[Halcro]

Have recently added three cartridges to my arsenal....


The Grace F9E. A really fine performer deserving of its long time reputation 


The Ortofon SPU Silver Meister. At last a LOMC which captures the soul of music as well as the best MMs can....





The London Decca Reference. Can be quite magical.....

[neobop]

Have recently added three cartridges to my arsenal.... 

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

[Halcro]

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...
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..

[neobop]

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


 

[neobop]

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,

[griffithds]

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!   

[Halcro]

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'......
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...
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.... 
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

[neobop]

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

[Halcro]

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....

Incidentally the Cardas Golden Reference phono cable in XLR configuration has 7pF per foot.....less than 50pF for the 1.8 metre length...

[griffithds]

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,

[neobop]

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

[Halcro]

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.

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....
Really annoying.....

[neobop]

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.

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....
Really annoying.....

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

[griffithds]

In today's market,  all that is required to 'improve' a product is to change it color! 
Regards,

[neobop]

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

[ACHiPo]

Great, informative post Neo!  Thanks for dredging this out of the archives.

[neobop]

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

[Halcro]

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...

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....
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'...

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

[griffithds]

Halcro,

I tend to agree with what both you and Neo have stated pertaining to the M/M thread over on that other network.    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,
 

[neobop]

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