these vintage MM's. I have been thinking about a much lighter solution to the Townshend outrigger that should accomplish the same thing without adding 5 grams to the arm.
Being so experienced with the Rock I'm sure you already know this, but it's quite easy to determine what the front end dampening actually brings to the table. No changes required. In your current setup, simply play an LP with and without the trough, by just pivoting it away. Very quick and easy A/B.
I know this doesn't exactly address what you are trying to do -- that is, combine a highish compliance cart with a lighter more suitable arm than your current Rega -- but I'm a little confused about your earlier question. Why do you think you need to "ditch the dampening trough" to combine a high compliance cart with a light arm? My understanding is the trough can be used with any non-unipivot arm / cartridge combo, so long as the combo is simpatico from a RF perspective. Am I missing something? :scratch:
-
My original question only applies to my current arm. Do the damping benefits of adding the 5 gram outrigger to the arm outweigh the pitfalls of running a 25cu cart on a 17 gram arm? My tests have shown me that 17 grams is just too much for the carts that I am testing, they sound sluggish. The arm without the outrigger sounds much better but I think its more a question of mass then the effectiveness of the damping. Now, if I put the outrigger on a 7 gram arm I'll be in good shape.
-
My original question only applies to my current arm. Do the damping benefits of adding the 5 gram outrigger to the arm outweigh the pitfalls of running a 25cu cart on a 17 gram arm? My tests have shown me that 17 grams is just too much for the carts that I am testing, they sound sluggish. The arm without the outrigger sounds much better but I think its more a question of mass then the effectiveness of the damping. Now, if I put the outrigger on a 7 gram arm I'll be in good shape.
OK, so your own ears have answered that question. I don't believe it's the dampening that's hurting things. As you've correctly surmised, I think the cart is just a bad match with the Rega arm made heavier w/ outrigger hardware. Removing the outrigger lightens the arm, and makes for a better match.
So the vintage cart on Rega is better without the trough, but is it better than your other carts with the trough?
I've seen your list (Benz, Dyna, Shelter). Some really nice ones there that should sound great on Rega + trough (unless there is some cart / arm synergy or matching issue I'm unware of).
But if IIRC, aren't they are all MC? Maybe you like the vintage MM so much not because it's vintage, but because it's MM? Just a thought. Many folks prefer MM. Have you tried a more recent MM? Most of the carts I own (see earlier post) are current MM, and on Rega they should all be just fine w/r/t RF. So you'd be able to use dampening trough. I prefer them all (including both Dyna 20x versions) to the Dyna 17d2 MC, which sounds a bit wirey and lean to me.
-
OK, so your own ears have answered that question. I don't believe it's the dampening that's hurting things. As you've correctly surmised, I think the cart is just a bad match with the Rega arm made heavier w/ outrigger hardware. Removing the outrigger lightens the arm, and makes for a better match.
So the vintage cart on Rega is better without the trough, but is it better than your other carts with the trough?
I've seen your list (Benz, Dyna, Shelter). Some really nice ones there that should sound great on Rega + trough (unless there is some cart / arm synergy or matching issue I'm unware of).
But if IIRC, aren't they are all MC? Maybe you like the vintage MM so much not because it's vintage, but because it's MM? Just a thought. Many folks prefer MM. Have you tried a more recent MM? Most of the carts I own (see earlier post) are current MM, and on Rega they should all be just fine w/r/t RF. So you'd be able to use dampening trough. I prefer them all (including both Dyna 20x versions) to the Dyna 17d2 MC, which sounds a bit wirey and lean to me.
I prefer my MM's without the trough to my MC's using the trough, absolutely. I am going to engineer an outrigger that will be under a gram and try it with the MM's that I have. I expect good things. I haven't tried any of the modern MM's yet, not sure I will anytime soon. I am very happy with what I have right now.
I like your description of the 17d2, that is exactly how I would descibe the d3 although it does seem to be a widely acclaimed cartridge.
-
I prefer my MM's without the trough to my MC's using the trough, absolutely. I am going to engineer an outrigger that will be under a gram and try it with the MM's that I have. I expect good things. I haven't tried any of the modern MM's yet, not sure I will anytime soon. I am very happy with what I have right now.
I like your description of the 17d2, that is exactly how I would descibe the d3 although it does seem to be a widely acclaimed cartridge.
Being just a more recent version of same cart, I suspect the d3 sounds very similar to d2. I know it's widely respected, and it's speed, detail retrieval and light airy character shows me why it's admired, but just not exactly to my taste. Based on the raves it gets, I figured I musta just set it up wrong. So I kept installing, and uninstalling. Several times, just to be sure. And each time I heard the same thing. Really nice detail (esp in HF), light breezy and quick, but just not enough meat on the bones for my taste. So outta line with my preferences that it never lasted on my arm more than a day! But I understand why others who have taste in that direction, or maybe a rig balanced towards dark and heavy, would like it.
What are you using now that you like so much?
-
I prefer my MM's without the trough to my MC's using the trough, absolutely. I am going to engineer an outrigger that will be under a gram and try it with the MM's that I have. I expect good things. I haven't tried any of the modern MM's yet, not sure I will anytime soon. I am very happy with what I have right now.
An outrigger under the arm will lower the center of gravity, but won't do anything about the extra mass unless you can shift the weight to the rear or reduce total weight of the paddle device. If you're going to replace the arm soon, it might be a waste of time. If you do make the outrigger it will be interesting reading results.
neo
-
I look at the top of the page (67) and I see this. You've said your peace and I'll say mine.
Sorry man. You're right. But the guy lies and attacks me like that, I'm gonna say my piece and set the record straight.
I've said what I needed to. Cease and desist time. Unless he lies and attacks again!
:lol:
Sunnydaze comments in red:
Reply #1318 on: 16 Feb 2016, 02:59 pm »
Quote from: neobop on 16 Feb 2016, 10:43 am
This thread has been running for years. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't recall your posting here before yesterday.
Yep. Is that a problem? Should I have requested your permission before posting?
This snide remark is based on a quote taken out of context. In no way did I ever imply you needed permission to post here. In fact, in a previous post I said, "Any member is free to come on this thread and say what they want. That includes me."
Quote from: neobop on 16 Feb 2016, 10:43 am
What was your first post yesterday, something about a whiney lil skirt? Yet you say "Unprovoked".
Post #1296: You mentioned me, out of the blue, for no reason whatsoever. Said I did things I didn't do. Just to get in a dig for some perceived/imagined slights.......that BTW, happened months ago, on a different thread! Retribution. Attack. Because that's what you do. Gotta get in the last word. Can't just drop it, like I did. So yes, unprovoked.
Post #1304: Joking with you.....I implied you were coming off like a "whiney lil skirt". Because you were! (PS and FYI: all the laughing emoticons denote joke status). I was just "Taking the piss" as the British lads like to say. (Google it if you need enlightenment). You'd never survive there with your thin skin and MIA sense of humor. I bet you're a blast at cocktail parties.
Then you did your usual -- got all nasty, sarcastic and snide with your insults about my low IQ, stupidity, etc.
First of all, it wasn't out of the blue. I was mentioning the things I think are going wrong in this circle and for me, you're one of those things. There was no escalation of hostilities, just the situation as I see it. It wasn't months ago. Previous to earlier today, the last post there was on the first of this month.
You think laughing emoticons makes a snide remark less nasty? It makes it worse. How could you possibly think, being the butt of a joke lessens the impact? Things like that make me question your intelligence.
Quote from: neobop on 16 Feb 2016, 10:43 am
The other descriptions like Moron Man happened after that, but in all honesty seem more like statements of fact. Truth is, I don't think you're too bright.
I've clearly shown where you were mistaken. And I was gracious enough to chalk it up to a misunderstanding. Hey pal, you made the mistake not me! Yet you double down and call me stupid again?! You're a real class act.
You said, "You misunderstood me. To be fair, I see the confusion, but it's not what I meant." IMO an honest mistake requires no apology, but I apologized for the mistake anyway. You might have thought my "stupid" remarks were based on that mistake. They were not. I've questioned your intelligence ever since the other thread. I didn't say it at that time.
Quote from: neobop on 16 Feb 2016, 10:43 am
Nothing to be ashamed of, but you have a nasty streak. You like to hit people when they're down, make fun of them, and make your point at someone else's expense. I try not to do that (digital alien threads excepted), and I held back on Evan's thread.
Show me where I did this.
Your exact words in Post #1296:
Definition of a volunteer - 1) a politically correct Nazi with a little authority 2) One who volunteers because that's what they're worth 3) A jerk with a blister on his hand who tries to rub up against you.
My friend, you have some cajones grandes to say I'm the one with a nasty streak, makes fun of people, and makes my point at someone else's expense!! :roll: Gimme some of your drugs, I too would like to escape from reality! :smoke: :lol:
And there are several examples of you getting just as nasty and insulting on Evan's thread.
Those remarks about volunteers were satirical, done in the style of a David Letterman top ten list. Anyone who thinks they were serious, is stupid, even if they never heard of David Letterman. Apparently you think your attack "jokes" are exempt from name calling. They are not.
Quote from: neobop on 16 Feb 2016, 10:43 am
If I misinterpreted your post I apologize, but I think the comments are apt.
Nice apology, pal. If??!! You definitely did, and I clearly explained it to you. Inability to proffer sincere apology when proven wrong = more classlessness and shows weak character. Continuing to call me stupid, when you and noone else acted stupidly, is just idiotic.
Already answered. Maybe that apology wasn't good enough for you. I think it was unnecessary. Either you didn't realize the risk of quoting out of context with that style of quote, or you are deliberately deceptive, or both.
At the risk of your response, I'm doing this to clear the air. It's how I honestly see it, with no further escalation intended. On further reflection, maybe the policy of no personal attacks, makes sense. As I said before, I don't want to spend time doing this, but without a "cleansing", the situation is unacceptable to me.
neo
-
Hey all, I'm new here to the site but have been an avid vinyl aficionado for many years, and have owned and used several different types of TTs over the years. What caught my eye was all the talk of the JVC Z1 carts. I Just acquired a JVC JL-F50 TT, for my garage setup, with one of the Z1-S carts on it and what looks to be a brown stylus. I have never seen or heard of one of these carts before. I would like to salvage the cart and just replace the stylus. I was reading through the sixty-some-odd pages of this thread and I see a lot of talk about the Jico and SAS styli that seem to be the best replacement for the cart. I've looked on Jico's site as well as a few others and cannot find the SAS anywhere. Unless of course I am searching under the wrong name. Can anyone steer me in the right direction on where to find a decently priced replacement stylus? I see that several people like the sound of this cart, and I would like to give it a try.
Thanks for any help, and damn glad to be here! :thumb:
-
I look at the top of the page (67) and I see this. You've said your peace and I'll say mine. .......
(blah, blah, blah.......and more nonsense)
Hmmmmmm, I think I made a wrong turn and entered the state mental hospital. :scratch:
Either that or DOUCHEville.
:rotflmao:
-
I getting the last word in.
No more confrontation between the two of you.
We can see the big picture.
You two don't have to try to convince anything.
Petulance at your ages! C'mon.
Any more and I am sending this thread to quarantine.
-
I getting the last word in.
No more confrontation between the two of you.
We can see the big picture.
You two don't have to try to convince anything.
Petulance at your ages! C'mon.
Any more and I am sending this thread to quarantine.
Thank you.
neo
-
Hey all, I'm new here to the site but have been an avid vinyl aficionado for many years, and have owned and used several different types of TTs over the years. What caught my eye was all the talk of the JVC Z1 carts. I Just acquired a JVC JL-F50 TT, for my garage setup, with one of the Z1-S carts on it and what looks to be a brown stylus. I have never seen or heard of one of these carts before. I would like to salvage the cart and just replace the stylus. I was reading through the sixty-some-odd pages of this thread and I see a lot of talk about the Jico and SAS styli that seem to be the best replacement for the cart. I've looked on Jico's site as well as a few others and cannot find the SAS anywhere. Unless of course I am searching under the wrong name. Can anyone steer me in the right direction on where to find a decently priced replacement stylus? I see that several people like the sound of this cart, and I would like to give it a try.
Thanks for any help, and damn glad to be here! :thumb:
Jico just announced that they are discontinuing the SAS, very sad news. They did mention that they are working on a replacement however.
-
Hey all, I'm new here to the site but have been an avid vinyl aficionado for many years, and have owned and used several different types of TTs over the years. What caught my eye was all the talk of the JVC Z1 carts. I Just acquired a JVC JL-F50 TT, for my garage setup, with one of the Z1-S carts on it and what looks to be a brown stylus. I have never seen or heard of one of these carts before. I would like to salvage the cart and just replace the stylus. I was reading through the sixty-some-odd pages of this thread and I see a lot of talk about the Jico and SAS styli that seem to be the best replacement for the cart. I've looked on Jico's site as well as a few others and cannot find the SAS anywhere. Unless of course I am searching under the wrong name. Can anyone steer me in the right direction on where to find a decently priced replacement stylus? I see that several people like the sound of this cart, and I would like to give it a try.
Thanks for any help, and damn glad to be here! :thumb:
Hi Davron94,
Welcome to vinyl circle where no stone is left unturned.
The SAS stylus has been discontinued. It's supposed to be reintroduced, but exactly when is unknown. The Z1 with a Jico elliptical is a decent, musical cart, but doesn't have the speed or finesse as with the SAS. The current selection of Jico Z1 styli are listed under Victor, here:
http://www.jico-stylus.com/index.php?cPath=8&sort=2a&page=2
The shibata looks interesting, but I haven't tried it. My Z1 SAS was $133. I suspect future pricing will be more, but that's a guess.
neo
-
Some people might be interested in this PDF - test reports of 5 current carts. Text is in German, but you should be able to figure out most specs, and the German photos and FR plots are easily translated. :roll:
https://www.fastaudio.com/workspace/media/downloads/pdf-auf-die-spitze-getrieben_stp_04_14_046_054.pdf
neo
-
GB,
Maybe this can help you get there sooner. User reports say this is every bit as good as a 16.5.
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649240538-canadian-made-rcm-3d-printed-parts-you-supply-the-shopvac/
The wand will accommodate 2 sizes of vac hose and has a pressure release valve to adjust suction.
neo
This little unit arrived Wednesday and the seller was great to work with. I had to wait for my MoFi sleeves to show up yesterday and cleaned two records to test DIY solution and the results were outstanding. I wasn't expecting such an amazing improvement. :o Here is a link to the solution I used http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/record-cleaning-youre-doing-it-wrong.689430/. I have more than enough of the Triton X100 if you want to try it.
-
GB,
We tell people about results of cleaning records properly, but until they hear it for themselves it's just a concept. Glad it's working out.
Thanks for the kind offer of some Triton X100. If I start mixing my own I'll be in touch.
Let us know when you're getting ready for that cart upgrade. Maybe we can help figure it out.
Regards,
neo
-
Some people might be interested in this PDF - test reports of 5 current carts. Text is in German, but you should be able to figure out most specs, and the German photos and FR plots are easily translated. :roll:
https://www.fastaudio.com/workspace/media/downloads/pdf-auf-die-spitze-getrieben_stp_04_14_046_054.pdf
neo
Hallo neo,
dies ist ein Test aus der Zeitschrift stereoplay vom April 2014. Insgesamt wurden 12
Tonabnehmer getestet. Fastaudio ist der Lyra-Vertrieb in Deutschland und deshalb ist dieser Test auch auf deren Webseite zu finden.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen - Toni
-
Hi Toni and those reading this,
The other day when I stumbled on the Stereoplay magazine test reports in the link (above), I was late and in a hurry but I wanted to post the link. The PDF is actually tests of a dozen carts up to 6K euros.
Near the end of the PDF is the new Lyra Etna. This cart comes in just under Atlas in their line up and some people say they prefer it.
Some of you might remember Dlaloum's comments about frequency response plots in HFN or tests using their test record and/or software, as being rolled off above 15KHz ? There's no doubt about that and just as those plots look rolled, the Stereoplay plots look bright. If you compare the same cart tested by the different facilities, there is a substantial difference. Without the same sample of a model being tested it's impossible to be exact, but it looks like this difference can be as much as +/- 6 or 7dB. This means that total difference could be as much as 12 or 14dB, but please don't assume this is the case in all instances. I think Stereoplay is more accurate but their test results look brighter in the high end above 10K.
