Clearaudio MM -- AT-95E and beyond

Halcro · « **Reply #840 on:** 12 Nov 2014, 04:41 am »

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...

neobop · « **Reply #841 on:** 12 Nov 2014, 03:54 pm »

Quote from: Halcro on 12 Nov 2014, 03:23 am

Hi Neobop,
Victor TT-101 actually....
Fully nuded in custom stainless steel cradle with 25lb custom cast bronze arm-pods....
AT33Mono is less than $400 and is loaded at 220 Ohms. Ortofon Cadenza Mono is over $1,000 but should be even better...

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.

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

a.wayne · « **Reply #842 on:** 12 Nov 2014, 08:58 pm »

Sweet looking rig ................

Halcro · « **Reply #843 on:** 12 Nov 2014, 11:24 pm »

Thanks for the compliments guys....

That's actually a white record on that first image Neobop....

On this image....that's

the Micro Seiki Cu-180 copper mat...
You're right Neo....that's a FR-64s arm at the back...

whilst it's a Micro Seiki MA-505s arm on the left

The straight 12" arm on the right is the SAEC WE-8000/ST

One of my favourite all-time arms...

Regards

dlaloum · « **Reply #844 on:** 12 Nov 2014, 11:30 pm »

neobop · « **Reply #845 on:** 13 Nov 2014, 06:40 pm »

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

dlaloum · « **Reply #846 on:** 13 Nov 2014, 08:50 pm »

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

neobop · « **Reply #847 on:** 15 Nov 2014, 07:57 pm »

Quote from: dlaloum on 13 Nov 2014, 08:50 pm

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

dlaloum · « **Reply #848 on:** 15 Nov 2014, 10:57 pm »

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....

neobop · « **Reply #849 on:** 18 Nov 2014, 01:32 pm »

Quote from: dlaloum on 13 Nov 2014, 08:50 pm

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

dlaloum · « **Reply #850 on:** 18 Nov 2014, 08:41 pm »

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

neobop · « **Reply #851 on:** 20 Nov 2014, 01:49 pm »

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

neobop · « **Reply #852 on:** 25 Nov 2014, 12:04 am »

Quote from: Halcro on 11 Nov 2014, 12:18 pm

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

Halcro · « **Reply #853 on:** 25 Nov 2014, 02:21 am »

Quote

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....

Interested in hearing some further thoughts from you when you've listened to more albums...

dlaloum · « **Reply #854 on:** 25 Nov 2014, 05:53 am »

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 ...

Might keep my eyes open for a basic mono cartridge...

neobop · « **Reply #855 on:** 25 Nov 2014, 02:20 pm »

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

S Clark · « **Reply #856 on:** 25 Nov 2014, 02:47 pm »

Quote from: neobop on 25 Nov 2014, 12:04 am

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.

neobop · « **Reply #857 on:** 27 Nov 2014, 01:47 pm »

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

griffithds · « **Reply #858 on:** 28 Nov 2014, 07:46 pm »

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

neobop · « **Reply #859 on:** 30 Nov 2014, 02:25 am »

David,
Cool move by Griff.

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.

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