Glanz moving magnet cartridges

Dear Lew, Thanks to the fact that something was rotten in
Denmark we got a great literary work. However you should know that many carts in the same series share the same corpus (aka 'generator'). The Glanz 51 has the sufix 'E'
(aka 'elliptical) and should be 'the same', according to
Nandric, with MF 300 and not, as you wrongly assume,the MF 200. The MF 200 is a proud owner of an Shibata stylus. A big 'status' difference I should think. I also noticed that the 'model difference' is marked on the stylus and not on the corpus. The corpus of all of them (Glanz and Astatic) is marked with 'MF'.
My quess is that 'MF' should give the indication for the producer. Besides a Balkanes and certainly 'some' Serbian will never admit to be wrong in anything. The animosity
between Raul and Dgob should of course not count as proof of the contrary. I am a kind of proud with my discovery so it is really unsporty from my comembers to (be)grudge me
my success.

Regards,

Dear Nicola, I assumed nothing except that I thought it was you who recognized a similarity between Glanz MF51 and Astatic MF200. I have never even seen any Glanz or Astatic cartridge in the flesh. Apparently I was wrong about your opinion. Sorry.

Dgob is a loyal user of Raul's preamplifier. I should think that would trump any disagreement over one particular cartridge's performance level. Thus I do not perceive any animosity on either side, just a difference of opinion.

Dear Lew, No need to apologize because the identity relation is inscrutable. Even Wittgenstein made a strong point by stating: 'for two things to say that they are identical make no sense and to say that everything is identical with it selfs says nothing'. Well we can do with 'equal' in the sense that you own the Triplanar and I also or that you own a poodle an I own the same dog. This of course does no mean that we are coowners of the same dog but rather that we own the same kind of a dog. In this sense the Glanz 51 'E' looks to me the same as my MF 200.
'The same' qua corpus because there is no way to see on whatever picture what kind of stylus is involved. Then,speaking about the styli. No one of us knows for sure
which kind of shape is 'the best'. What is 'best' for our records does no imply our 'ears'. However even Raul is obviously willing to make Axel rich with his 'mega order'
in terms of money for the exotic cantilevers and styli.
One can hardly qualify such kinds of decisions as 'rational' but well of course as wishful thinking.
I can also hardly believe that Dgob owns Raul's amplifier.
This must be something from the past in which we all liked
each other...I am very glad with the fact that no (identical) lady is involved in the dispute. Otherwise we would have one member less.

Regards,

Dear Dgob: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1252605722&openflup&56&4#56

I bought on Argentina and now the cartridge is with my brother. Was the MF-71L ( non-integrated headshell but stand alone model. I don't know but maybe what you like are the additional integrated headshell design distortions, I never heard that integrated design and certainly I don't care about integrated headshell designs: I don't like it for very good reasons that already discussed in this and other threads. ) and was identical to the MF-100 ( tha's why I remember was the 71L. ) that performs similar but a little better than the Glanz sample ( my MF-100 was a NOS and not second hand as the Glanz. ).

Anyway, the MF-200 IMHO outperforms both Astatic/Glanz. I think you need to hear the MF-200 and I'm sure that's as other MF-200 you will be surprised.
My MF-300 is on the road to Axel for an up date and to find out the Astatic up quality performance limits, the MF-200 on stock fashion is great one.

Btw, no I'm not ignorant on the Glanz.I think for my part is all said it about, I'm done on this Glanz subject.

Please go ahead and as till today you can follow sharing your experiences. As Lewm could be that other people want to follow with your thread/interest about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dgob, are your G5 & G7 MMs? What cantilevers does each use? Do the bodies look like the Astatic MF series? Have you tried interchanging styli?

The Astatic 100/200/300 as well as the Glanz MFG series are all Moving Flux. Hence the MF model designation.

Allow me share a few things I do know about these carts. All of the MF series from both Astatic and Glanz were made in Japan by the Mitachi Corporation. I can also say for sure that the Astatic/Glanz MF generators are not all the same. Well on the outside they are but the MF200/300 put out 4.2mv. The MF100 and all of the MFG Glanz 31/51/61/71, series put out 3.5mv. Interestingly, the G7 is rated at 4.2mv on the Vinylengine database. I wonder if that is true?

The MFG51E Glanz is not a MF200 or even a MF300. The sound is quite different on each. They should because they have different output and have different styli. The cantilever on the MFG51E I have also has a much different aluminum cantilever than any other MF units. It uses a very large taper. Looks heavy to me. My MFG51E is on the bottom of the totem pole sonically of all the MF/MI carts I have heard. The MFG31E/L is much closer to the MF200. It uses the same color stylus holder as well as the same cantilever. All three have different styli. MF200 is a nude Shibata. The MFG31E has a nude elliptical and the MFG31L has a nude line contact. The MFG31E/L both sound close to the MF200. The MF300 is good but I would use it for target practice after hearing the MF200 or MFG31E/L.