In each test there's a list of specs under the plots. I'm not fluent in German, but Etna tracking ability is tested at 120um !! :o
Holy cannon shots Batman, does it get any better?
neo
-
GB,
We tell people about results of cleaning records properly, but until they hear it for themselves it's just a concept. Glad it's working out.
Thanks for the kind offer of some Triton X100. If I start mixing my own I'll be in touch.
Let us know when you're getting ready for that cart upgrade. Maybe we can help figure it out.
Regards,
neo
I've been using the triton X100 (.5% with 5% IPA in distilled water) for about 4 months now with great results. No Static whatsoever, and gives the records a good deep cleaning. I do a double rinse with distilled water after cleaning also.
-
Hi Davron94,
Welcome to vinyl circle where no stone is left unturned.
The SAS stylus has been discontinued. It's supposed to be reintroduced, but exactly when is unknown. The Z1 with a Jico elliptical is a decent, musical cart, but doesn't have the speed or finesse as with the SAS. The current selection of Jico Z1 styli are listed under Victor, here:
http://www.jico-stylus.com/index.php?cPath=8&sort=2a&page=2
The shibata looks interesting, but I haven't tried it. My Z1 SAS was $133. I suspect future pricing will be more, but that's a guess.
neo
Thanks for the info Neobop! So does this mean that there are no SAS styli left anywhere for the Z1?
-
Hi Davron,
I doubt if you'll be able to find one. Not every stylus store carried SAS, and those like LpGear who had some SAS never carried JVC SAS, and they're sold out of the others.
If you want a decent stylus to get it going, you can get one of those .3 x .7 mil elliptical for < $35 at Turntable Needles or Lp Gear. I had to get my SAS from Jico in Japan. I don't know what else to tell you except what's already posted - the Z1E is an unpretentious musical cart. It has a nice presentation and resolution, but isn't the last word.
No one knows when Jico will offer a new version SAS. They're nude tips on a boron cantilever so it might take Jico a couple of months to get the most popular models in stock. Then they're made in batches according to what's been ordered. I waited 3 weeks. I'd bet they have the new ones for sale by this summer.
neo
-
This is interesting:
I went to FastAudio site (German Lyra) and they have Etna tracking spec at 80um. Abtastfähigkeit: 80 μm That's sensing capability.
https://www.fastaudio.com/produkte/phono/etna/
Go back to the Stereoplay PDF and the spec for all the carts seems optimistic, to put it mildly. Then I copy (by hand) the Stereoplay word used for the spec, "Tiefenabtastfahigkeit", and the translator says I must be kidding. :duh:
Maybe I copied wrong, but there's nothing else I can think of, it could be. So, what's up with this?
It's obviously a tracking spec. Could Lyra be that conservative with their spec? No. My 8 ball says, "No Way Try Again". Looking at the other carts on Stereoplay, could a Clearaudio Concept MM be 100um ? I don't need an 8 ball for that one - subtract at least 20 to 25um from the MM spec. That would put it closer to an Ortofon spec, but still leaves a discrepancy of 10 - 15um. If we use Ortofon as a reference, I'd guess that Etna is more like > 90um.
I think this illustrates the danger of comparing specs and thinking it's an accurate measure, comparatively speaking. Test records and software are not created equal. It could be that tiefenalabastergkeit or whatever it is, means something entirely different. Even if that's the case, it's still funny. :thumb:
http://www.amazon.com/Magic-8-Ball-Mini-Game/dp/B002NXU0AM/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1456755488&sr=8-3&keywords=magic+8+ball
neo
-
I am curious to know what type of loading (total) you guys who are using the Z1/SAS combo have settled on?
-
Hi neo,
Tiefenabtastfähigkeit means horizontal tracking ability of increasing amplitudes
at a low frequency of 300 Hz or 315 Hz.
low=deep=tief
I don't know what kind of test record they use.
Regards Toni
-
Hi Smctigue,
I think everyone is close to 47K around 100 to 250pF total. Sometimes Griff loads at 100K, but I'm not sure if that's with the Z1/SAS. It might be only with a certain preamp, not sure. Halcro went to 55K + 200pF additional with the X1 I believe. Might be 47K with Z1.
I load at 47 or 50K, 150 to 300pF total depending on phono stage. I have one vintage preamp that's 50K/225pF. More modern designs I use 50 to 100pF internal. I tried 53K, but went back to 47K.
Did you get one of these? I thought you had those other 3, 20SLa etc.
neo
-
Hi neo,
Tiefenabtastfähigkeit means horizontal tracking ability of increasing amplitudes
at a low frequency of 300 Hz or 315 Hz.
low=deep=tief
I don't know what kind of test record they use.
Regards Toni
Hi Toni,
That's interesting, thanks for posting. Ortofon tests at 315Hz. I forget what record they use. If Test Factory used 300Hz it could account for the difference in numbers. Lower frequency means longer excursions.
See anything in those reports that interests you ?
neo
-
I think these Stereoplay tests were made at 315 Hz too.
I don't know if Test Factory in Stuttgart still exists.
I stopped reading Stereoplay or Audio 20 years ago and the publishing company changed -
so I guess, they don't have a test laboratory anymore.
I'm a fan of Audio Technica MM carts (but they need the correct capacitance to provide a linear
frequency response between 20Hz - 20kHz)
A quarter of a century ago Robert E. Greene, TAS writer, Mathematics Professor at UCLA and
violinist wrote a TAS article in issue 72 about MMs and MCs which in my opinion is still valid
at present:
http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html (http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html)
-
Hi Smctigue,
I think everyone is close to 47K around 100 to 250pF total. Sometimes Griff loads at 100K, but I'm not sure if that's with the Z1/SAS. It might be only with a certain preamp, not sure. Halcro went to 55K + 200pF additional with the X1 I believe. Might be 47K with Z1.
I load at 47 or 50K, 150 to 300pF total depending on phono stage. I have one vintage preamp that's 50K/225pF. More modern designs I use 50 to 100pF internal. I tried 53K, but went back to 47K.
Did you get one of these? I thought you had those other 3, 20SLa etc.
neo
Neo, thanks for that. Yes, I have one now. Fun cartridge. Sounded a little thick at 47k/150pf total. I upped that to 47k/330pf but I think I over did it. I have a bunch of caps and resistors on the way to play with.
-
I think these Stereoplay tests were made at 315 Hz too.
I don't know if Test Factory in Stuttgart still exists.
I stopped reading Stereoplay or Audio 20 years ago and the publishing company changed -
so I guess, they don't have a test laboratory anymore.
I'm a fan of Audio Technica MM carts (but they need the correct capacitance to provide a linear
frequency response between 20Hz - 20kHz)
A quarter of a century ago Robert E. Greene, TAS writer, Mathematics Professor at UCLA and
violinist wrote a TAS article in issue 72 about MMs and MCs which in my opinion is still valid
at present:
http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html (http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html)
Toni,
If the Stereoplay tests were also at 315Hz, it illustrates the danger of comparing specs even more, but with that in mind this could easily turn into a comedy routine about fallacies of assumption. Sometimes it isn't funny.
I didn't know of the Test Factory's existence until you mentioned it a couple of years ago, possibly on the Atlas thread?
I was a regular reader of Audio magazine. A few months into the year I would have parts of the annual equipment directory memorized. I think they stopped publishing around the turn of the century. I never had much respect for Stereophile or TAS, but for work I read some of each. They were so corrupt it turned my stomach, they probably still are. HP tried to see how much free high end equipment he could get and Stereofool was flat out dishonest. Reviews were bought and sold and big advertisers got a nice return for their investment. I remember around '88 Stereofool announced that reviewers were no longer allowed to accept gifts of their review samples, like that would address the problem. :duh: Smoke and eyewash - set off some smoke canisters so the helicopter might land safely.
I retired from being a turntable guy in '90. I cofounded American Hybrid Technology with Dan Fanny, but we made no money at first and I needed to eat, so he bought me out. I remember his telling me about going to Sea Cliff and blowing their minds with the AHT Non-Signature. He later said it was the only 5 star component for 3 years running, or something like that. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving person/component and I seriously doubt if there was any financial incentive involved. When I first heard the phono stage I was still working retail and nothing else came close - fastest, cleanest, most neutral stage East or West of the Pecos. Made the Vendetta sound like a receiver from the '70s in comparison. I kid you not. When we measured the S/N it was off the chart. It exceeded the test equipment, so Danny put it at 98dB @ any gain. Max gain is 67dB w/supplied resistors.
Later, some clown at Stereofool got ahold of a stripped down version to debunk the mystique. The Non-Signature had Teflon boards with silver traces, mil spec chips (still current), regulators on the regulators, encapsulated space shuttle Vishay resistors ($60/ea. wholesale), a separate power supply which could power a 200w amp, and multiple output caps. Every part was the absolute best. The stripped down version had none of that and it was said to be a matter of taste as to preference with a favorite darling. It might have been a CAT.
Herron Audio wanted to buy the rights to the design when Danny got out of the biz. He sold it to Walker and a new version is around $20K last I looked.
Of course there were bright spots with the mags, and thanks for the link to the classic article highlighting the 881 and 170ML. Some of the writers for each mag were excellent. I used to enjoy Anthony Cordesman's stuff, but not as much as his strategic defense analysis.
neo
-
Around '95 I bought an AHT Phono unit from a "reviewer". It wasn't the Non - Sig but the less expensive model. I remember it being VERY good. I sold it to finance the purchase of a Marantz 7C. I still regret selling it. I called Dan about a problem with the unit, he told me to come down to Jersey and he would take a look. He did the repair while I waited. Nice guy.
-
Neo, thanks for that. Yes, I have one now. Fun cartridge. Sounded a little thick at 47k/150pf total. I upped that to 47k/330pf but I think I over did it. I have a bunch of caps and resistors on the way to play with.
I find the Z1/SAS rather height sensitive, and this seems consistent with all the microridge tipped carts I've tried. For loading, I think you'll find that increasing resistance value, if possible, will better address that situation. Adding capacitance will lower high frequency resonance and is used to augment the midrange/treble region and fix treble droop. The X1/Z1 shibata were 4-ch carts and probably need to see lower capacitance as part of the design.
Like Toni said about an AT - wants to see < 200pF total for flat response. Higher C will make it sound brighter.
I usually change resistance value +/- about 10% of the total value and take it from there. Whatever works.
neo
-
Around '95 I bought an AHT Phono unit from a "reviewer". It wasn't the Non - Sig but the less expensive model. I remember it being VERY good. I sold it to finance the purchase of a Marantz 7C. I still regret selling it. I called Dan about a problem with the unit, he told me to come down to Jersey and he would take a look. He did the repair while I waited. Nice guy.
Small World? There was a review in 6 Moons. I think he might of know Dan, but I'm not sure about that. If you got it around '95 and had it fixed sometime later, did Dan still have the Goldmund table and direct drive electrostatics? You might have been graced with the presence of the beautiful damsel Donna, girlfriend extraordinaire. We worked out of Dan's house. I used to commute and would arrive unexpectedly, and sometimes it was obvious they had been doing what couples do. Ah, le parfum d'une femme e'tait enivrant.
The Goldmund is a great table, but the arm isn't quite as great. Dan had a Grasshopper and it was still pretty damn good. The DD 2 + 2's had potential, but Dan didn't have the room and it was really nice but not the best ever. That cigar would go to Dr. Marty Wax. Leave it to an ophthalmologist to get alignment right? That's a story for another day.
neo
-
Yeah, Dan definitely had the Goldmund and I remember his tube amp (one of his designs) but I don't remember his speakers. No Donna that day. The "reviewer" I bought it from instructed me "not to tell Dan who you bought this from". He was a sleazy character. I seem to recall Stereophile had a review but I could be wrong about that. I remember the review as being ok, nothing great. I bought it on a recommendation and was happy that I did.
-
It shouldn't be too long before I can start my new table build. I want to try to duplicate the Kenwood anti-resonance material as used on the L07d, KD500, etc. but on a Halcro style pod. This material requires lots of ventilation when drying and it's still too cold for that. I might take some photos as I go and hopefully it won't jinx me.
The table is a newly acquired JVC/Victor TT81 motor unit. I have a 120V AC to 100V step down from Amazon and I'm ready to get started. I also now have a Victor 7045 arm, and I'm thinking of using the Unitrac or Sonus with it, on another pod. If I set up a third pod for a mono cart maybe I could sell a few tables, but it's always hard for me to sell a piece of my collection even if it's not the greatest or best. Truth be told, I'm not an audiophile. This is a hobby for me and I'm into music, so there it is, a vehicle, a means to an end not a business anymore and hopefully not an obsession.
Some of you might remember our talking about Raul on Audiogon forum. This is the guy who started the MM/MI thread on Agon. Some of this is funny, but the guy is so stupid it's pathetic. He obviously has two authors for his technical questions and.....
My member name on there is fleib.
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/tonearm-recommendation
-
Mr. TEA pities the fool who hasn't trained his ear to recognize distortion.
-
Mr. TEA pities the fool who hasn't trained his ear to recognize distortion.
Raul's final word on alignment - just posted. He's so dumb it's a sin. I feel sorry for him. He's enthusiastic, but his arrogance is only exceed by his ignorance and stupidity - an egomaniac moron with an agenda.
Maybe if I tell him he's right we can get on with it. He has already taken up most of the thread. Hmmm, that could backfire and come back to haunt me. Maybe it's worth a try anyway.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=138457)
SoundTractor
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=138458)
Feikert
neo
-
Raul's final word on alignment - just posted. He's so dumb it's a sin. I feel sorry for him. He's enthusiastic, but his arrogance is only exceed by his ignorance and stupidity - an egomaniac moron with an agenda.
Maybe if I tell him he's right we can get on with it. He has already taken up most of the thread. Hmmm, that could backfire and come back to haunt me. Maybe it's worth a try anyway.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=138457)
SoundTractor
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=138458)
Feikert
neo
Hi neo,
by curiosity I went on Audiogon and read a few comments from Raul,
I hope I don't write my comments on AudioCircle like him. :duh:
Guy 13
-
Hi neo,
by curiosity I went on Audiogon and read a few comments from Raul,
I hope I don't write my comments on AudioCircle like him. :duh:
Guy 13
Nothing to concern yourself with on that score. Raul is fond of calling other people ignorant and thinks he knows more than anyone.
Ignorance means lack of specific knowledge, but it has other implications in our culture. Everyone is ignorant of something, to a greater or lesser degree, but to be so stupid and misinformed, and insulting to other people at the same time, is a little hard to take. I've been dealing and trying to reason with this guy for around 10 years when he came on VE and wrote the dumbest, most obnoxious stuff you can imagine.
I see I'm a little late to employ my strategy. Maybe it's just as well. There's no satisfaction to be gained at any rate. Best I could hope for is to shut him up for a short while. He is honestly trying and revenge is an bitter dish, best not served.
neo
-
I want to get this posted before I forget. It's a great resource if it happens to include something of interest to you. Among other things it is an alignment arc protractor generator, strobe disk generator and has thrust plate material testing results.
http://conradhoffman.com/chsw.htm
Arc protractors are not recommended unless mounting distance is perfect (factory).
neo
-
I second Neo's recommendation here, Conrad Hoffman's arc protractor generator is unequalled in my experience. You can adjust any parameter in seconds and generate templates with any of the standard alignments or any custom one you wish to invent. You must be able to scale your printer to produce exact reproductions and not "fit to size", but that's usually easily accomplished. A little harder is cutting out an exact spindle hole, I used a protractor with a circle guide, then cut an X inside the circle. Voila, perfect center cut. Heavy weight gloss photo paper made the best templates.
-
Hi Mr. Roll,
Good advice for printing. I downloaded 3 protractors on plain paper and got the scale on the money. Cut them out perfectly and glued them to some thin cardboard. The glue made them curl up and they were useless. I should have known which glue shrinks, but I was never into glue. Hard to imagine someone dumping a tube of model airplane cement into a paper bag and huffing glue. I have a friend who did that when he was a kid. Said the glue got on your face and in your nose hairs and everywhere exposed and he didn't find that out until he woke up from a coma. I'd like to be able to say he only had 2 or 3 brain cells left, but the truth of the matter - the guy's a brain and a half. He smokes everyone under the table then does trig in his head. But who knows maybe he could have been another Einstein.
