2. analog
  3. 1173550723

Dyscoveries on Dyna, Denon, Supex, Technics,FR,Ik

Dear friends: Over the time and testing/trying different cartridges ( " old " and new ones ) with different tonearms to find the " best " performance on each cartridge I find some interesting subjects that I want to share with all of you:

Denon 103: this is one of my oldest cartridges that I own and I use it for a while many years ago. In the last three years every time that I mounted and hear it I can't heard it for more than half hour, that's why I always treat it like a " rubbish cartridge " in my posts about. I try it with almost every single tonearm that I own and the result was always the same.
Then, I take in count that in all the tonearms ( removable and fixed headshell ) I can't tighten to much the headshell screws because the 103 is " open " ( input to output ) all the way where the screw goes and if I try to really tighten then the screw goes out of the cartridge body ( it is dificult to me this explanation because my English problems, I hope you can understand ).
I don't like to tailored the cartridge sound through tight ( more or less pressure ) the headshell screws, I always tighten the screws at " its limits " where IMHO and experiences there are less resonances/vibrations on it with better overall performances.
So, what to do?, it happen that I have an Audio Technica AT-LH18/OCC headshell ( headshell weight: 18grs. ) that has screwed holes underneath the headshell ( these holes are 2mm in deep, don't cross/pass the headshell ) in this manner I can tight the screws at maximum with out any trouble, well this was a great solution ( along with the weight of the headshell ) because I mounted the 103 in the Dynavector 505 ( similar to 507 ) and the performance change for the better like night and day, now I can hear the 103 for more than half an hour: very good improvement, this not means that now the 103 is at the XV-1/Myabi/etc performance level: no, but now the 103 has a decent performance that for its price is very good.

Dynavector XV-1: this one is one of my favorite cartridges, I really like it. It is a cartridge that almost always perform very good in almost any tonearm. Well I never be satisfied with " very good " performance I always look for excellent/exemplary performance.
I read some posts where XV-1 owners posted that this cartridge is a very good match with the Dynavector 505/507 tonearms and this was not my own experience about, it sounds good but nothing more.
I decide to try a little hard on the subject with: VTA/VTF/load impedance/etc,/etc with out any " great " results.
Then I decide to try with different headshells ( other than the original 507/505 ones ) till I find that with a light weight headshell ( Denon 100% magnesium, 6gr. The Dyna headshells weight: around 14-15 grs. ) the performance was/is glorious for say the least: I never heard ( any where ) better XV-1 performance that in this set-up.

Fidelity Research MC 702: this is a very " old " MC cartridge design. It is an integral headshell design, bulky one ( " ugly " ? ) at 30-32 grs, low compliance 6-7 Cu, low output 0.2mv and likes VTF 2-3grs.

I own this cartridge for at least 20 years and I buy it second hand in almost new/pristine condition. After many years I set up ( last December ) in my Micro Seiki MAX 282 tonearm ( it likes tonearms like: Ikeda, Dynavector, Audiocraft, SAEC, etc, etc ) and for the very first musical note I knew that this cartridge was something very special.
After 20 hours the sound performance was/is formidable/marvelous, I don't have words to describe my " surprise ", the best I can tell is that the music flow easily through this cartridge like in almost any other ( any where ) cartridge I heard.
If you " see " it ( second hand ) and if you have the right tonearm and phonolinepreamp then buy it!!!!!

Supex SDX 2200R: Another " old " MC design with screw open body type design ( like the 103 you need the right headshell ), ruby cantilever and low output 0.2mv. Man

I make the set-up on the Lustre GST 801 tonearm and sound was terrible at the begin, I have to wait 30 hours for the suspension settle down.
This was/is a great cartridge too, IMHO it competes with cartridges like the Universe ( are very similar in quality performance ) or any other today ones. Many people look for the Supex 900 series ( that I owned ) well the Supex Ruby beats easily those ones.

