2. analog
  3. 1142355422

Dynavector XV-1s What is the REAL story?

I have read the performance parameters required for best sound in this cartridge, by the great HP,which I found interesting and perplexing.I then read,what seems to be a complete about face of HP's findings,by Mr Fremer,in Stereophile.Mr. Fremer does make a valid argument(we're talking tracking force)for correct alignment in the coils,and claims the mfgr's suggested force is the way to go.Makes sense,to me, NOT to stray from what the original designer has recommended!Yet,what do I know?It also seemed that MR Fremer was intentionally making the point,that HP was a bit clueless regarding downforce.

Well,now we have the "new audio pioneer"(I do like the guy,alot)Arthur Salvatore,on his "really fun to follow" web pages,stating that after much experience,with the XV-1s,he has concluded that MR Pearson was RIGHT,in recommending a downforce considerably higher than even the mfgr states.Obviously Mr Fremer would be incorrect.Even though his argument follows the line of ultimate reliability,as well as performance.All in a product costing about 4500 bucks--????

So,my argument is this---"WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON"???

We have a very expensive product that has gotten a considerable amount of press,where the supposedly top reviewers in the industry cannot seem to agree on a parameter that will DEFINITELY affect both sonic performance,as well as long term reliability!

They claim that "Newbees" are in short supply,and the industry is shrinking.Hmm,I wonder why!

Do we ALL cancel our subscriptions,to these "once hobbyist oriented" journels?Do we rely on forums like this to garnish the "TRUTH",where there STILL are those who "jump" at the opportunity to tout their Favorite possessions,and put in a good word for their favorite designer/manufacturers?

Or do we start to rely on our own sense of perceptions,which(believe me)really begin to "sharpen up",after you have spent your hard earned cash!!

Any thoughts are always welcome!!
sirspeedy70680e509
nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 
Assertions and conclusions. I think that we all think in the same way.
We start with some assertion which we assume to be true and then
make our conclusions. But ''the first'' logical rule is: if the assertion
is not true than deduced conclusions can't be true also. Ergo : we
start with different assertions. 
My Allaerts MC 2 Finish has as recommended VTF 1.8 g( max
tolerance0.05 g !!!).  The most other carts have ''lose'' 
recomm.  from 1.5 till 2. 5 g.  What then is  the sense of advice to
 use recommended VTF? 
Then the obvious assertion is that the carts in casu are made
equal. Aka with exactly the same specs. This is certainly not the
case with the most Van den Huls. The added assertion is that those
are actually made by Van den Hul. How does one know that?
He spend 6 moths pro year in Ukraine, owns 4 different companies
and produce just one cart pro week in order to keep his skills in
good conditions. Who produce the other carts? Or, how many
workers does he use in his ''shop''? Why are so many Van den
Huls offered for sell. If one is not willing to part from his ''beloved
cart'' we can hardly find those for sell. Say Miyabi Standard,
FR7 fz, Ikeda 9 REX or Kiseki blackheart, etc. 

labpro's avatar
labpro
88 posts
 

So after careful set up ( Smartractor for alignment and microscope for VTA)  I have 50 hours on a new Dynavector XV1s.

Using TW Acustic Raven and TW Acustic 10.5 arm. SUT is an Auditorium 23 T2, the correct SUT for this cartridge according to the dealer.

I read through the various comments here, and tried many VTF settings......settled between 1.95 and 2.00. I tweaked the VTA to correspond with VTF changes. Whoever said this cartridge is "hyper sensitive" to VTF setting was 100% correct.

Anyway, I like the overall presentation but I am disappointed with the mid-base. Horns and vocals sound too "thin" especially sax and female voices. It lacks "meat on the bone."

Typically you would add some weight to the VTF to get a "fuller/heavier sound, but its still unimpressive. I'm used to Miyajima so perhaps the Dynavectors are just more cool sounding?

Can someone familiar with Dynavector XV1s comment on this.

Will things improve with further break in?

dover
2,247 posts
 

after careful set up ( Smartractor for alignment and microscope for VTA)  I have 50 hours on a new Dynavector XV1s.

Using TW Acustic Raven and TW Acustic 10.5 arm. SUT is an Auditorium 23 T2, the correct SUT for this cartridge according to the dealer.

The Audtiroium 23 T2 is designed and voiced for the EMT cartridges ( 24 ohms ) and Denon 103 ( 40 ohms ).

The correct transformer for your Dynavctor XV1S ( 6 ohms internal impedance ) is the T1.

I realise you may have swapped the T1 for the T2 for your Miyajima - but now you need to try the T1 for your Dynavector.

If the T1 sounds better then you have a beef with your dealer who has given you poor advice.

 

labpro's avatar
labpro
88 posts
 

According to the dealer, it’s best to have a cartridge with a lower direct current resistance (DCR) than the SUT. The XV1s is 6 ohm and the T2 SUT is 15 ohm (the A23 T1 is 2 ohm). That being said, no harm in trying the T1. Thanks for the suggestion. 

labpro's avatar
labpro
88 posts
 

I also sent a message to Mike at Dynavector to get his input. I’ll report back. 

More to discover