I know you're a History guy and I've got a question. What did George Washington die from? Hint: It wasn't bacterial epiglottitis.
I've got a new friend. She's a little whacky, but .....
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=138675)
See ya on the flip side,
neo
-
I know you're a History guy and I've got a question. What did George Washington die from? Hint: It wasn't bacterial epiglottitis.
Mr. Cheap and Cheerful Enclosure Guy (meant in a good way),
I'll spare you the embarrassment of not posting the answer to a question you probably haven't seen yet. :roll: You might have thought I was going to make a joke and say he died of Dutch elm disease or poison oak, but Washington's wooden teeth is a myth. He never had wood teeth.
He had dental problems most of his life and all of his adult life, which wasn't unusual near the end of the 18th Century. He did have partials and false teeth, and he collected teeth both animal and human to supply his Dentists. He also purchased at least 9 teeth from "Negros". Washington stood 6' 3" and I imagine he was looking for a good fit and that was the only consideration. As President, Washington was in constant pain. His gums were painful, if not diseased. There is conjecture about a bone infection, which is possible when a bacterial infection from a wound, spreads.
What Washington really looked like:
http://www.earlyamerica.com/lives-early-america/real-face-george-washington/
It was a cold and stormy day in December when President Washington, at age 67, rode out in the freezing rain to inspect his property at Mt. Vernon.
To be continued.
neo
-
The President who chose not to be King.
-
Hello Smctigue,
I think I remarked about your user name and I thought it seemed familiar, but I couldn't place it. Then it occurred to me that you might be
E. Smctigue Wagstaff, son of the late Quincy Adams Wagstaff president of Huxley Univ. I followed that hunch and soon realized it was a comical dead end, at least as far as your genealogy. I was beside myself with frustration, but no regrets for following my instincts.
I was reading about George Washington and his red hair and something else occurred to me. [George did not wear a wig. He powered his red hair to look acceptable when in formal wear] Your moniker became clear to me. I unlocked the code and solved the enigma. Without your permission I won't reveal the actual names of your ancestors. Before I continue let me ask you a question. When under hypnosis do you have feelings of hunger and longings for French fries or potatoes, roasted or mashed? This is making me hungry. I await your response.
neo
-
Hi Mr. Roll,
I know you're a History guy and I've got a question. What did George Washington die from? Hint: It wasn't bacterial epiglottitis.
See ya on the flip side,
neo
Well I always though he was bleed to death by his physicians, who were treating some kind of upper respiratory infection. A wiki search says the infection was the causal instrument of his passing, not aided by all the bloodletting. Everything is speculation and guesswork, some of it by very educated people, thus the cause is an educated guess at best. I was never a big Washington guy, but was always fascinated by his early exploits, been to Ft Necessity and Ft Ligonier many times.
-
Dear Mr. Letitroldsmobile98,
You were never a big Washington guy. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that, but you're treading on thin ice. I think you mean, you weren't assigned to the Washington section when you were sweeping floors at the National Archives?
If you're referring to the Necessity loss, does the term "forced confession" mean anything to you? Did you happen to read Washington's comments after?
I'm not going to predicate further discussion on the proposition that you evaluate Washington's performance as Commander in Chief as second rate. That would be inconsistent with prior discussions.
If you still have an Olds 98, that might be interesting if it's a '41. Other than that, I'm quite sure your luxury liner Jersey Jalopy is entirely mundane, but that is not the issue at hand. I suspect this is a misunderstanding and I'm hesitant to continue.
neo
-
I don't know how this thread got around to GW, (I guess the beyond provides a lot of latitude), but the Brits think he was a pretty good general.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9204961/George-Washington-named-Britains-greatest-ever-foe.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9204961/George-Washington-named-Britains-greatest-ever-foe.html)
They've faced some good ones over the centuries.
-
Jeffkie,
Beyond encompasses everything in this universe and the next. When this works it's like a comedy team bowling league. One guy person sets im up, the other knocks em dead. Manual pin setting only please.
You want to talk carts? That's serious business and you could spark a serious discussion. Most of the funny stuff isn't so funny. It never gets off the launch pad. Talk away (new anti-speech spray only to be used as directed).
See Chris Rock at the self-congratulatory awards for overpaid movie people? I thought he showed great restraint all things considered. That's a strange phrase - all things considered. Maybe it should say - all things we have considered, because it implies all things have been considered.
I'd like to take this opportunity to recognize the classiest champ:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=138767)
You go girl. Look at you bad self. You'll be back, don't I know it.
-
Well I always though he was bleed to death by his physicians, who were treating some kind of upper respiratory infection. A wiki search says the infection was the causal instrument of his passing, not aided by all the bloodletting. Everything is speculation and guesswork, some of it by very educated people, thus the cause is an educated guess at best. I was never a big Washington guy, but was always fascinated by his early exploits, been to Ft Necessity and Ft Ligonier many times.
I think you were right the first time. They say hindsight is 20-20, but after 200 years? After riding in the freezing rain Washington did not change out of his wet clothes. Later he wasn't feeling well and retired. Doesn't seem like enough time for an infection, respiratory or epiglottal to cause death. Washington was complaining of a general feeling of being sick and having a sore throat which was said to be constricting, but had enough time passed? He was bled approx. 80% of his blood. Not much chance of recovering from anything under those circumstances. Considering the infection theories, it makes about as much sense as saying he died of a sore throat.
Martha was against the practice of bleeding. We'll never know why she didn't prevent it. Doctors can be intimidating.
In the US the healthcare system is broken. It's not a system it's a multi billion dollar industry.
Forced confession - see the kid on the news in N. Korea? Breaks your heart, at least mine.
neo
-
I couldn't help but notice, no one commented on the Stereoplay tests. Some interesting carts on there including the Grado Sonata, AT33EV, Kisiki Blue, and Einstein is next to Lyra. The link is an entire page to the rear so rather than get sarcastic:
https://www.fastaudio.com/workspace/media/downloads/pdf-auf-die-spitze-getrieben_stp_04_14_046_054.pdf
I'm afraid, without David Dlaloum to steer, we're a rudderless ship. David has more important things to do. We'll just have to muddle through.
I relapsed the other day. I wonder if the compulsion to smoke ever goes away. I've heard stories of people smoking after being clean for 10 years or more. Most people don't realize that smoking is the strongest addiction in the arsenal of substances. At the methadone clinic they say it's one day at a time, but with smoking it's one hour at a time. I kid you not.
I think it's a good idea to discourage smoking, but raising the price to a million dollars a pack to fund incompetence, is punishing the victims. It's legal to smoke and the first cigg is cheap ($0.50), and once you're hooked it leaves you broke and in poor health. Think about it. Our governments are dope dealers profiting on the misery of victims.
neo
-
I couldn't help but notice, no one commented on the Stereoplay tests. Some interesting carts on there including the Grado Sonata, AT33EV, Kisiki Blue, and Einstein is next to Lyra. The link is an entire page to the rear so rather than get sarcastic:
https://www.fastaudio.com/workspace/media/downloads/pdf-auf-die-spitze-getrieben_stp_04_14_046_054.pdf
I'm afraid, without David Dlaloum to steer, we're a rudderless ship. David has more important things to do. We'll just have to muddle through.
I relapsed the other day. I wonder if the compulsion to smoke ever goes away. I've heard stories of people smoking after being clean for 10 years or more. Most people don't realize that smoking is the strongest addiction in the arsenal of substances. At the methadone clinic they say it's one day at a time, but with smoking it's one hour at a time. I kid you not.
I think it's a good idea to discourage smoking, but raising the price to a million dollars a pack to fund incompetence, is punishing the victims. It's legal to smoke and the first cigg is cheap ($0.50), and once you're hooked it leaves you broke and in poor health. Think about it. Our governments are dope dealers profiting on the misery of victims.
neo
:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
-
Neo,
I was actually trying to translate that information, but ran out of patience. I did enjoy looking over the charts and specs. That is a very revealing article even without translation, seeing the frequency responses is much appreciated. I wish there was a cartridge library like the Cable Co. to see which is best in my system. If a company could insure the cartridges and charged a fee to "try" them. Sure it would be complicated, I would be happy to pay.
Sorry to hear of your relapse. I smoked from age 14-32. My wife and I quit smoking in 2007 when her mom had to have surgery to remove black sections cut out of her lungs. I had tried many other times, even succeeded once. Then I let stress and addiction win again. There were five of us in the family that quit to support her kicking the habit. My wife and I are the only ones that actually made it. :( Her mom is back to smoking after a couple years of quitting and has a frequent nasty cough. I very rarely get the "craving" and the thought of paying $7+ a pack greatly helps prevent caving into that damn habit. One of the many problems is that most start smoking while young and invincible and not much thought of how much slower the body heals as you get older and the repercussions of choices down the road.
Most addicts must find a new addiction to keep them focused. I used exercise and workout until I almost destroyed my rotator cuff working out 7 days a week. I suppose my 5'9" 160lb frame wasn't built to bench 350lbs (at least I made it to 285lb) :duh: At least by then I was much safer from relapse. I enjoy so many things much more without the side effects of smoking. Food tastes better, bedroom activities are much better, falling asleep without fighting to catch my breath are only a few things that keep me clean. Besides at $7 for one pack a day for 7 days a week is $49 a week, the cost of a great record or you could save it for the entire year for $2548 to buy a nice cartridge or tonearm. Damn, how about a new TT?
Sorry for the rant, but I am praying you kick the habit quick before it really gets a good hold again.
-
Hi Guy13,
How's your arm(s)? I thought about your Rega when the ground connection broke inside one of my arms. I remember your tech welded it on and that's right for aluminum. It's a tricky weld. Most dudes who weld can't weld aluminum. Sorry if I was harsh after DIY dude implied I called him a liar. It's natural when you get angry to stop reading and he lost it...... anyway, hope you didn't think I was taking it out on you.
Sometimes I forget these forums go Worldwide. I usually don't think about that. Most US citizens don't understand our Constitution and Bill of Rights. These are the greatest documents of their kind ever conceived in the History of the World, a self perpetuating blueprint for freedom. Problem is, a blueprint must be followed, to work.
Checks and balances - Legislative branch passes/changes laws. Executive branch executes laws, oversees administrative/diplomatic duties. Judicial branch decides on matters of law. Each branch balances out the other branches. Like a tree, each branch should be healthy for the tree to be balanced and not lean over or fall down in a storm.
The Supreme Court does not legislate or pass laws. It's their job to decided if a law conforms to the provisions of the Constitution, if it's fair or reasonable under those provisions, or not. If not, the court sends it back and says, try again.
The Executive branch can not change laws. The duty of the President is to carry out the laws passed by Congress and to oversee foreign policy.
The problem is, two branches are trying to take power from one of the other branches. The Supreme Court is "legislating from the bench" IMO, that means exceeding their authority and going beyond ruling on constitutionality, and changing law.
The President is also exceeding his authority IMO. His interpretation, and execution of the laws passed by Congress far exceed their intent. This does not mean I am for or against a particular policy.
Hey Guy13, check this - turn it up to 11:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0968f0VWvd8
neo
-
Hi Guy13,
How's your arm(s)? I thought about your Rega when the ground connection broke inside one of my arms. I remember your tech welded it on and that's right for aluminum. It's a tricky weld. Most dudes who weld can't weld aluminum. Sorry if I was harsh after DIY dude implied I called him a liar. It's natural when you get angry to stop reading and he lost it...... anyway, hope you didn't think I was taking it out on you.
Sometimes I forget these forums go Worldwide. I usually don't think about that. Most US citizens don't understand our Constitution and Bill of Rights. These are the greatest documents of their kind ever conceived in the History of the World, a self perpetuating blueprint for freedom. Problem is, a blueprint must be followed, to work.
Checks and balances - Legislative branch passes/changes laws. Executive branch executes laws, oversees administrative/diplomatic duties. Judicial branch decides on matters of law. Each branch balances out the other branches. Like a tree, each branch should be healthy for the tree to be balanced and not lean over or fall down in a storm.
The Supreme Court does not legislate or pass laws. It's their job to decided if a law conforms to the provisions of the Constitution, if it's fair or reasonable under those provisions, or not. If not, the court sends it back and says, try again.
The Executive branch can not change laws. The duty of the President is to carry out the laws passed by Congress and to oversee foreign policy.
The problem is, two branches are trying to take power from one of the other branches. The Supreme Court is "legislating from the bench" IMO, that means exceeding their authority and going beyond ruling on constitutionality, and changing law.
The President is also exceeding his authority IMO. His interpretation, and execution of the laws passed by Congress far exceed their intent. This does not mean I am for or against a particular policy.
Hey Guy13, check this - turn it up to 11:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0968f0VWvd8
neo
+ 100 x current debt :)
-
It shouldn't be too long before I can start my new table build. I want to try to duplicate the Kenwood anti-resonance material as used on the L07d, KD500, etc. but on a Halcro style pod. This material requires lots of ventilation when drying and it's still too cold for that. I might take some photos as I go and hopefully it won't jinx me.
The table is a newly acquired JVC/Victor TT81 motor unit. I have a 120V AC to 100V step down from Amazon and I'm ready to get started. I also now have a Victor 7045 arm, and I'm thinking of using the Unitrac or Sonus with it, on another pod. If I set up a third pod for a mono cart maybe I could sell a few tables, but it's always hard for me to sell a piece of my collection even if it's not the greatest or best. Truth be told, I'm not an audiophile. This is a hobby for me and I'm into music, so there it is, a vehicle, a means to an end not a business anymore and hopefully not an obsession.
Some of you might remember our talking about Raul on Audiogon forum. This is the guy who started the MM/MI thread on Agon. Some of this is funny, but the guy is so stupid it's pathetic. He obviously has two authors for his technical questions and.....
My member name on there is fleib.
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/tonearm-recommendation
Funny you should mention , Im currently restoring my KD650 , looking at tonearms /cartridge ....
-
+ 100 x current debt :)
Hey A. Wayne,
The national debt? I think it's more like from 8 to 18T in 8 years. Sweeeeet, got it coming up 8's. I think that qualifies for some kind of award.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_2_12?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=magic+8+ball+original&sprefix=magic+8+ball%2Caps%2C140
I broke my 8 ball. I really miss it.
Kids liked it too.
It's magic you know. No foolin.
I got this tiineee peromid,
he is really really cool.
Sits on the sink, & you put your blade in an keep er super sharp shararp. Oh yeah.
Got me one old rayayzor, he loadss a double side blade. U twisist t handle _ open up top.
Don't you mess with that thin thin blade.
Rarazor don't fit, under the peerramid___ end of handle he stick oouut.
Got me some messed up azimuthoth (decending)
That's whyy the pyramiddd he don'to oont worerrkkk
But he looooks mi I g t y sharp.
Just played the White Album backwards. Think I nailed that one.
Can't explain how those words came out played backwards.
Cosmic man.
I broke my table but it was worth it.
just a motor got the rotor.
Think I'll call Japan.
neo
-
Did I hear KD-650 ? ? ?
Will the KD650 owner please pick up your table 2 or 3 times and bench it 25 times? Nice table A. W. Take a KD 500 and a Denon 1250 for it??
What do you want a big ol table like that for? Slim down - get the modern look. I'll find a cute little B&O and throw it in. That's 3 for 1. You could have a table for every spare room and one for mono?
Speakin of finance, what happens in times of war? The gov sells war bonds and borrows money to finance the war, like in WWII. Gov needs to borrow money for F35's and Patriot III missiles. Hey, you see that rail gun? Google that bad boy. It's a magnetic missile launcher with no fuel - just magnetic repulsion - can hit a moving target over 100 miles away. Uses satellite targeting or something. That seems like the weapon of choice for domestic violence. Ladies, have one of these towed to your house. He'll never know what hit him.
neo
-
I've got a new friend. She's a little whacky, but .....
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=138675)
See ya on the flip side,
neo
Sarah Silverman?
-
I relapsed the other day. I wonder if the compulsion to smoke ever goes away. I've heard stories of people smoking after being clean for 10 years or more. Most people don't realize that smoking is the strongest addiction in the arsenal of substances. At the methadone clinic they say it's one day at a time, but with smoking it's one hour at a time. I kid you not.