Audio Technica ATML 180 OCC: One of the greatest MM cartridges ever made.
This model ( I understand ) never sale in USA, the one that was on sale was the ATML 170 and 160 ( still very good ).

Till you hear a MM cartridge with the right phonolinepreamp you can't understand how good/great are the MM cartridges. During my last trip I was in San Diego and Norm heard in his system ( I think for the first time ) a MM cartridge the Empire EDR.9: he was happily surprised, he really likes the quality sound performance of this 100.00 dls MM cartridge.

Some MM cartridges like this one not only compete with any top MC cartridge out there but in some ways beat them, yes ( IMHO ) is better that any single Koetsu I heard it, that any ZYX or Lyra.
It is incredible that a 500.00 MM cartridge could be better performer than a 6-8K MC one.
This cartridge I mated with the Technics EPA 100MK2.

Technics 205CMK4: A marvelous MM cartridge. As good the Audio Technica is this one is better!!!!
What can I say about?, almost nothing but: Magic Diamond, Allaerts, Dynavector, Transfiguration, you named: the Technics is at least at the same level in any single sound performance parameter and beat almost all those MC cartridges for neutrality/natural tone balance, like I already say: marvelous cartridge!!!!!, if you have the tonearm and right phonolinepreamp then buy it!!!!
Mine is matched with the Micro Seiki MAX 282.

Ikeda 9REX: This one is a today MC cartridge with a unique design characteristic for a MC cartridge: it does not use cantilever ( like the cutter lhate/heads on the recording ), the design is with out cantilever. It is a very low output 0.16mv, weighty: 17grs, low compliance: 6CU and like VTF 2.8grs.

It is obvious that this cartridge is not for everyone, not only need the right tonearm and the very best phonolinepreamp out there but a lot of patience to obtain the best performance.
When you achieve this " best performance " you knowed because you will be in heaven.
The sound performance of this cartridge is a " little " different for all we know: the inmediacy of the sound and transients are second to none, the pitch/texture/no overhang/tight/fast bass is second to none, the high frequencies extension and speed are second to none, etc, etc.
You can't be near the live music like with this Ikeda cartridge: this one really is truer to the recording audio device!!!
You have to be a experienced music lover who attend very often to live events to understand what you are hearing through the Ikeda cartridge, you can't compare its sound performance with the sound performance of any other cartridge: it is not only the subject if it is better or not but the subject is that is different/near the live event.
It is an infamous bad traker: it does not like any single dust in the LP or in the stylus, we have to have everything in pristine condition. It takes more than 200 hours to hear it at its best. Like I told you: we need patience and know how.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Ag insider logo xs@2x
logenn
91 posts
 
Gentlemen,

Let's stick to the facts.

The object of this discussion is that the PC-1 did not live up to everybody's expectations. Well i disagree, however, if you think about it, nothing ever lives up to the hype!
Why else would we be changing so often or even having this discussion.
Nothing is perfect.

In the case of the PC1, in the correct arm and in the right system, it
can solve a lot of problems and add serious value. It's bass response can augment systems that are lacking in this area and it's speed brings otherwise lackluster of lifeless systems alive. Let's be honest, this is what it is all about matching the right components to minimize system weakness and achieve the correct balance.

In my system with the Technics Sp 10 MkIII/Sme312s, i watched this cartridge improve weekly. When first installed, I compared it to my reference, the Garrard 301/Triplanar/Xv1s, and felt the PC-1 system was lacking in refinement, transparency and naturalness. Now after putting hours on this combination, I can see it breaking in and doing things the other system doesn't.

On large orchestral works, in my system in a very large room, I appreciate the added body and weight of the PC-1. On Blue Note jazz works, I appreciate the speed and dynamics over the XV1s setup.

Whereas, the XV1S syetem, excells on chamber music, solo voice and smaller works like solo piano that benefit from its refinement and naturalness, I can see where the PC-1 has it's strength and place.

