2. analog
  3. 140043-486

Hear my Cartridges....🎶

Many Forums have a 'Show your Turntables' Thread or 'Show your Cartridges' Thread but that's just 'eye-candy'.... These days, it's possible to see and HEAR your turntables/arms and cartridges via YouTube videos.
Peter Breuninger does it on his AV Showrooms Site and Michael Fremer does it with high-res digital files made from his analogue front ends.
Now Fremer claims that the 'sound' on his high-res digital files captures the complex, ephemeral nuances and differences that he hears directly from the analogue equipment in his room.
That may well be....when he plays it through the rest of his high-end setup 😎
But when I play his files through my humble iMac speakers or even worse.....my iPad speakers.....they sound no more convincing than the YouTube videos produced by Breuninger.
Of course YouTube videos struggle to capture 'soundstage' (side to side and front to back) and obviously can't reproduce the effects of the lowest octaves out of subwoofers.....but.....they can sometimes give a reasonably accurate IMPRESSION of the overall sound of a system.

With that in mind.....see if any of you can distinguish the differences between some of my vintage (and modern) cartridges.
VICTOR X1
This cartridge is the pinnacle of the Victor MM designs and has a Shibata stylus on a beryllium cantilever. Almost impossible to find these days with its original Victor stylus assembly but if you are lucky enough to do so.....be prepared to pay over US$1000.....🤪
VICTOR 4MD-X1
This cartridge is down the ladder from the X1 but still has a Shibata stylus (don't know if the cantilever is beryllium?)
This cartridge was designed for 4-Channel reproduction and so has a wide frequency response 10Hz-60KHz.
Easier to find than the X1 but a lot cheaper (I got this one for US$130).
AUDIO TECHNICA AT ML180 OCC
Top of the line MM cartridge from Audio Technica with Microline Stylus on Gold-Plated Boron Tube cantilever.
Expensive if you can find one....think US$1000.

I will be interested if people can hear any differences in these three vintage MM cartridges....
Then I might post some vintage MMs against vintage and MODERN LOMC cartridges.....🤗
128x128halcro
halcro's avatar
halcro OP
2,664 posts
 
I am a bit confused by your comment. First, I will point out that I did not say “current” MC’s. 
But you did call the sound of the FR-7f and 7fz "dated"......
Imo, excellent modern MC cartridges, the Palladian in particular and as heard in your comparisons are generally more refined sounding and offer better performance at the frequency extremes, the highs in particular.  They do a better job of conveying the natural timbres and texture of instruments without harshness. 
Your use of the term "modern MC cartridges" to me.....seemed to imply 'current' 🧐
You have to admit, that the term "dated" has negative connotations...?
If I were to call 'tube technology' "dated"......it would sound 'judgemental'...although technically accurate.
In MY world..and IME and YMMV etc etc......the 'dated' cartridges (pre-digital) often sound more realistic, transparent and 'alive' (as opposed to 'live') than "modern MC cartridges".
So on this....we must agree to differ 🙃
On most other things...I agree with you 😀
I think "tube equipment captures/reproduces more of the nuances in the sound, texture and expression in the sound of live music than does solid state."
I lived with a complete tube phono/line preamp for 20 years and loved it.
As good as the Halcro DM10 preamp is (and it is)....it can't quite capture the 'air', transparency and three-dimensionality of tubes.
I tried many tube amplifiers in my system but unfortunately....because my 12" undamped paper-cone woofers are run 'full range' (no crossovers)....tubes did not have the damping factor needed to control the woofers 😢
I also agree about electrostatic speakers....
The best speakers I ever heard (in terms of realism and transparency) were the original Martin Logan CLS driven by Audio Research tube amplification.
Their sound is permanently embedded in my consciousness even after 25 years has passed.
And their midrange to high frequency presentation, is the benchmark in everything I try to achieve in my system.

We are now, two generations into the 'digital music' age, with most people on the planet having heard little else other than CD and digital music presentation.
To this day....I cannot sit and listen to CDs on my system for longer than 20 minutes without feeling annoyed and uncomfortable.
Whereas your brain is finely tuned to instrumental realism....mine is somehow 'wired' to reject 'digital'...🤯
I can discern very quickly, whether an analogue record has been digitally recorded...and unfortunately for me.....they are never (up to this point)...as musically satisfying.
Because of this 'digital age' which has inevitably engulfed us....I feel that  'modern' cartridge designers have (perhaps unknowingly) tried to emulate some of the perceived digital 'advantages' like increased high-frequency detail in the belief that it is perceived as 'more revealing...🙉

Now in regards to Screaming Jay Hawkins.....are you trying to imply that he is not classically trained.....😜

Regards
Henry

halcro's avatar
halcro OP
2,664 posts
 
As I reported a couple of months ago.....I acquired a NOS SHURE LEVEL II MM with a BERYLLIUM CANTILEVER
Recommended by Chakster....this F-8 LEVEL II/Beryllium impressed me.

A few weeks later....I managed to find a NOS SHURE LEVEL II with a RUBY CANTILEVER.
A chance to see if there are any perceptible differences between the F-8 LEVEL II/Ruby and its Beryllium brother.

SHURE LEVEL II/Beryllium 

SHURE LEVEL II/Ruby
harold-not-the-barrel
895 posts
 
Morning Henry,
Now you have new beryllium cantilever (that Grace Level II above) and new boron cantilever GLANZ MFG-610LX that NOS from Japan. Could you tell which one is lighter or darker in colour ? Is boron darker ?
frogman
7,457 posts
 
I must be missing something; I’m a simple man 😔.  Are we listening to Grace or to Shure carts?  
frogman
7,457 posts
 
Actually, don’t tell me...yet 🤔
More to discover