I think it's a good idea to discourage smoking, but raising the price to a million dollars a pack to fund incompetence, is punishing the victims. It's legal to smoke and the first cigg is cheap ($0.50), and once you're hooked it leaves you broke and in poor health. Think about it. Our governments are dope dealers profiting on the misery of victims.
neo
As a recovering nicotine addict, preach brother! Twelve years since I gave up cancer sticks. At $50/carton, that's $2500/year I can spend on audio gear and live longer to enjoy it to boot. It was 10 years before I felt I could have a cigar without falling off the wagon. I can now have a few cigars a year without having any desire to take it further, and cigarettes just smell nasty, but I never take it for granted.
-
You ever wake up in the middle of the night cause you had a weird dream or something tickled you and you couldn't figure what it was?
Maybe you had a new approach and wanted to write it down before you forgot it, or maybe it was the cat downstairs playin with a mouse.
They like to bat em around a little you know - playin with the prey. The mouse normally gets away but they die anyway being mortally wounded from the claws. They die of acute infection of the blood? Go into some room and think it smells funny and later you find Mummy Mouse when you sweep behind the radiator. Mummy's embalmed in his/her own dried juice and wrapped in cat hair. Oh my what a sweet find. Score id BC Cat 5? - mice 0.00.
Better hope Mummy Mouse don't come back to life and hunt you down. Nothing more dangerous than Mummy Mouse.
I love my little BC and she loves and cherishes me. I don't trim her claws. No, she likes em long and sharpens em on a post. That's what mousers do.
BC is Russian Blue, but she looks grey to me. Got her in Lancaster County from a farmer who was glad to be rid of her. Picked up an Amish hat too. Got stuck behind a buggy out there. Wasn't bad, dude pulled to the right when he could and I drove on by.
Mr. GentleBender, please stand before this inquisition and tell the members, Do you know or have you ever known a gentlemen who goes by the handle Nandric? His other name may be Nicola Nickelavitsky. We have reason to believe he has contacted both yourself and Mr. Archibald Phew in a dastardly Russian mind control plot. You are sentenced to hard labor in the Thought Police organization where you may have the opportunity to have your rank elevated to Secretary of Cool Rubber Guys of both alien and domestic origin.
Evan, how's your pod?
I was feeling a little stressed so I put some nicotine back in my vapes. I appreciate the concern, but it's often counterproductive to harp. I still support Smokers Rights, being an addict. People don't consider the other aspects of an issue like sin tax. Innocent people must pay that tax, and they are the victims. How does this make sense?
I also support Male Rights and don't accept the political correctness fallacies commonly fostered today.
Yes, that's Sarah Silverman in the photo. She got something, a certain gesture, wrong on her HBO special, but I could straighten her out if she has an open mind. Something else too - inappropriate on this forum.
Dizzy Gillespie for President!!!
-
:lol: You had me googling those people to figure out where you were headed.
Sorry about the previous nag. :| They say ex-smokers are the worst and it is true. I know I could care less about whatever came out their mouths when I was smoking and here I am. I know it is hard and I hope I can avoid that dance again. We understand how hard it is and I didn't mean to harp.
-
Did I hear KD-650 ? ? ?
Will the KD650 owner please pick up your table 2 or 3 times and bench it 25 times? Nice table A. W. Take a KD 500 and a Denon 1250 for it??
What do you want a big ol table like that for? Slim down - get the modern look. I'll find a cute little B&O and throw it in. That's 3 for 1. You could have a table for every spare room and one for mono?
Speakin of finance, what happens in times of war? The gov sells war bonds and borrows money to finance the war, like in WWII. Gov needs to borrow money for F35's and Patriot III missiles. Hey, you see that rail gun? Google that bad boy. It's a magnetic missile launcher with no fuel - just magnetic repulsion - can hit a moving target over 100 miles away. Uses satellite targeting or something. That seems like the weapon of choice for domestic violence. Ladies, have one of these towed to your house. He'll never know what hit him.
neo
The 650 has been in house since 1980 , plan on getting it armed up and singing this year ...
As to magnetic weaponry, supposedly that was what Iverson was working on when he went missing some decades ago , leaving all his Eagle amp fans in a bind ... :)
-
The 650 has been in house since 1980 , plan on getting it armed up and singing this year ...
As to magnetic weaponry, supposedly that was what Iverson was working on when he went missing some decades ago , leaving all his Eagle amp fans in a bind ... :)
The 650 is a good ol destroyer, very serviceable, but don't get carried away. It's not exactly an L07D.
Not sure I follow on the rest. Eagle amp?
Is that a Rowland amp in your avatar? Can you carry a Stereo 5 with one hand?
How about a monoblock?
comin at ya
-
Here are links to more info on John Iverson and The Electron Kinetics Eagle amplifiers.
http://www.eagle-audio.com/history.htm
http://www.stereophile.com/solidpoweramps/electron_kinetics_eagle_2_power_amplifier/
Scotty
-
:lol: You had me googling those people to figure out where you were headed.
Sorry about the previous nag. :| They say ex-smokers are the worst and it is true. I know I could care less about whatever came out their mouths when I was smoking and here I am. I know it is hard and I hope I can avoid that dance again. Weunderstand how hard it is and I didn't mean to harp.
Just wondering, you used the royal "we". You can explain if you wish.
Sometimes it hard to know someone's agenda. Everyone's trying to prove something, which might be good if you're Stephen Hawking, but most people aren't that cute and lovable and I mean that in the sense of his practical nurse. No stupid jokes please.
If you're trying to prove/disprove the existence of God, all the science and logic in the World isn't going to get you very far IMO. Should we go outside of the World? Still seems to end in a question mark????? When we combine Einstein and quantum the Universe seems to follow the rules of science, kind of makes sense. Still no proof/disproof.
What if we try another approach? Lets assume that God does not exist. Then we have no one or thing or higher power to blame for our predicament, and we are truly pathetic IMO. Mankind is the chump of the Universe. We suck. We can't get nothing right unless we triple the negative and get even more ridiculous.
It's only natural to blame God when or if we suffer a terrible loss. How could You let this happen, we think. I don't believe in You anymore. I never really did anyway and I don't care. Leave me alone I hate You, we think in our heads, but who are you thinking about, yourself?
Do you hear yourselves? Sounds like a child. That seems about right to me.
It's easy to prove that God exists as a concept. Now lets assume God does exist in fact and reality, as The Supreme Ruler of this and every possible Universe, He who defines the singularity, He who planted the seed of life on this planet and He who happens to be our Loving Father in heaven. Seems to me this is a more productive line of thought and opens up all kind of possibilities.
I don't know about you guys, I usually pray in silence, not out loud. Maybe you don't pray, but I question that. Doesn't matter God is telepathic. He knows what you are thinking, knows if you've been good or bad, so for goodness sake knock off the noise pollution. Have a little respect and that doesn't mean see how slow you can drive.
neo
-
Just wondering, you used the royal "we". You can explain if you wish.
Sometimes it hard to know someone's agenda. Everyone's trying to prove something, which might be good if you're Stephen Hawking, but most people aren't that cute and lovable and I mean that in the sense of his practical nurse. No stupid jokes please.
I used "we" because any smoker that has successfully quit knows how hard it is. Believing in God is something I regularly take for granted. To not have someone so big and powerful who serves us, the selfish human, fixing and forgiving our mistakes would make me lose all hope. Only God can save man from himself. :| Unless you are praying in a group, silent prayers are best. Remember that it is not about religion, it is your personal relationship with God.
-
Gents,
I will leave the ruminations on higher beings alone for now. But as soon as proselytizing and condemnations raise their ugly heads, I am sending this to Q to be cleaned up.
Just to let you know, we are standing on thin ice at the moment. Step lightly.
P.S. Warning also applies to politics and macro-economic policies. We don't want to go that far beyond MM carts.
-
I used "we" because any smoker that has successfully quit knows how hard it is. Believing in God is something I regularly take for granted. To not have someone so big and powerful who serves us, the selfish human, fixing and forgiving our mistakes would make me lose all hope. Only God can save man from himself. :| Unless you are praying in a group, silent prayers are best. Remember that it is not about religion, it is your personal relationship with God.
I see people walking their dogs with plastic bags and my cat requires 2 litter box because I don't have the time to train her to use the toilet. She's picky too, no regular cat food, no sir, she has to have fancy stuff in tiny portion containers, but she knows best cause animals can smell when something's not right. I'm almost certain my diagnosis of round worm was correct and it was a lot of fun reaching that conclusion because BC can now retain her nourishment.
Did I mention BC's full name? It's Baby Cat, named by my Ex wife because she was so small when we adopted her. I often wonder if mankind has dominion over animals or if it's the other way around. Do I own BC or does she own me? I serve her. Seems so clear cut, but the animal police know best? Give me a break. That's the petal between the clutch and petrol control. I like my steering on the left and the Brits have it backwards. It's not my fault Range Rovers and Jags are highly overrated. The snoot factor is a little high around here.
You don't know who you're talking to. I'm the guy who did 165 on the Jersey pike at 3AM or thereabouts. Yea yea yea _ _ yeaah. A little magic with a small block V8 in a chevy trans am special. Oh yeah. . . . You don't know what I got.
neo
PS - forgot to mention there's a magnetic part and other parts the same as a phono cartridge. Start with the coil(s). Can someone tell me?
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=139147)
-
I see people walking their dogs with plastic bags and my cat requires 2 litter box because I don't have the time to train her to use the toilet. She's picky too, no regular cat food, no sir, she has to have fancy stuff in tiny portion containers, but she knows best cause animals can smell when something's not right. I'm almost certain my diagnosis of round worm was correct and it was a lot of fun reaching that conclusion because BC can now retain her nourishment.
Did I mention BC's full name? It's Baby Cat, named by my Ex wife because she was so small when we adopted her. I often wonder if mankind has dominion over animals or if it's the other way around. Do I own BC or does she own me? I serve her. Seems so clear cut, but the animal police know best? Give me a break. That's the petal between the clutch and petrol control. I like my steering on the left and the Brits have it backwards. It's not my fault Range Rovers and Jags are highly overrated. The snoot factor is a little high around here.
You don't know who you're talking to. I'm the guy who did 165 on the Jersey pike at 3AM or thereabouts. Yea yea yea _ _ yeaah. A little magic with a small block V8 in a chevy trans am special. Oh yeah. . . . You don't know what I got.
neo
PS - forgot to mention there's a magnetic part and other parts the same as a phono cartridge. Start with the coil(s). Can someone tell me?
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=139147)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=139219)
Cat poop > cat food > ring worm > alpha pets > Brit vehicles > muscle car > Little Deuce Coup lyrics > AT mm.
Hope you're okay. :?
-
MM AT95 E
:lol:
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=139219)
Cat poop > cat food > ring worm > alpha pets > Brit vehicles > muscle car > Little Deuce Coup lyrics > AT mm.
Hope you're okay. :?
Am thinking the same thing. Neo, are you channeling Hunter Thompson? :lol:
-
Do I sense a bias against righters? Not in the righters or wringers sense, more like the why can't I make a cartoon to express the irony of any given situation without losing something vital to me?
Atkinson is BS. I like the cartoon though. Tone magazine is guilty of willful destruction of children's toys. They might still have a video of some questionably qualified lawnmower taking a hammer to a perfectly innocent Technics TT. Ohhhhhhh this P-mount alignment is soooo hard when you're had a few. Then I'm up late one night and hear someone in Coraladio named Tone pub say some very intelligent thins. I suspect he's a survivor of a volcanic explosion and should really be given a medal.
I don't think I expressed it clearly, but the diagram of the fabulous AT MM is there for a reason. First, look up the history of Stereofool. I shit you not, around '88 they announced reviewers would no longer be able to accept gifts of review samples.
I received a call from Dan Fanny after he posted once. He's been living it up out of the country all this time. He had to hook up the call some weird way or it would have cost about a million dollars. He might be back, but he's thinking it over. I think the economy is gonna collapse and it looks like WW III, so maybe he's better off where he is. ??????
I know what you're trying to do - get me to take a brownie shot of my AHT boards and supply. No way Hosea. He wasn't married to Donna long and they split up anyway so that's a dead end. He's a member here now so watch what you say or the thought police will let it slide probably. I've been thrown out of Jazz circle for having an opinion and Japanese bashing. I couldn't think of the name of the musician to compare style to Sadao Watanabe, but it's Teromoso Hino the trumpet player. Dude can play. Sam Jones LP.
You don't dot every I and cross every T. Listen to Wayne Shorter put some space in there. He's the only guy who could follow Trane in Miles band. In the early '70s we waited for every Weather Report like it was a gift from God, and it was. A good friend Chuck Taylor (bass) formed the East Powelton Jazz Collective, but wasn't anything to it. Later he had a regular Wednesday gig at a club near 11th and Spruce in Philly. Nice straight up trios and sometimes quartet. Chuck brought in the best guys in town and sometimes John Swana or Uri Cain would be there killin it. Chuck took lessons from Buster Williams and one night we drove up to NYC and played stump the band with a tape I made. That's with the Studietto, Zeta, Monster 1000, and AHT with a Sony ES 900 or 1000 3 head tape.
We had fun back then. Today there is no real jazz in Philly. It's all lousy singers, it's terrible. How anyone can sit there and take it, without losing your dinner is beyond me, but that's what the customers want.
neo
neo
-
Do I sense a bias against righters? Not in the righters or wringers sense, more like the why can't I make a cartoon to express the irony of any given situation without losing something vital to me?
Atkinson is BS. I like the cartoon though. Tone magazine is guilty of willful destruction of children's toys. They might still have a video of some questionably qualified lawnmower taking a hammer to a perfectly innocent Technics TT. Ohhhhhhh this P-mount alignment is soooo hard when you're had a few. Then I'm up late one night and hear someone in Coraladio named Tone pub say some very intelligent thins. I suspect he's a survivor of a volcanic explosion and should really be given a medal.
I don't think I expressed it clearly, but the diagram of the fabulous AT MM is there for a reason. First, look up the history of Stereofool. I shit you not, around '88 they announced reviewers would no longer be able to accept gifts of review samples.
I received a call from Dan Fanny after he posted once. He's been living it up out of the country all this time. He had to hook up the call some weird way or it would have cost about a million dollars. He might be back, but he's thinking it over. I think the economy is gonna collapse and it looks like WW III, so maybe he's better off where he is. ??????
I know what you're trying to do - get me to take a brownie shot of my AHT boards and supply. No way Hosea. He wasn't married to Donna long and they split up anyway so that's a dead end. He's a member here now so watch what you say or the thought police will let it slide probably. I've been thrown out of Jazz circle for having an opinion and Japanese bashing. I couldn't think of the name of the musician to compare style to Sadao Watanabe, but it's Teromoso Hino the trumpet player. Dude can play. Sam Jones LP.
You don't dot every I and cross every T. Listen to Wayne Shorter put some space in there. He's the only guy who could follow Trane in Miles band. In the early '70s we waited for every Weather Report like it was a gift from God, and it was. A good friend Chuck Taylor (bass) formed the East Powelton Jazz Collective, but wasn't anything to it. Later he had a regular Wednesday gig at a club near 11th and Spruce in Philly. Nice straight up trios and sometimes quartet. Chuck brought in the best guys in town and sometimes John Swana or Uri Cain would be there killin it. Chuck took lessons from Buster Williams and one night we drove up to NYC and played stump the band with a tape I made. That's with the Studietto, Zeta, Monster 1000, and AHT with a Sony ES 900 or 1000 3 head tape.
We had fun back then. Today there is no real jazz in Philly. It's all lousy singers, it's terrible. How anyone can sit there and take it, without losing your dinner is beyond me, but that's what the customers want.
neo
neo
+1
-
“We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, and a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers... and also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of Budweiser, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.
Not that we needed all that for the trip, but once you get locked into a serious drug collection, the tendency is to push it as far as you can.”
“Every now and then when your life gets complicated and the weasels start closing in, the only cure is to load up on heinous chemicals and then drive like a bastard from Hollywood to Las Vegas ... with the music at top volume and at least a pint of ether.”
“No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten.”
― Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
“Happy. Just in my swim shorts, barefooted, wild-haired, in the red fire dark, singing, swigging wine, spitting, jumping, running—that's the way to live. All alone and free in the soft sands of the beach by the sigh of the sea out there, with the Ma-Wink fallopian virgin warm stars reflecting on the outer channel fluid belly waters. And if your cans are redhot and you can't hold them in your hands, just use good old railroad gloves, that's all.”