IMO it boils down to system requirements, music preferences and room accoustics plus time to properly run in. This last comment is often overlooked by all of us causing us to jump to invalid conclusions.
lewm
13,044 posts
 
Dear Raul, I read with interest and some surprise your comments above regarding the fact that you were disappointed in the PC-1 because of the price/performance ratio. You stated that at half its retail price (i.e., ~$3,000) you would rate the PC-1 as "good". In view of this statement, how are we (or how am I) supposed to take your comments on the many MM cartridges that you've been very enthusiastic about? None of them cost more than a few hundred dollars, at most. Am I to assume that you would not review those cartridges nearly as favorably if they were priced up there with the latest MC types? Prior to this, I was of the opinion that your critiques were formulated without regard to cost. If we're talking about price vs performance, then a typical out of production MM cartridge would be competitive, even if it's absolute performance level were very mediocre in relation to the latest and most expensive models. Please clarify.
mobileholmes
1 posts
 
Raul,
Taking shots at Albert, based on one nights listening, is pointless. That you still harbor ill-will after taking offense at someone's honest opinion, does you a disservice. You've turned this into a pointless argument that Albert tried to avoid. However, you keep bringing it up.

Albert correctly points out that the crossover had only a few hours on it, that the signal caps are teflon, and teflon caps take hundreds, if not several thousand hours to completely break in. It's my understanding that Dan at RTI has empirical evidence that caps break in. He can watch a cap break in over hours with an oscilloscope. The 'scope doesn't lie. Further, Dan states that teflon caps take much longer to break in than polypropylene caps. There are physical and chemical changes that occur in ALL capacitors.

The root of the problem here is that you swoop in with a transistor preamp, try to warm it up in a couple hours (after it's been in a jet, cold, moved around, etc..), insert it into a completely foreign system, and expect it to perform to its potential. A better approach is forwarding the preamp some days/weeks earlier, allowing the unit to be run continuously for enough time that the unit settles in/warms up, and giving the host enough time to make system tweaks that will maximize the combination. As an aside, I've never had ANY solid state piece that didn't sound slightly hard/aggressive/sterile for the first several hours (usually four hours, with more gradual improvement the following day). I would imagine, based on my experience, that your preamp is no different. Also, moving around interconnects seems to somehow disturb them. I know that will sound like audiophile nonsense to some, but I've heard it. The act of plugging in your preamp disturbs the cable geometry/crystal structure, etc.. of the cables.

Nobody there disrespected you, jumped up and down screaming that the Aesthetix was better or even offered an opinion. Let's face facts here: Albert's entire system is based around the Aesthetix. Everything from tube choices in the power amps, to speaker positioning, to turntable tuning, to isolation, to tweaks, to cable choices were based on the Aesthetix being in the system. Even without the preamp switch, the system was not its usual self. The aforementioned new crossover was already causing problems in the system, not to mention that Albert was using 12sn7 instead of the 12sx7 which is what he usually uses (he was using the 12sn7 as a break-in tube to save the hard to find 12sx7). Now, I'm not saying the system sounded bad, but that it now sounds a good bit better after the crossover had a chance to break in.

It is my understanding that your preamp was rather new, with only a couple hundred hours. I've always heard major improvements with transistor equipment after many hundreds of hours--from cheap CD players to extremely expensive transistor pieces.

Those of us who were there didn't like the changes after swapping in your preamp. Why does that disturb you? It was a preamp with a few hundred hours on it, that had been on a freakin' jet earlier in the day, put into a system optimized around a totally different sounding preamp, with a brand new crossover with teflon caps, and all of it done with no chance to allow any tweaking/adjustments. It's no wonder that it didn't sound as good to us. It had no real chance, and that is your problem. It's possible that the thing was damaged because it wasn't working when it showed up at Louis' house, or at least that's my understanding of the night's events. When you asked Albert's honest opinion, and the opinion's of those others of us who were gathered there that night, the opinions were given without malice, disrespect or ill-will. YOU never gave YOUR PREAMP a fighting chance under the conditions.