― Jack Kerouac, The Dharma Bums
-
When did this thread turn to Jabberwocky?? Politics, altered consciousness, dog schitt, :scratch: ?
’Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
-
When did this thread turn to Jabberwocky?? Politics, altered consciousness, dog schitt, :scratch: ?
’Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
LOL ok I surrender. Back to Neo's musings on MM cartridges. Over and out.
-
Neo,
Any thoughts on the DL301 in the Denon lineup ...
Regards ?
-
Forgive me Dear Reader,
I heard the Cranberries on the radio today and wax nostalgic for earlier, happier times. We caught them at the Tower in Upper Darby some years ago, before the Ex's milk soured.
I haven't heard the DL-301. As I mentioned, I owned a 160 and a 304, and reviewed a DLS1 in a group review on VE called a bicycle. I have reason to believe the 301 fits right in the lineup giving up some resolution to its more expensive brethren, while retaining that natural type sound with good stage. Speaking of stage, the 160 seemed a hair odd in that regard, but still nice. I think it had something to do with high frequency separation. I can't describe it at the moment.
It took me a long time to review the DLS1. As I later found out (J Carr) it seems to be because of the extra low output and extremely high relative inductance/resistance. It's coreless like the ART7, but has approx. 4x the resistance. It gave the AHT fits in RF land. Couldn't stabilize DC offset. I believe David and I discussed this sometime much earlier in this thread. If you do a search....
Friends - B50, Davey W, and John TCG participated. I still can't believe John is gone. We were buds. It's hard to talk about it.
Think I'll send Raul an email.
neo
-
Neo, have you tried the Signet MR5.0 with the ATN150MLx? I've just tried it today and I've got it right up there with the Maestro! If you get a chance, give it a try. This is the first time I've liked this body this much!
Don(grb)
-
Neo, have you tried the Signet MR5.0 with the ATN150MLx? I've just tried it today and I've got it right up there with the Maestro! If you get a chance, give it a try. This is the first time I've liked this body this much!
Don(grb)
Don,
I guess this thread has gotten so long it's unwieldy. All (I think) the Signet MR5.0 have a motor similar to the 120/440, 155, 152, 160ML etc. etc. etc. This 490mH MM was AT's go-to high end offering for many moons. Do you like boron or beryllium? That's what you're talking about with the differences. an orig 5.0 ML and a 160ML equivalent stylus - ATN150MLX.
This is a spectacular combination with one big caveat. Old laminated coils are more likely to go bad. I have a 5.0 ML - beryllium/ML. I bought if for the stylus which still has life. The motor has tolerance worse than an AT3400 and I don't use it, but put that stylus (same as 152ML) on a 120/440 and it will beat most anything for detail, dynamics etc.
What a bargain - a 160ML for a few hundred bucks. You can pick your favorite inductance with a modern plastic equivalent 100E, 5V - 350mH, 95E - 400mH, etc. A new AT stylus should come in an AT cardboard box, not a generic plastic stylus box.
http://www.zzounds.com/item--AUTATN150MLX
neo
-
I think I've missed the boat on the beryllium cantilevers.
I wish that I could have that experience. Do you prefer it to the boron?
-
Don,
Beryllium is lighter and more flexible so it tends to sound more wide open and dynamic. Boron is more exact. IMO the only AT with beryllium which might sound better with boron is the 15/20SS, but I'm not complaining. Beryllium seems to go good with the ML tip which can have a relentless quality. On the other hand that detail and tracking is superb for those who value that quality.
I'd take a 120/440, or 100E, 5V with an ATN150MLX over any other current MM. The 150 stylus is a bargain for $200. A current AT stylus should come in a factory box not a generic plastic box.
http://www.zzounds.com/item--AUTATN150MLX
The secret to success is loading.
neo
-
Neo, are you saying you'd prefer the 120/440 body with the ATN150MLX over the AT150MLX? If so, why?
Lower mass? Most folks seem to prefer the 150's metal body.
-
Jeff K,
No, I'm not saying that. As a general rule, the higher the inductance the easier to load. An AT10, 11 has around 1000mH similar to a Stanton 681, maybe a bit more. It's easier to dial in and superior to the Stanton IMO.
The 490mH 160, 155, 120/440 etc. is a little hairier, but has better resolution, more transparent. The 95/Clearaudio at 400mH has a nice balance.
The 350mH 150 is even more transparent (see-through), harder to load.
The TK9, 10 series at 85mH is harder yet.
The potential for resolution goes up as the inductance goes down, but not everyone likes all the detail.
neo
-
just a question
neobop, what's the channel seperation (in DB) of these cartridges?
thanks
-
just a question
neobop, what's the channel seperation (in DB) of these cartridges?
thanks
Hi Georgopoulos,
It depends on whether you're talking about a spec or measured performance. Seperation @ _frequency? The temptation is to oversimplify.
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/cartridges/699a33304468ed99/index.html
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/cartridges/06264e9fc93d590b/index.html
http://www.lpgear.com/product/AT100E.html
neo
-
Well now sports fans, seems like there's a new oldie from AT:
http://www.lpgear.com/product/AT150SA.html
It's a 160/440 in a deluxe body - tapered aluminum/shibata
-
Ok, I'm listening. Give us the skinny!
-
As the Big Bopper used to say, Skinny Minnie, she ain't skinny. She's just tall, that's all.
The 150SA is an AT-160 body w- shibata/tapered aluminum. Want a 160? Fit it with a 150MLX stylus. Want a lighter version w/anti-resonant properties? Get a 120/440 body and fit it with what you like.
Want a 350mH generator like the 150?? Get a 150, 100E, or 5V body and mix and match. Best is what you like best, what works out with your phono input and loading capabilities.
Seems to me, we ask the impossible from recordings and then we are surprised when they are less than perfect. Sometimes it sounds real, like you're in the club. You get lost for a few seconds and you're transported back in time, to another place.
Why are musicians notoriously bad at selecting stereo equipment?? When auditioning, they tend to fill-in in their head, what they don't hear from the equipment. I've had members of the Philadelphia Orchestra give me carte blanche to select a stereo for them. Why?
What clues make it seem real, to you?
neo
-
Thanks, Neo!
-
More news from AT:
Apparently there is a newer version of the 100E and it has the same motor as the 120/440. AT seems to be playing games with the model numbers and corresponding motors. In N America apparently there is still stock of the 350mH version. In the rest of the world buyer beware.
For years the 100E was available in Japan only as a special bargain for Japanese audiofools. I seriously resent this practice. Apparently Audio Technica thinks the rest of the world is stupid and the Japanese deserve special treatment for being Japanese?
It looks like the 7V is discontinued. I can't find it on any AT site. I have to assume this motor is just too sweet and musical to be a genuine AT. You don't have to load it with 100K resistors or stand on your head and spit wooden nickels. Unlike the Signet TK7LCa (550mH) the 7V is 500mH and 650 ohms. I think it has more potential than the 7LCa. You can still get one at Lp Gear or Amazon and get free shipping.
AT is a mess with different products available in different markets. I'm not sure about headphones and microphones, but their cartridge distribution looks like amateur hour. They need to get their act together. This creates a lot of bad will and hard feelings.
neo
-
Another surprise from AT - a new TOTL MC ART1000
http://www.whathifi.com/news/audio-technica-unveils-new-reference-art1000-mc-cartridge
http://www.analogplanet.com/content/audio-technicas-evolutionary-new-art1000-phono-cartridge#Y210J0Vwa7cRSwJR.97
Hold your breath - close to $6k
The coils hang down to the cantilever near the stylus?
Could be an expensive dust bunny.
neo
-
I can't believe that thing isn't threaded!
-
More AT - LP5 turntable
http://eu.audio-technica.com/hifi-phono/turntables/AT-LP5
This one has a longer arm, about 9.8" eff length w/no VTF OTF. Has Technics style arm bearings. New (?) AT95X w/red stylus.
Includes a built-in preamp. Sells in England for just under $500.
Interesting situation with AT and N America sales - no high end product is offered, not that this table is high end. If you go to AT N America site the TOTL MC is the PTGIII. Is this because AT is heavily discounted in the US? Not thought of as a high end company?
I suspect it's because worldwide sales might be hurt by US discounts and US customers would tend to buy grey market product w/no warranty.
I believe it's only the turntable/cartridge division where this situation exists. This sucks.
If you want an ATN150MLX stylus it might be a good idea not to wait. The new ATN150Sa stylus is $251.21 at Lp Gear. This is aluminum/shibata.
neo
-
Ok classmates (and teacher 8)), I've got a couple questions for you:
1) I may have the opportunity to buy a Grace F9 for a decent price. While it has a stylus, it's in unknown condition so likely needs to be replaced. The Soundsmith replacements are supposedly fantastic, but by the time I put a new stylus on, it will be >$600, and I'm questioning whether the combination will be THAT good? Input and suggestions are greatly appreciated.
2) The same seller has a Signet TK-7E cartridge with an AT-22SS stylus with ~100 hours for a good price. I've read lots of good things about the different TK-7 models, and the AT-22SS stylus is supposed to be fantastic in its own right. First question is advice/feedback on this cartridge and stylus combination--how would it compare to the AT150MLX cartridge I picked up a few months ago? Second question is whether the AT150MLX (and variant) stylus will fit on the TK-7E. I've read that the 15SS will fit on the Signet, but is the AT15SS and AT150, et al the same fitment?
Thanks in advance!
AC
-
I think the 150MLstylus works on the TK7Ea. I think the TK7 is a different system.
Don
-
Hi Evan,
Don is correct (go to the head of the class?). The Signet TK7E is from the old Signet line and is a round plug model. Matter of fact, the generator is identical to the 15/20SS with 450mH, 500 ohm, and 2.7V.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=150532)
The 15/20 beryllium/shibata stylus is unobtainium and would be virtually impossible to replace. Problem is, exotic round plug styli are extremely rare. Lp Gear might have a 20SLa or similar. I think most of the 20 series is beryllium. Not sure about any of that availability.
I find my 15/20SS to be an eminently listenable cart. It seems to have the detailed AT resolution, but with a sweeter presentation than the 150MLX. The ML/boron stylus is more exact.
The F9 is a great cart. I haven't heard it with a Soundsmith replacement stylus. I imagine it's excellent - said to combine superior resolution with the Grace musicality.
If your 150MLX seems a little bright or unforgiving, try a 400K resistor in parallel with your input. Make sure input capacitance is < 200pF.
neo
-
Hi Evan,
Don is correct (go to the head of the class?). The Signet TK7E is from the old Signet line and is a round plug model. Matter of fact, the generator is identical to the 15/20SS with 450mH, 500 ohm, and 2.7V.
I figured this out after I posted my question. Not sure what happened to my response? Dog ate it? :lol:
The 15/20 beryllium/shibata stylus is unobtainium and would be virtually impossible to replace. Problem is, exotic round plug styli are extremely rare. Lp Gear might have a 20SLa or similar. I think most of the 20 series is beryllium. Not sure about any of that availability.
LP Gear sells a replacement, but a bonded alloy cantilever.
I find my 15/20SS to be an eminently listenable cart. It seems to have the detailed AT resolution, but with a sweeter presentation than the 150MLX. The ML/boron stylus is more exact.
The F9 is a great cart. I haven't heard it with a Soundsmith replacement stylus. I imagine it's excellent - said to combine superior resolution with the Grace musicality.
If your 150MLX seems a little bright or unforgiving, try a 400K resistor in parallel with your input. Make sure input capacitance is < 200pF.
neo
I need to inspect my 150--even after 20 hours it's not sounding that great.
Thanks!
-
I need to inspect my 150--even after 20 hours it's not sounding that great.
Somehow I missed your edit of the last post. If the cart was new, 20 hrs is not adequate for break in. It could be close to 100 hrs.
neo
-
Acutex fans:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151290)
neo
-
Here are the 310, 312, and 315 in living colour.... :icon_lol:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151295)
It is hard to distinguish many differences between the three although other folk swear that the 320 is 'The One'..... :thumb:
When I load the LPM 420STR however...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151296)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151298)
the clouds part and the sun bursts through with vivid clarity... :dance:
This cartridge is surely in my top 15...... :guns:
-
Somehow I missed your edit of the last post. If the cart was new, 20 hrs is not adequate for break in. It could be close to 100 hrs.
neo
I'll give it more time to run in. I'm in the home stretch of my turntable build, after which it will be easier to swap the 150 into rotation.
-
Hard to find generator specs for Acutex. Seems that some of the upper models were 610 DC/ 2700 IMP. Some also had boron cantilevers, but tip mass seems a bit high. They must have bonded diamonds.
Nagaoka is said to be the OEM. This also makes sense as Nagaoka makes most of their styli with bonded tips.
Acutex are induced magnet types, with magnets at 45° w/a piece of metal shield between the magnets.
Are some Acutex models 3 magnets?
Any info - please jump in.
neo
-
Guess I'm diving into the MM rabbit hole! My AT 150 MLX is sounding fantastic on the TransFi tonearm. I just received an NOS Signet TK7SU with a TKN3 stylus, and have a TK7e with an AT22SS stylus coming in. Think I've got enough back ups at this point, although I'm eyeing a Fidelity Research MM just to hear what it sounds like.
-
All good choices Evan...
You'll soon be an expert... :thumb:
-
All good choices Evan...
You'll soon be an expert... :thumb:
Thanks Henry! :green:
-
Guess I'm diving into the MM rabbit hole! My AT 150 MLX is sounding fantastic on the TransFi tonearm. I just received an NOS Signet TK7SU with a TKN3 stylus, and have a TK7e with an AT22SS stylus coming in. Think I've got enough back ups at this point, although I'm eyeing a Fidelity Research MM just to hear what it sounds like.
That's great. I was afraid you might have too much capacitance for flat response from the MLX.
I think we touched on this in a PM. The TK7E and 7SU share the same generator. Check out the chart near the top of the page (72). That's not such a bad thing. You might find one body sounding better than the other. If you have a digital (necessary) multimeter, you can check for similar channel resistance. Some meters can measure inductance and you can check that too.
Not sure if you were reading this thread when I bought an old Signet MR 5.0ML ? The body didn't sound good, but the generator is the same as a 440 (490mH), and the stylus sounds great. But that's a modern 100/120 series beryllium/ML. Your TK7's are older round plug types, and with that ATN20SS coming in, you should be in great shape.
Henry,
Before I forget again, great photos!!
Don't you have a couple of FR MMs ?? Could you tell us about them? The FR-6SE looks like the best one?
neo
-
I can not find this cartridge LPM 420STR . Can someone give me a link? Thanks...
Here are the 310, 312, and 315 in living colour.... :icon_lol:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151295)
It is hard to distinguish many differences between the three although other folk swear that the 320 is 'The One'..... :thumb:
When I load the LPM 420STR however...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151296)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151298)
the clouds part and the sun bursts through with vivid clarity... :dance:
This cartridge is surely in my top 15...... :guns:
-
I can not find this cartridge LPM 420STR . Can someone give me a link? Thanks...
The 420STR is a vintage cartridge that is no longer made.
You need to keep an eye out for one on eBay or even better....HiFiShark.
They come up from time to time. You just need to be patient.
Here is a LPM 412STR that is currently available
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/381791961623?rmvSB=true
Good luck.
-
Henry,
Before I forget again, great photos!!
Don't you have a couple of FR MMs ?? Could you tell us about them? The FR-6SE looks like the best one?
neo
Thanks Neo....
Yes I have a whole cotillion of FR MMs....
The FR-5
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151947)
The FR-5E (a favourite of J.Carr)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151948)
and the best of them....the FR-6SE
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=151949)
Luscious and enveloping as they all are....the FR-6SE mounted in the ceramic headshell of my SAEC WE-8000/ST tonearm is one of the most captivating sounds that has filled my room :rock:
Regards
-
Trigger pulled! Fidelity Research FR-6-SE coming from Hong Kong with an NOS stylus (and stylus guard--learned the other one I was considering didn't have one).
Looking forward to hearing it on my TransFi.
Neo,
I'm not sure what the input capacitance is on my phono stage, and I have low C phono cables, but it definitely is fine with the MLX. I think the problem I had with the other arms was more of an effective mass issue, or it could be that the MLX is just finally hitting its stride?
Henry,
Thanks again for your guidance! Will post some shots of the FR-6-SE when I get it installed.
AC
-
Congrats Evan,
You sure have your listening 'work' cut-out for you.... :drool:
I'm so enamoured with the FR-6SE that I rushed in to secure a spare for myself in case something untoward occurs.... :stupid:
Just to be safe....
Regards
-
Congrats Evan,
You sure have your listening 'work' cut-out for you.... :drool:
I'm so enamoured with the FR-6SE that I rushed in to secure a spare for myself in case something untoward occurs.... :stupid:
Just to be safe....
Regards
Henry,
That's a good plan. These things are rare, desired, and expensive. I'm still licking my cheapskate wounds. My consolation is that I won't be out too much if it's not my flavor, as I know somebody that'll prolly take it off my hands! :lol:
Evan
-
Now, for that perfect Shure V15. The question is III, IV, or V?
-
TK7SU is installed. Sounds really good--definitely better than the MLX.
-
Straight off....if it sounds good, that's a great sign Evan.
In the TransFi arm you have no worries about geometry but is there a way to check azimuth because you know a Shibata stylus is probably the fussiest profile for alignment.
-
Straight off....if it sounds good, that's a great sign Evan.
In the TransFi arm you have no worries about geometry but is there a way to check azimuth because you know a Shibata stylus is probably the fussiest profile for alignment.
Henry,
I have the Feickert Adjust+ record and software. Dialing in the TK7, Kleos, and Zero on the Pioneer are on my list of things for this weekend. The TransFi is amazingly easy to get close out of the chute. Adjusting azimuth is more fiddly than with an AT head shell on the Pioneer, but VTA is a piece of cake.
Oh, and I have a V15-III and Jico Neo-SAS coming! Did I mention I'm diving into the rabbit hole?
Evan
-
Henry,
I have the Feickert Adjust+ record and software. Dialing in the TK7, Kleos, and Zero on the Pioneer are on my list of things for this weekend.
Oh, and I have a V15-III and Jico Neo-SAS coming! Did I mention I'm diving into the rabbit hole?
Eav
Hahaha.....
It's like you've been bitten Evan.... :angel:
With all those cartridges, it might be a better idea to have them mounted in their own headshells and use them with the pivoted arm leaving the Kleos for the TransFi?
Just a thought..... :tempted:
-
Hahaha.....
It's like you've been bitten Evan.... :angel:
With all those cartridges, it might be a better idea to have them mounted in their own headshells and use them with the pivoted arm leaving the Kleos for the TransFi?
Just a thought..... :tempted:
Henry,
That's an interesting idea. I have two wands for the TransFi--I'd planned on running either the Kleos or an MM cartridge on the TransFi and can keep one plugged into an MC input on the phono stage and one plugged into the MM input. The Pioneer I'd planned on keeping for the Zero and plugged into the second MC input, but it's not that hard to swap inputs.
Now that my MM collection is growing, however, maybe it makes sense to mount a few on the Pioneer. I also thought the Pioneer to be a bit too high mass for 70s era MM cartridges, which I thought liked lower mass? The FR-6se should play quite nicely in the Pioneer arm, though.
Oh, the TK7e with the AT20SS arrived from Singapore today. I'm enjoying the TK7SU so much at the moment, I'm not itching to mount it just yet.
Zoot is sounding very nice! :thumb: 8) :green:
AC
-
New AT cart announcement - coming (Japan) in Dec.
https://www.audio-technica.co.jp/atj/list_model.php?categoryId=1010502&sortType=releaceDate
New stereo motor is in the VM700 and 500 series. It's 460mH, 800DC/2.7K, 4mV out. Looks like a higher output 15/20 series (450mH, 2.7V).
The 500 is plastic and the 700 is deluxe. Top stylus is LC, then shibata, then ML. All cantilevers are aluminum.
New mono MM (2) is 600 series and has inductance which looks like one channel - 230mH, 400DC/1.4K, 3mV.
The VM760SLC - $771 list.
New AT-150Sa - $877 list.
neo
-
The FR6e arrived today. Will mount it up on the Pioneer arm this weekend and give it a listen.
-
The FR6e arrived today. Will mount it up on the Pioneer arm this weekend and give it a listen.
You did mean the 6SE....?
-
Halcro,
(Thought I'd comment here rather than on Audio Karma, since we were drifting further away from the topic of the thread there.)
Just got my first Yamamoto HS4 carbon fiber headshell and the effect was quite striking.
I had earlier compared Audiocraft AC4000 unipivot tonearm, an aluminum headshell, and Audiocraft AC03 cartridge with Micro MA505LS tonearm, Yamamoto HS3 boxwood headshell, and A&R P77 + Jico SAS cartridge. The P77 sounded nice, warm, but not as refined or extended as the AC03 and also a hint bloated.
Yesterday, I just changed the Yamamoto HS3 boxwood to Yamamoto HS4 carbon fiber and everything else stayed the same. The P77 now sounds much more open & refined, less bloated, and in general much closer to the AC03, though the latter is still a notch more refined & open. On the downside, some of the warmth also disappeared. So I'm wondering if a headshell of hard wood like ebony or an ebony spacer with the carbon fiber headshell would be the optimal combination. What's your set-up for your Garrott P77?
-
Yesterday, I just changed the Yamamoto HS3 boxwood to Yamamoto HS4 carbon fiber and everything else stayed the same. The P77 now sounds much more open & refined, less bloated, and in general much closer to the AC03, though the latter is still a notch more refined & open. On the downside, some of the warmth also disappeared. So I'm wondering if a headshell of hard wood like ebony or an ebony spacer with the carbon fiber headshell would be the optimal combination. What's your set-up for your Garrott P77?
Hi Plato,
I'm not familiar with the AC03 but "bloat" is not something I've heard with the SAS in the Garrott P77, although with its original stylus that word could possibly apply.
With the P77/SAS and HS4 carbon fiber headshell, the sound is simply sublime.
I could almost be tempted to say....near perfect 8)
Now admittedly that's in the Dyna DV-507/II tonearm so perhaps you could try it in your AC-4000 tonearm?
The A&R P77 is not however identical to the Garrott P77 although it does form the basis of it.......
-
"Bloat" was a bit of an exaggeration and certainly there's no excess bloat with the HS4. And yes, the sound is indeed pretty amazing. I'll have to keep my eyes open for a Garrott P77 body.
So which cartridges do NOT sound great on the HS4?? And what works for them?
Also, you've been advocating the Shure V15-III recently. Why the III rather than IV or V or Vx?
-
Also, you've been advocating the Shure V15-III recently. Why the III rather than IV or V or Vx?
Good question.... :scratch:
I've not heard the others and the III seems to have the greater reputation. There also appeared to be greater satisfaction with the SAS mating with the III than the others :thumb:
So which cartridges do NOT sound great on the HS4?? And what works for them?
Most of the cartridges I've tried sound better in the HS4 headshell and those that don't (like the Atlas)...at least don't sound worse :dunno:
-
You did mean the 6SE....?
Prolly :duh:
-
Good question.... :scratch:
I've not heard the others and the III seems to have the greater reputation. There also appeared to be greater satisfaction with the SAS mating with the III than the others :thumb:
Ok, thanks! Based on everything I've read, the III & V seem more popular than the IV, though the sonic differences aren't entirely clear.
Most of the cartridges I've tried sound better in the HS4 headshell and those that don't (like the Atlas)...at least don't sound worse :dunno:
That's seems like a strong endorsement :D So for which ones do you prefer a wooden, metal, or ceramic headshell?
-
So for which ones do you prefer a wooden, metal, or ceramic headshell?
Prior to the Yamamoto Carbon Fiber HS4 headshell, I used to have a loose 'rule-of-thumb' that metal-bodied cartridges sounded best in wood shells, plastic-bodied cartridges sounded best in metal head shells and wood-bodied cartridges could go in the ceramic shell.
But even that 'rule' is undone by the exceptions :uzi:
After trying literally a dozen cartridges in the SAEC ceramic headshell of my 8000/ST tonearm.....the FR-6SE was born for this shell
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=152548)
My Signet TK-7LCa has sounded so brilliant in the Copperhead plastic resin-bodied arm and shell that it's not coming off..... :rock:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=152551)
Similarly....my Victor Z1/SAS sounds so good in a no-name metal headshell I bought for $5.00, that it also is going nowhere...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=152552)
And then there's the Fidelity Research FR-3 headshells which are mistakingly (IMO) maligned by some afficianados
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=152553)
yet which cleverly combine metal inserts in a resin body to create a decoupled headshell which matches so beautifully with many cartridges when used with the FR-64s and FR-66s tonearms.
So rules are good as far as they go....but the real lesson is to try different combinations because the cartridge/headshell interface is, IMO......one of the greatest factors in extracting a cartridge's maximum performance. :rules:
And it's a factor that the majority of high-end audiophiles with their high-end 'fixed-headshell' tonearms are simply unable to exploit... :wtf:
-
Thanks again!
I have the same FR-S/3, which I think is pressed aluminum rather than resin. My Miyajima Premium BE (ebony body) sounds fabulous in it. My Accuphase AC1 (aluminum body) sounded very open, smooth, and dynamic in the SAEC ULS-3X headshell (ceramic, like yours), but not quite warm or natural enough for my taste. It's now in the Audiocraft MC-S/T arm wand (aluminum) and it's not coming off :D
Also, I changed the headshell leads on the HS4 carbon fiber headshell to 1877 Angel's Breath and was very positively impressed. Quite a change in sound.
-
Also, I changed the headshell leads on the HS4 carbon fiber headshell to 1877 Angel's Breath and was very positively impressed. Quite a change in sound.
Oh yes.....I have a friend in Bavaria who as a matter of course with all his headshells, replaces the leads to pure silver Van den Hul.
I have used silver leads on a couple of my shells but can't truthfully say I can hear a difference :scratch:
Pretty sure the S3 is plastic and not aluminium.... :thumb:
-
Your Bavarian friend, would that be thuchan aka audiocirc.com? :D
Here's an old Fidelity Research catalog saying FR-S/3 is pressed aluminum:
(http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l183/Plato65/FR%20catalo12.jpg)
-
Oh wow....thanks for that.
That's amazing......
I've never seen pressed aluminium done so sharply in such a thickness.
The Japanese had such resources in the Golden Age of analogue.... :flame:
-
Your Bavarian friend, would that be thuchan aka audiocirc.com?
Non other..... :thumb:
-
Non other..... :thumb:
Well, he does speak of his "Sydney friend" a lot on his blog :D And strangely enough, soon after you sold an MC-L1000, thuchan seems to have acquired one. Pure coincidence, I'm sure. 8)
In terms of headshell leads and other cables, my experience has been that going from stranded OFC copper to solid-core (or Litz), single-crystal, high-purity copper is generally an improvement. In comparisons between solid-core, single-crystal, high-purity copper and silver, I've generally preferred copper.
-
Well, he does speak of his "Sydney friend" a lot on his blog :D And strangely enough, soon after you sold an MC-L1000, thuchan seems to have acquired one. Pure coincidence, I'm sure. 8)
Haha....keen eye you have... :eyebrows:
After I found my MC-L1000, I was so impressed that I found another (better) one for Thuchan.
As it turned out.....I couldn't live with the lack of bass performance in my sample.....but Thuchan's is superlative by all accounts.
It shows that paying for the 'best' is often the course that rewards :thumb:
-
I'm still struck by the change in sound of my A&R P77 + Jico SAS when going from a boxwood to a carbon fiber headshell. This change should have no effect on the electrical properties of the cartridge, but still seemed to have an effect on the perceived frequency extension. So it appears that resonances in the plastic body are a real factor at least for this cartridge.
Have you tried graphite headshells? What are the physical differences in terms of rigidity & resonances between carbon fiber & graphite?
-
Hi Plato, welcome to the monkey house.
I think it was about 2 years ago Furukawa Electric announced they would no longer make PCOCC wire. AT made no mention of it with their new carts, and does not supply PCOCC headshell leads with these new entries. [note - these headshell wires are still available. Like the ATN150MLX, if you want it, better get it now.]
It's my understanding that long crystal copper is made in ways other than continuous casting.
If anyone has generator specs (inductance/resistance) on Garrott or FR, please contribute.
neo
-
At least, Wan Lung in Taiwan still makes OCC wire and sells it under Neotech.
-
PC OCC isn't really a type of wire. It's a process for making long crystal "oxygen free" wire. LC wire was invented by Hitachi in 1975. The long crystal structure dramatically reduces the number of boundaries within the copper or silver. PC OCC process was invented 10 years later so it's obviously not necessary to produce LC. For a more detailed explanation:
http://www.atlascables.com/design-conductors.html
neo
-
Well, it's common to call the wire resulting from an OCC process as OCC wire. Interestingly, it has lower resistance than silver:
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cg1003808 (http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cg1003808)
My the point is that Wan Lung I believe is the only company using the OCC process currently. Furukawa stopped using it, as you mentioned. See about half way through the presentation: http://www.audiosensibility.com/faq/TechnologyOverviewSlideshow.pdf (http://www.audiosensibility.com/faq/TechnologyOverviewSlideshow.pdf)
-
Yes, you're right. OCC copper has lower resistance than silver, but does it have lower resistance than OCC silver?
I'm not sure if OCC wire is better than other LC. I think there are others making LC wire, but I'm not sure of that either.
The point of all this is coil wire and headshell leads. AT makes no mention of coil wire type in new offerings and does not supply the PC OCC headshell leads. They do supply the leads with the 150Sa and 33Sa (newer), and use PC OCC coil wire in those. Maybe they're scaling back. Carts like the 440/120 have/had OCC coils.
neo
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=153562)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=153563)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=153564)
The Palladian by Acoustical Systems :flame:
-
Looking good! How does it sound?
Surprised to see four pairs of screw holes. Have you tried using two or more pairs at the same time for a tighter connection?
-
Looking good! How does it sound?
Surprised to see four pairs of screw holes. Have you tried using two or more pairs at the same time for a tighter connection?
It's looking like my 40 odd cartridge collection and 5 other tonearms (plus turntable) may suddenly be redundant..... :wtf:
I think all the holes are to allow max. flexibility. I don't think extra screws will work as the heads interfere....
-
That good?! One cartridge, one tonearm, one turntable??? One record also? :D Which ones would be the one tonearm & turntable?
-
Hahaha.....
I'm hoping it's not true.....but my 40 year search for the 'perfect' cartridge never really appeared realistic.
Until now..... :beer:
This is a serious game-changer..... :scratch:
-
Hahaha.....
I'm hoping it's not true.....but my 40 year search for the 'perfect' cartridge never really appeared realistic.
Until now..... :beer:
This is a serious game-changer..... :scratch:
Wow, didn't expect this from you, a MC no less. Isn't Acoustical Systems Dertonarm's (Agon user name) company? What's the output? All I could turn up in a quick search was effusive praise.
http://www.hmfsolutions.com/news/palladian-moving-coil/
https://belhifi.com/products/acoustical-systems-palladian
Looks like about $9.5K ?
I call first dibs on your throwaways. :lol:
neo
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=153621)
Wow, didn't expect this from you, a MC no less. Isn't Acoustical Systems Dertonarm's (Agon user name) company? What's the output? All I could turn up in a quick search was effusive praise.
http://www.hmfsolutions.com/news/palladian-moving-coil/
https://belhifi.com/products/acoustical-systems-palladian
Looks like about $9.5K ?
I call first dibs on your throwaways. :lol:
neo
And if you can read German....
Acoustical Systems The Palladian
PrinzipMoving CoilAusgangsspannung0,33mV bei 5cm/sek
Statische Nadelnachgiebigkeit16-18mm/N bei 18°C bis 30°C
Empfohlene Auflagekraft17-18mN (1,7 - 1,75 p.)
Kanalgleichheit0,35dB bei 1kHzKanaltrennung32dB
Frequenzgang15Hz bis 32kHz ±2dB
NadelschliffQ4 Shibata EVO
Innenwiderstand5Ω
Empfohlener Abschlusswiderstand100-200Ω
Gewicht 11,8g
Preis 8800 Euro
-
The German text doesn't have much additional info from the English text in the picture, other than that the needle tip is Shibata EVO.
Yes, when you start selling all your other cartridges, do keep us in mind :D
-
Hi Neo,
Acoustical Systems is signed in under the name of Axinia Schäfer
in Rott. This is a small town in Bavaria, Germany, south-west of
München (Munich).