Another thing I find improbable is your assertion that you know how a system sounds after just a few hours. It took 3 or 4 listening sessions at Albert's house to appreciate what is special about his system. Even though the system didn't sound as good as it usually did that night, it still beats the hell out of my system and 99.5 percent of the other systems I've heard. You're making a snap judgment based on 3-4 hours of listening. I don't know of ANY reviewer or audiophile who claims that he knows what a system or component sounds like after such a short period. You usually need to go through dozens of recordings to hear everything a system can and can't do. Albert's system is better than mine. Listening to it has made me a better reviewer/listener, and allowed me to better hear changes in my system. I've only heard three other systems that are as good as, or maybe better, than Albert's current system. Two had huge full range 'stats and the other had huge full range ribbons.

Raul, none of us have said that your preamp sucked. We just didn't like it as much as the Aesthetix, a design that's been perfected over several years, and happens to cost even more than your preamp. Your preamp did beat a more expensive tube design that was briefly in that system some time back, so this has nothing to do with tubes versus transistors.

I wish you peace. Please let the episode drop and learn from it. Criticism, when honest, is the only way to objectively improve the performance of a design. The designer/builder/owner is usually too involved to see possible flaws that would be apparent to a non-involved party.

By the way, hearing the AirTight and the Koetsu in the same system on the same night was eye opening. The PC1 is the absolute cleanest cartridge I've heard. It makes most records sound more like tape than a piece of plastic with a groove in it. The frequency response is super extended and very flat. Dynamics are superb. On the other hand, it is VERY demanding of the matching tonearm (the 312S is maybe even more spectacular, in an unspectacular way, than the PC1). Further, the high output with low impedance is a challenge to properly load. Some phono stages won't have the necessary flexibility to take advantage of the PC1.

With deepest respect,
Phillip Holmes
www.dagogo.com
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
13,060 posts
 
Dear Albert and friends: Please don't panic!.

As Logenn very clear and precise states: the main subject is the PC-1 not Albert's system ( he knows very clear my overall opinion and I know his opinion too ) or any one else system.

As Logenn point out and I always said nothing is perfect and is system/room/time dependent and according the choose on each person trade-offs.

The fact that you and your friends agree on the PC-1 is ok with me that does not change what were my experiences on the PC-1 in five different system ( including mine/yours ).
Normally in a group like the one you belong that things happen: there are a general agreegment on some subjects many times under friendly " presure ".

In the other side you have the Thomasheisig group that think the PC-1 is not so good like you think.

Mobilholmes: I respect your opinion but you don't have not only the whole facts but even the right facts on everything you posted. Example : day before that night you speak I was hearing for many hours the Albert's system even we made some changes in the set up inlcuding load impedance in the Aesthetix.

In everything that I speak with Albert at his place and on email I never " touch/compare " the Essential 3160 for the good or bad, the Essential never been a subject for my opinion.
The ones that " touch " my preamp were both of you when told me that its sounds is better than the Messenger one and even the AR: these were your words.
There are many other things that are unknow to you so your opinion is a lightly one.

Anyway like I posted: in the differences are the answers and the way to learn.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas OP
13,060 posts
 
Dear Lewm: Yes, on the MM subject ( and some MC " old " ones ): +++++ " critiques were formulated without regard to cost.... " ++++++

In the PC-1 I take it in that way because that's are the very high prices on the today MC cartridge market but if I put against MM top performers IMHO maybe it could be two " roads ": one bring the PC-1 to the MM price or to carry the MM to the MC price level.

In the second case and speaking of quality performance/price ratio some MM could be easy on price level similar to top MC ones.

IMHO I think that several of those " old " and some today MM cartridges are really a bargain and the best time to buy it because maybe in the future you can't find them at those very low prices and that " price growing evolution " fact we can see it with some MM today cartridges like the Grado and Cartridge Man Music Maker, so it already starting about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
More to discover