She's a diploma economist and, I think, in cooperation with
Dietrich Brakemeier and maybe other partners.
This is the website: http://www.arche-headshell.de/ (http://www.arche-headshell.de/)
I know you are perfect in German - so here's the first review of
the Palladian:
http://www.hifistatement.net/tests/item/1834-acoustical-systems-the-palladian?limitstart=0 (http://www.hifistatement.net/tests/item/1834-acoustical-systems-the-palladian?limitstart=0)
Mit den besten Grüßen - Toni
-
Thanks for the link Toni. Gruben - pits, dig? Is that like, can you dig it, or happy hunting? None of the above?
Yes Brakemeier was Dertonarm on Audiogon, if anybody cares. It might have something to do with the cart going down under, but what difference does that make? Another ho hum megabuck titanium cart, this one with an aluminum cantilever and a shibata, can join the ranks of Atlas, Anna, etc. Everyone says it sounds like live music. I'm kind of sick of Keith Jarrett, and Jan Garbarek makes me barf, how about Jazz at the Pawnshop? :rotflmao:
Henry,
I hear the ART1000 is better and half the price, not that I've tried it.
Seriously, congratulations.
neo
-
Neo,
The Anna and Atlas in particular are not even in the same town let alone playing on the same field as the Palladian :lol:
Diamond-coated boron anyone.... :duh:
But don't sneeze at aluminium as a cantilever......
Beryllium aside......many of my favourite LOMC cartridges come equipped with the humble bauxite derivative:-
FR-7, FR-7f, FR-7fz, and all the old SPUs and new SPUs I believe..... :scratch:
And yes....Detonarm (Dietrich Brakemeier) has always been a 'champion' of the FR-7 series cartridges.
Whilst I haven't yet heard the ART1000.....its paternal ancestor the Victor MC-L1000
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=153633)
whilst interesting and fun.......suffers some biological faults which I can't imagine its projeny could correct... :thumb:
At any rate.....Dietrich's sonic sensibilities are as far removed from Jonathan Carr's as mine are and for that I'm eternally grateful :kiss:
-
Nothing like a little sarcasm and kidding to get the conversation going, but I really can't take Jan Garbarek. The "critics" got upset over in Jazz Circle when I said Phil Woods wasn't my favorite. Who cares? Well, I guess they do or they wouldn't get upset. :duh:
Halcro,
Did you have/had an L-1000 ? I know it has the coils attached near the tip, but seems very different from the ART1000. The Victor has .22mV and 25 ohms ? The AT is coreless with .2mV and 3 ohm impedance. The Victor specs look more like a Denon and the AT looks like a hot rod 50ANV. It must have some powerful magnets.
neo
-
Did you have/had an L-1000 ? I know it has the coils attached near the tip, but seems very different from the ART1000. The Victor has .22mV and 25 ohms ? The AT is coreless with .2mV and 3 ohm impedance. The Victor specs look more like a Denon and the AT looks like a hot rod 50ANV. It must have some powerful magnets.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=153676)
Yes Neo....had it and sold it....
-
That coil connection to the cantilever looks icky.
The Palladian must be one hell of a cart. Did you hear its predecessors? Apparently this is the third and best entry from them. Funny thing is, there's nothing new here, it's an optimization. The HIFI Statement review was a little strange regarding aluminum resonances being lower in frequency than boron therefore less objectionable. Say what? What did make sense was the varnish (special?) on the cantilever and its shortening made a big difference. A shorter cantilever will resonate at a higher frequency. So will a more rigid one.
I was playing the Z1/SAS at 52.3K/100pF internal. I think that's close to what you use. Sounds better. 200pF didn't sound right, but different cables.
Enjoy your new cart. Please keep us informed of any developments.
Regards,
-
I haven't heard the other two AS cartridges but Thuchan of course has them.... :thumb:and the Palladian is now his 'Reference' out of the 85 cartridges he has.. :slap:
But despite the fact that the Palladian appears faultless as of now.....I still can't stop this disease.
Be prepared for some imminent news..... :rules:
-
More about the UNI DIN alignment and protractor a little later. I want to show you the Grado Signature Laboratory tonearm:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=153748)
On Agon we were talking about zero offset underhung arms. This one is a little different. The cantilever points at the pivot in the vertical plane and the lateral alignment is conventional.
This is said to be a great sounding arm. I think it looks pretty cool too.
neo
-
The new NeoSAS/R stylus is now available.
With tapered ruby cantilever
-
Halcro,
Do you know the differences between the "regular" neo SAS and the more expensive ones?
I was thinking about this the other night when playing the Z1. The new Z1 SAS looks the same except for the sapphire cantilever and the price is now $211.
I saw a regular shibata replacement for an X1, but still no SAS. Lookey here:
http://www.jico-stylus.com/index.php?cPath=18&sort=2a&page=10
Ruby and sapphire have the same chemical composition except for trace elements which determine color. Is one tapered and the other not?
neo
-
Halcro,
Do you know the differences between the "regular" neo SAS and the more expensive ones?
Ruby and sapphire have the same chemical composition except for trace elements which determine color. Is one tapered and the other not?
neo
Neo,
The more expensive ruby stylus is tapered. No idea why they use ruby for the taper and sapphire for the straight cantilever.
AC
-
Since ruby & sapphire are for our purposes the same, the only difference is the taper. Does the taper then really make a difference that justifies the doubling of the price?
-
Neo,
The more expensive ruby stylus is tapered. No idea why they use ruby for the taper and sapphire for the straight cantilever.
AC
And as we're talking most probably 'synthetic' sapphire and ruby.....I can't see the reasoning for a 100% increase in cost to US$412... :peek:
This puts a vintage V15/III at approx $700 including postage if one wanted the neoSAS/R.
As one can buy a NOS Victor Z1 for $135......it will be interesting to see how the marketplace reacts to this pricing strategy?
I'm tempted to try one for my Garrott P77 though..... :scratch:
-
I suppose the difference in price is a reflection of their cost. They probably break a lot of ruby crystals trying to taper them.
And it gets worse, the M97x SAS(R) is $467. :duh:
What is the length of these Shure cantilevers, 4mm ? Even if it's longer the cheaper one might sound better. Even though tapering will reduce tip mass, there isn't that much to begin with. David used to say that tapered is more rigid, but it seems to me the other way around. Wouldn't the tapered end be more flexible? Doesn't matter as much as having the secondary resonances being complimentary to the response of the cart.
I think this question might be moot. Send your cart to Soundsmith or a competent retipper and you can get the stylus of your dreams a bit cheaper. BTW, Soundsmith now has boron/OCL for $399. I think ruby/CL is still $250, but that makes the regular SAS look like a deal. :thumb:
neo
-
I think ruby/CL is still $250, but that makes the regular SAS look like a deal. :thumb:
With the improvement in sound that the original SAS rendered......you're damn right :drool:
-
With the improvement in sound that the original SAS rendered......you're damn right :drool:
Yes, but the original SAS no longer exists unless you already have one, or find NOS. What I was wondering about in the first place was the difference between boron and sapphire for my Z1. All other things being equal I'm guessing boron is a little better for this cart. Sapphire should compliment its strengths and boron improve its weakness, if you can call it that.
For the money Jico wants for the SAS(R) I was hoping it would be a hollow tube ruby/sapphire. J Carr told us Namiki has them in stock. That might really be interesting.
neo
-
So despite the Palladian eclipsing all the other cartridges in my collection......
I couldn't help myself from snaffling a rare, mint Sony XL-88 LOMC for which I have been searching a long while.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=154009)
It is surprisingly small (half the size and weight of its brother the XL-55
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=154010)
But I think they make a charming couple.... :thumb:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=154011)
Cantilevers and styli appear to be identical...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=154012)
Just a couple of hours on it but it sounds promising... :angel:
-
Halcro,
Nandric (agon) and possibly Griff have the D version (diamond cantilever) of this cart and think highly of it.
It will be interesting to find out what you think of your new red cutie.
neo
-
Acoustical Systems SMARTractor alignment device is said to be the most precise and easiest to use. Of course that's provided you can sight the intersection of the arm pivots, from above. The name is a variation of the original device of this kind, the Dennison SoundTractor. The Feickert version now also has the 3 standard alignments. The Soundtractor and Geo-Disc (platter level pivot sight) have Loefgren A (Baerwald) only.
http://www.arche-headshell.de/alignment-tools/smartractor/
"In the last 2/3 of the record's groove, the UNI-DIN curve offers significant (18-45%) less average - as well as less total! - distortion than Baerwald or Loefgren."
Saying this as a general statement isn't true. It might be true for arms designed for Stevenson where achieving Loefgren A or B is not possible due to headshell slot length limitations, but I doubt it. Uni Din is an intermediate alignment in between Stevenson and Loefgren A. The inner null is moved out to 63.5mm. You can see the curves here:
http://www.analogplanet.com/content/uni-din-versus-l%C3%B6fgren-b-just-clarify#CskXR3sRrZGP1xTL.97
I used a similar alignment 30 years ago when I set up Japanese tables (Technics mostly). Ever notice most vintage Japanese arms have 15mm overhang regardless of effective length? Resulting nulls wind up close to Stevenson and minimize inner groove tracking problems. With "better" carts most people prefer one of the Loefgren alignments.
If you can't change effective length (mounting distance) you can get an intermediate alignment. I used to put the cart at the far end of the headshell and increase offset angle for a similar inner null. You should check the angle of both the inner the outer nulls to be sure new offset angle is correct.
On the cart the distance from headshell screws to stylus varies, but you usually wind up close to uni din, "invented" by Brakemeier.
neo
-
Another thing to ponder is the relationship between alignment error and distortion. To say 3% alignment error is 3% distortion is flat out wrong IMO.
Although Loefgren postulated that alignment error caused distortion, it appears this has never been quantified. Baerwald who popularized the Loefgren A alignment, said the error caused 2nd harmonic distortion. This was in the 1930's and the distortion analyzer was invented in 1941 by Hewlett Packard. Can't find any studies that actually measured angular distortion although our ears tell us there's a difference in the sound of particular alignments.
Who thinks this difference in sound is 2nd harmonic distortion? Please raise your hand. :sleep:
neo
-
I finally got around to installing the Fidelity Research 6 SE. All I can say is WOW! :thumb: Henry you were right, this cartridge is something special right out of the box. I've got it set up with 2.0g tracking force on my TransFi arm and on the first track I was amazed at how it sucks me right into the music. I haven't even dialed in the VTA yet--just used the same settings as with the AT 150. Will let it run in for a few sides then do some critical listening on LPs I'm familiar with (I just got a bunch of new-to-me records that I'm enjoying hearing for the first time).
I was afraid I damaged the stylus mount pressing it into the motor body--the plastic has degraded a bit over the years, and the fit was very snug, but it finally went. Sure wish it had some sort of stylus guard!
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=154025)
-
I love how you've posted cartridges that are used/NOS and nearly impossible over the years!
Right now I want a new one, but I don't know when exactly I'll get one. I'm also debating a different turntable. Mine has to be tipped so far to one size for correct azimuth that at the end of a record the label is often high enough to rub on it.
-
Evan,
Good to read about your new cart.
Does the TransFi arm have VTA OTF ? Do you purchase it directly from them, or go to Brit ebay?
neo
-
Hi Folsom,
I remember the photo of your Goldering from the other thread. That's a mess and if it has been like that since you've had it, I doubt if you really know what it can do.
I'm not saying it's world class. I don't know, but some people love the 1042. For that series I believe the generators are all the same and difference is the stylus. This would need verification, but I think it would be worth pursuing.
Always happy to make recommendations.
neo
-
I finally got around to installing the Fidelity Research 6 SE. All I can say is WOW! :thumb: Henry you were right, this cartridge is something special right out of the box. I've got it set up with 2.0g tracking force on my TransFi arm and on the first track I was amazed at how it sucks me right into the music. I haven't even dialed in the VTA yet--just used the same settings as with the AT 150. Will let it run in for a few sides then do some critical listening on LPs I'm familiar with (I just got a bunch of new-to-me records that I'm enjoying hearing for the first time).
I was afraid I damaged the stylus mount pressing it into the motor body--the plastic has degraded a bit over the years, and the fit was very snug, but it finally went. Sure wish it had some sort of stylus guard!
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=154025)
Glad to hear you like the FR-6SE Evan... :D
2 Gms may be a tad heavy for it? I run mine at 1.5Gms VTF.
I thought you managed to get one with the stylus guard?
-
Evan,
Good to read about your new cart.
Does the TransFi arm have VTA OTF ? Do you purchase it directly from them, or go to Brit ebay?
neo
Neo,
The TransFi has VTA OTF--one of the reasons I got it. I bought it directly from Vic--it really is a brilliant design and sounds great, especially given the relatively low cost.
I did tweak VTA yesterday just by setting the wand parallel to the record. Didn't seem to make a difference--still sounds great.
Evan
-
Glad to hear you like the FR-6SE Evan... :D
2 Gms may be a tad heavy for it? I run mine at 1.5Gms VTF.
I thought you managed to get one with the stylus guard?
Henry,
I started at the top end of VTF and will drop it down--seems a tad warm and lush, so less force may help that.
I think you're right about the guard! It may be in my cartridge box--need to look.
Evan
-
Hi Folsom,
I remember the photo of your Goldering from the other thread. That's a mess and if it has been like that since you've had it, I doubt if you really know what it can do.
What do you mean exactly?
-
What do you mean exactly?
A mechanical aspect of tracking or tracing a groove, dictates vertical orientation of the stylus/cantilever part of the moving system. Groove walls are cut at 45° so tracking has a 3 dimensional aspect, whether or not you consider the vertical part.
Picture a stylus mounted off at 15° angle. In order to have the stylus vertical you would have to tilt the cantilever and body an equal amount to compensate. With the cantilever/body tilted like this VTF is off vertical, tracing is uneven and information is lost or misrepresented, but this is an extreme example and results may vary with type.
Most "decent" carts will only vary slightly and a small azimuth adjustment can be rewarding.
I've read of people bending or twisting an aluminum cantilever to correct this, but I'm not recommending it.
I remember seeing the photos you posted. If I remember correctly the first one was shocking and the second didn't seem as bad, but still off quite a bit?
If I don't remember this correctly, then I take it back. Anyway, here is a good practical guide for azimuth:
http://www.sound-smith.com/faq/how-do-i-set-azimuth-adjustment-my-cartridge
neo
-
...I've read of people bending or twisting an aluminum cantilever to correct this, but I'm not recommending it.
Yep, that was me. It was a last resort measure on a badly defective Denon 102. Under a dissecting microscope with rubber coated forceps, I torqued the Al cantilever of a mismounted stylus into a better alignment. Not for the faint hearted.
-
I heard you could do it with a coffee straw. So I tried it on a badly damaged cantilever, e.g. no loss if I broke it. Which is what I did, but it was working pretty good until the damage to the aluminium took over. I'd try it again with an undamaged, or mildly damaged, cantilever if I ever needed to.
-
Henry,
I started at the top end of VTF and will drop it down--seems a tad warm and lush, so less force may help that.
I think you're right about the guard! It may be in my cartridge box--need to look.
Evan
Henry,
While I distinctly remembering buying a cartridge with a guard, I don't have it. I think I forgot to look for it when I received it. :duh:
Dropping VTF to 1.5 definitely brightens things up a bit. Love this cartridge! Thanks for the tip.
Evan
-
A mechanical aspect of tracking or tracing a groove, dictates vertical orientation of the stylus/cantilever part of the moving system. Groove walls are cut at 45° so tracking has a 3 dimensional aspect, whether or not you consider the vertical part.
Picture a stylus mounted off at 15° angle. In order to have the stylus vertical you would have to tilt the cantilever and body an equal amount to compensate. With the cantilever/body tilted like this VTF is off vertical, tracing is uneven and information is lost or misrepresented, but this is an extreme example and results may vary with type.
Most "decent" carts will only vary slightly and a small azimuth adjustment can be rewarding.
I've read of people bending or twisting an aluminum cantilever to correct this, but I'm not recommending it.
I remember seeing the photos you posted. If I remember correctly the first one was shocking and the second didn't seem as bad, but still off quite a bit?
If I don't remember this correctly, then I take it back. Anyway, here is a good practical guide for azimuth:
http://www.sound-smith.com/faq/how-do-i-set-azimuth-adjustment-my-cartridge
neo
Uh... my azimuth requires the cartridge to be turned a lot farther than you'd want, but it's not like 45º or anyhting. Some LP's make funny sounds because the sticker is so thick it rubs on the cartridge a little. It's because the tip is inserted into the cantilever very poorly.
Is the sound perfect? Probably not but it sounds normal.
Is it possible to bend the tip? I doubt it. Maybe the cantilever can be twisted? Eh?
-
Maybe the cantilever can be twisted? Eh?
Yes, but you better have steady hands and good magnification.
-
I did it. It's a little to the left while playing but seems fine. Still had to set azimuth a little. Doesn't rub on stickers though.
-
Dropping VTF to 1.5 definitely brightens things up a bit. Love this cartridge! Thanks for the tip.
You might also want to try raising the VTA just a smidgen at the pivot.....
This cartridge has great 'body'.....but it needs to be massaged 'just right'.... :tempted:
Regards
Henry
-
I did it. It's a little to the left while playing but seems fine. Still had to set azimuth a little. Doesn't rub on stickers though.
Actually I ruined it... no more music for me.
-
Sorry to hear that. I'm suspect that my success was dumb luck more than anything else.
-
Actually I ruined it... no more music for me.
EEK !! They're easy to break - even aluminum will break if it folds, or at the point of attachment. Those Goldring replacements are interchangeable within the series. Considering the 1042 is a Gyger S, not really overpriced. I wonder if another brand (Shure style) can be substituted?
Folsom, What arm do you use?
neo
-
The problem was that something within the magnet area got screwed up so it sounded like static all the time. Why and how I don't know. I'm actually sick of Goldring, and I do think it's overpriced. The cartridges cost nearly as much as turntables they come on.
I don't know what arm is on my table, it's a cheap MMF5.1 (although the sticker price isn't that cheap on them).
-
I don't know what arm is on my table, it's a cheap MMF5.1 (although the sticker price isn't that cheap on them).
I believe Pro-Ject makes the arms included on Music Hall turntables.
-
The problem was that something within the magnet area got screwed up so it sounded like static all the time. Why and how I don't know. I'm actually sick of Goldring, and I do think it's overpriced. The cartridges cost nearly as much as turntables they come on.
I don't know what arm is on my table, it's a cheap MMF5.1 (although the sticker price isn't that cheap on them).
Can't say I have experience with them, but the 5.1 seems to be well received. Looks like a med mass arm and I think you could use any of a wide range of carts. Want to stick with high output? A replaceable stylus is usually a plus. Looking for a particular sound, detailed, mellow, bright, laid back ?
Hard to beat AT for bang for your buck. Have anything in mind, maybe price?
neo
-
Well I decided to get a different turntable. I need to sell one or two more things before I can get it. I'll probably get an Ortofon Blue or AVA Grado.
-
Well, to catch up around here, Halcro wrote a review of the Palladian on Audiogon. You can find it about 10 posts down:
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/the-palladian-a-step-beyond
Since only a couple of people have heard the cart there's only so much to be said. The rest is speculation and of course, other related or unrelated things.
The discussion has turned to cantilever excursion and arm interaction. This leads me to something from about 8 years ago on VE. Thanks to Google I was able to locate this thread. I had forgotten its name and the original subject.
The OP is named Desktop. He is a retired industry pro who worked for a major speaker company. He did research about drivers and human perception.
Like the ancient Egyptians, VE edits its history and my posts have been deleted. Luckydog the physicist name was changed to guest. On page 3 he answers a question of mine and says the now forbidden name neo. :duh:
Anyway, check out the 2nd post:
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=11676
That should keep you busy for awhile.
neo
-
Thanks for that Neo,
The description of the movements of the cantilever are quite incredible but believable when you think about it :o
Really wish he included a Link to a video we could watch....
I'll try Google..... :scratch:
-
Ok....found an electron microscope video of a stylus in a groove and it doesn't seem to move the cantilever much at all.... :scratch:
https://youtu.be/GuCdsyCWmt8
-
Not that I know much about this stuff. I do enjoy listening and learning when I have time though. You have to remember that the stylus in the video is not properly mounted on a cartridge. That may change quite a few parameters regarding stylus/cantilever movement.
-
Ok....found an electron microscope video of a stylus in a groove and it doesn't seem to move the cantilever much at all.... :scratch:
https://youtu.be/GuCdsyCWmt8
That's what the RIAA network is for. You can see that some grooves are larger in the video.
-
The video in question was probably made before there was an internet, or before its general use. It wouldn't be possible to make such a video with an electron microscope. This was a slow motion film of an entire cantilever in action using laser interferometry. This splits a laser beam and uses mirrors and phase of the beams to measure things like the ends (internally) of an optic fiber cable. Apparently there are different kinds of interferometers and that's about the extent of my knowledge about them. If you're interested, there are U-tube videos explaining how they work.
The description of the cantilever movement is nothing short of amazing and hard to believe. In another thread Desktop thought it was made by Dynavector, but wasn't sure. I believe he said this was circulated only in the industry and was not for general consumption. This makes sense to me. If a film like this was released it might possibly hurt sales, scaring people away. Companies tend to be protective, but if the film were to be released today, I'd bet it would increase sales. Get your crazy cantilever, entire cartridge for only $98.99. Deluxe model for only $10,299.00. :thumb:
neo
-
I think what surprised me most, is the scale of the diamond compared to groove 'ditch'... :scratch:
I kinda had in my mind the stylus sort of 'buried' between the groove walls....
-
Me too, but such is not... I guess. :lol:
-
You might also want to try raising the VTA just a smidgen at the pivot.....
This cartridge has great 'body'.....but it needs to be massaged 'just right'.... :tempted:
Regards
Henry
Henry,
Lifting the tail indeed seems to improve the musicality--no discernible difference in timbre, but music is more emotionally engaging.
Thanks!
Evan
-
Henry,
Lifting the tail indeed seems to improve the musicality--no discernible difference in timbre, but music is more emotionally engaging.
Thanks!
Evan
Glad it works for you Evan....
For the final curtain, if you have a phonostage that can easily change loading....the FR-6SE is one cartridge that sounds better loaded above 47K Ohms.
I run mine at 60K... :thankyou:
It sure is one sweet cartridge.
As Neo would say.....errs on the side of 'omission. But so easy to listen to :beer:
Cheers
Henry
-
Check out these electron microscope photos.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/295971006731097497/
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/237213105346660717/
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=154511)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=154512)
Click on a photo in the link and you get more. An electron scope isn't suited for an "in action" video. If you watch the rest of the one Halcro linked to, you'll see what the guy had to do to make it. Only conductive surfaces show up so every insulator must be coated or plated. The scope he used took one frame every 20 seconds (I think he said) so the movement had to be recreated - moved 50 microns at a time.
The reason you need an electron scope for these views, is lack of perspective with optics. You can get 1000X with an optical scope, but the focal length is so short the lens is practically touching the object.
neo
-
The shot in the second Link (and also second photo in your post) still shows the relationship of the stylus to the groove which is the same as the YouTube video where only the very tip of the stylus navigates the groove.
Impossible to visualise the previously described "tortuous twisting" and "gymnastic convolutions" manifested upon the hapless cantilever.... :scratch:
-
I wonder if laser interferometry might exaggerate the gyrations of the cantilever.
It uses mirrors and they tend to create distortion when used at an angle.
Still, the description said at one point the cantilever seemed to fold up on itself and almost looked like it was in 2 places at the same time. :o
neo
-
I wonder if laser interferometry might exaggerate the gyrations of the cantilever.
It uses mirrors and they tend to create distortion when used at an angle.
Still, the description said at one point the cantilever seemed to fold up on itself and almost looked like it was in 2 places at the same time. :o
neo
Yeh......I just don't see that happening :wtf:
-
Yeh......I just don't see that happening :wtf:
Even if the motions in the video were exaggerated, I'd bet the real gyrations would blow your mind. On paper, the physics of a record player indicate it should not work. "They" used to say a record player is like a bumble bee. According to the laws of aerodynamics, it should not fly. More recently they discovered they underestimated how fast those wings flap.
Desktop was a very interesting poster on VE. As part of his research on speaker drivers, he discovered that midrange drivers produced a more real sound of the human voice if they were no more than about 2.5" in diameter. This was the result of double blind testing, not lab measurements.
neo
-
To change the subject, so far everyone who tried Palladian seems to love it. It must be seductive, so much so that the latest comment was almost obscene - kind of disgusting. I'm assuming not everyone is following the thread. At this point I'm losing interest. The same subjective comments are repeated. Maybe Stereoplay will get one to review and publish a lab report.
My previous comments about UNI DIN alignment might be incorrect. Brakemeier claims Analog Planet nulls are wrong. My comments are based on Fremer's published information or misinformation as the case may be. Maybe his friend Wally Whatisname screwed up?
I'll cut to the chase. Although Brakemeier claims that one null can not be calculated from the other and they don't conform to traditional geometry, I think he's full of it. This is a smoke screen. If there is one null, there has to be another or the alignment would be unlistenable. I suspect the point of alignment on his template is not actually the null and that's why Mikey screwed up, if in fact he did.
Brakemeier is a cleaver fellow and he claims intellectual property for this alignment. Good luck with that one Mr. Brakemeier. I think you might have delusions of grandeur.
Anyway, the giant table looks awesome and I suspect Acoustical Systems will sell a bunch of their carts at $10K/pop, maybe some arms and alignment devices. They will have to settle for that.
neo
-
Over the weekend I found what appears to be a NOS Signet TK7LCa. Installed it on my Townshend yesterday, it sounds very much like my AT20SS - a bit sweeter. It may evolve with more hours on the stylus but I'll probably let it go as I have a bunch of exra stylii for the AT20SS. I've been enjoying a M20E Super for the last few months - a very organic cartridge, excellent synergy with my Pilot 232 and Cornwalls.
If anybody is interested in inspecting the Signet let me know.
-
Hi Smctigue,
Vintage Cornwalls or a reissue? Interesting situation. Curious how you load the M20.
The 7LCa is a sought after cart. You shouldn't have any trouble moving it.
Let me ask you something else, did you check the astrological alignment of the moon on the day you installed the LCa ?
This could be important. The gravitational pull of the moon might affect the cantilever and cause a malignant overhangover. :duh:
Nice to hear from you again.
Regards,
neo
-
Neo, Cornwall I, '82 I think. I've been hearing Klipsch will send you running from the room for the past 30 years but that hasn't been my experience, I really like them. I load the M20E with 320pF (total) @ 47k. The E sounds like a refined Fl and as good as the highs are on the FL I think the E's are better.
-
S,
Some of the old Klipsch are really great - misunderstood me thinks. Put 2 watt to some corner horn _ and the hall does light so bright ti tight.
I used to load the FL @ 52K, around the same pF. The highs were great. Regret selling that one. What pre are you running?
neo
-
Neo, I've been thinking of increasing the resistance a bit as well. I need to order some resistors. My phono is a Joule Electra OPS 2. Changing the loading requires that I make up a RCA loading plug. It's a bit of a pain but it does allow for any combination I may be inclined to try.
-
Hi Neo,
Acoustical Systems is signed in under the name of Axinia Schäfer
in Rott. This is a small town in Bavaria, Germany, south-west of
München (Munich).
She's a diploma economist and, I think, in cooperation with
Dietrich Brakemeier and maybe other partners.
This is the website: http://www.arche-headshell.de/ (http://www.arche-headshell.de/)
I know you are perfect in German - so here's the first review of
the Palladian:
http://www.hifistatement.net/tests/item/1834-acoustical-systems-the-palladian?limitstart=0 (http://www.hifistatement.net/tests/item/1834-acoustical-systems-the-palladian?limitstart=0)
Mit den besten Grüßen - Toni
Hi Toni,
I'm sure you know by now, but not everyone may have followed the Agon thread on Palladian and Acoustical Systems. There was a thread ('12) on What's Best Forum about problems with getting ripped off or swindled by AS, and similar persistent rumors. I checked the apparent source (from 2 separate parties) and there's nothing to it. Most of it looks like a smear campaign.
neo
-
Over the weekend I found what appears to be a NOS Signet TK7LCa. Installed it on my Townshend yesterday, it sounds very much like my AT20SS - a bit sweeter. It may evolve with more hours on the stylus but I'll probably let it go as I have a bunch of exra stylii for the AT20SS. I've been enjoying a M20E Super for the last few months - a very organic cartridge, excellent synergy with my Pilot 232 and Cornwalls.
If anybody is interested in inspecting the Signet let me know.
I'm interested in your cartridge.
Don
-
New AT cartridges announced:
https://audiotechnicanewsroom.com/2017/01/05/ces-2017-audio-technica-announces-extensive-new-vm-cartridge-series/
-
Back from outer space. I see the left coast is still there. I was worried for a minute, thought it fell back into the sea. That's a relief.
Seems like el ninno dumped some dew on the coast. Not a minute too soon, or so they say. Think I'll hang here for awhile, until I get ..... well, it doesn't
matter. Boris has a new phono - Vista Super fly Phono II Little bigger for punch.
I wonder if the new AT MMs are coming to a dealer near you? Get your bad self over here man. We need some AT mix/match.
Getting bored Think I'll get mfg together again. Made in USA. In the mean time, get the new Vista or you'll wish you had. That's my opinion and I'm
sticking with it.
neo
-
One thing I forgot to mention. The Palladian is probably a great cart. I have little doubt about that.
The UNI DIN alignment is not unique. I don't care about the supposedly intellectual property claim. Here's the deal:
The AS alignment devices are probably the best in the world, it's just that the rationale is nonsense.
I'd get one anyway. It's performance that counts.
neo
-
I think they're right about making some extra money after retirement. Did a little job today. Made $40. Every little bit helps out along with some help from your friends.
Not sure how much to charge for my services.
I want my own F-14, but too many passengers. How many native Americans will fit inside an aircraft carrier?
And you thought we were extinct.
-
Almost forgot. Message from Gen Patton - something about driving a tank over the Alps.
I like to pretend I'm in the army. Tanks are cool. Do they have stealth tanks?
-
Are you OK Neo?
-
Those unfamiliar with General George Patton -----
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_S._Patton
He thought he was the reincarnation of Hannibal, was itchin to kill some Nazis.
To make a long story short, he was reported to have been murdered by the russkies.
Some say there was a deal made, but I really don't know. Bet he could have kicked Rommel's ass.
neo the Nazi killer? Whenever you spot a Nazi, give em the finger.
-
Ummmm, no comment. :o
-
Earth to Neo.
Guy, your post have gotten a bit on the bizarre side, even for you. Grbluen's question wasn't rhetorical.
Are there any issues that you should share with us?
And what can you tell me about the Denon 207 cart? Any experience with it?
Scott
-
Earth to Neo.
Guy, your post have gotten a bit on the bizarre side, even for you. Grbluen's question wasn't rhetorical.
Are there any issues that you should share with us?
And what can you tell me about the Denon 207 cart? Any experience with it?
Scott
Do your homework. Pop Quiz.
neo
-
Do your homework. Pop Quiz.
neo
I've got lots of numbers, but not much actual listening experience. It seems to like low mass tonearms, and may have not been a good fit where I first mounted it. Hayden labs says a bit light on bass, but quite detailed mids and upper ranges. Factory graphs show a rising dB level above 5Khz. Output .34 mV at one lab yet vinylengine says .2, mass 4.7g, cantilever is a boron pipe, compliance is 13x10-6, Load >100 Ohms, output impedance 40 ohms.
-
This thread has been inactive for a long time, but has so much good information in it. I've got a Victor TT-81 coming in a few days and miss the input of so many of these knowledgeable audiophiles. I"ll be looking for a tonearm that won't break the bank to go with it. Anyone have an extra collecting dust?
-
Is there anyone here such as Neo who does needle replacement on contract? I have a ClearAudio Virtuoso Ebony with a bent needle.
I need to get it ‘fixed’
-
Neo has been gone from here for over a year, sorry to say. As far as replacement of a bent cantilever, try Soundsmith.
-
I have the same Virtuoso cartridge and had Soundsmith do a full fix. I went with the ruby cantilever. It came back sounding better than new, but the new setup changed the geometry a bit. Be sure to realign, especially the VTA.