Who needs a Diamond Cantilever...? 💍

@best-groove, not sure what you are getting at here?

Daniel can solve the problems ....

Yeah @best-groove ......... Who is Daniel ?

not sure what you are getting at here?

I got confused, I only read the first page without looking at the next and I answered.

@chakster   Cartridgelab

I suppose your comment was aimed at the old discussion about Victor MC-L1000. The sample I received was in pristine condition and is still working great. I'm aware of its vulnerability, so I use it sparingly and only with clean records. 

BTW, Daniele of cartridgelab did a great job on my Dynavector DV-30C and was a very pleasant guy to communicate with. I wouldn't hesitate to call on him when the need arrives.

I suppose your comment was aimed at the old discussion about Victor MC-L1000.

exactly

I wouldn’t hesitate to call on him when the need arrives.

certainly, all my cartridges and tonearms always go through his hands for a check.
I no longer send to anyone else, he did revive cartridges given for passed off by others that not even Christ with his famous miracles would have succeeded.
Of course, everything has a cost.

@edgewear : That vintage top of the line Micro Seiki TT JC owns it, I don't know if today still has it.

Yes, it is a true beauty and was and is expensive unit.

R.

Dear @edgewear : The cantilever build material and in specific diamond against boron needs a little " analysis ".

My take as been no design/build cartridge expert is as coming:

first define the overall cantilever functions that seems to me an " easy " task:

one of that functions is to hold the stylus tip and second ( could be others. ) and along the cartridge suspension is to follow the modulations/vibrations transmited by the stylus grooves riding and this function is way critical because the ideal is to do it/transmit those movements with out adding cantilever self vibrations/resonances.

That last point is impossible to achieve due not only to the strog forces generated during the stylus grooves ridding but because not even the diamond is a perfect non vibrational cantilever material and because each cantilever along the stylus and its fulcrum has a resonance frequency.

So those tiny grooves modulations is desired too be transmitted at fast as it can.

I don’t know if the synthetic diamond used in cantilevers has exactly the same characteristics than the real natural diamond but if we compare differences in between real natural diamond and boron those differences are not night and day ( both materials are away from other cantilever materials. ). Example:

hardness : D= 10 B= 9.3 transmision speed D=18,000 B=16,200

density D=2.41 B=3.5 Young Modulus D=1,050 B=656  ( in other studies says the density of boron is: 2.35. )

All those numbers comes from Namiki site. The biggest difference looks at stifness but the boron still is way superior to other materials but diamond and very good as use in cantilevers.

I can’t see that the build material in a cantilever with diamond or with boron can makes a big differences per sé and what we listen through either material is colored too by the cantilever shape and its length along the quality of the cartridge suspension and cartridge engine/motor.

I think that exist to many variables to confirm with out doubt the absolute superiority of sysnthetic diamond vs boron in cartridge cantilevers.

Well all those and what I posted before on this regards is my amateur opinion.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Pretty good amateur opinion Raul.  This is what I came up with. The specific gravity of Boron is 2.34. This means that Boron is 2.34 times heavier than an equal volume of water. The specific gravity of diamond is 3.52! Diamond is significantly heavier than Boron. A Boron cantilever will have a lower effective mass and theoretically track better. This does not take into account the stiffness of the two materials. Both are very stiff but I believe diamond is stiffer. The stiffer material would provide more accurate transmission. In order to know which is superior in any given design I think you would have to build the cartridge both ways and subject it to testing. I have this itch that tells me the diamond is more of a marketing strategy than anything else. The manufacturers of some very fine cartridges seem determined to avoid using diamond cantilevers and I'm sure there is a reason. I was hoping jcarr could fill us in on it.

Agreed, I suspect the extra $4000 Koetsu charges for a diamond cantilever has everything to do with snob appeal and 'trophies for the rich' marketing tactics.
I've read somewhere that Namiki charges around $1000 for their diamond cantilever/stylus assembly, so the $1500 extra Ortofon charges for the MC Anna Diamond (with their Replicant 100 stylus, so probably not sourced from Namiki) over the regular version with boron cantilever seems more reasonable. Whether this translates to better sound is open to debate. Of course the reviewers say 'yes', but they're just the mouthpiece for the industry. They just as easily try to convince people that Koetsu's surcharge is also money well spent.

Sure enough, it would be most interesting to know why JC and - for example - AJ (van den Hul) never issued a model with diamond cantilever. They must surely have considered this. I recently made direct contact with AJ about another matter, so perhaps I'll get the chance to ask him about this. And hopefully JC will take the bait here....!

Diamond is boring :)) Leave it for girls.

How about Synthobionic Cantilever used by Reto Luigi Andreoli who’s been trained by Garrott Brothers in Australia and later went on his own with Bluelectric brand in Switzerland. A few audiogonners have his Magic Diamond MC cartridge, but do you know about his MM cartridges with Synthobionic Cantilever?

As you can read below Streamliner MM models has unique SYNTHOBIONIC CANTILEVER! Pretended to be unbreakable. What??? Let’s have another look.

You need google chrome browser (or google translate) to read this review. You will not find another interview with Mr. Adreoli, but Russian reviewer asked his permission to add a bit from their email conversation into this review. Very interesting!

Synthobionic Cantilever is something more interesting than Diamond cantilever.

It is interesting to compare material qualities. Then we have ruby/sapphire=corundum, with a both higher specific gravity AND a lower stiffness, seemingly clearly inferior to diamond (all else being equal). Then the issue of rod vs. pipe - why don’t we see more attempts at pipes, besides aluminum (difficulty to manufacture?). And also why don’t we see more short cantilevers to minimize the effects of imperfect cantilever materials, alignment difficulties aside.

The Koetsu diamond cantilevers do seem perhaps a little bit shorter. Maybe it could be argued that and a (possibly) more rigid stylus bonding could account for the improved sound over boron on the same cartridge, if the mass vs. stiffness is a wash :)

I like cactus - very nimble. Very rugged material for user handling.

Short cantilever means the arc traversed by the stylus in response to the groove is shorter than with a longer cantilever, which means the net coil or magnet velocity is reduced for a given deflection of the stylus, which means a proportionate reduction in voltage output for a given magnet and coil structure.  And that all is also dependent upon where the fulcrum is located relative to the coil (MC) or magnet (MM) at the other end of the cantilever.

@lewm , I think what you mean to say is the radius of the arc is shorter so the stylus rotates more in the groove than it would with a longer cantilever. The longer cantilever also has more of a mechanical advantage over the motor assembly for whatever that is worth.

Oh, I forgot to mention. The ultimate cantilever will eventually be made of graphene nanotubes, hardest stiffest substance known to man. Very light also! Best of all worlds, expensive as hell.

I will google translate it for you:)

Original article about Bluelectric cartridges is here:


“Cantilevers by Reto Adreoli are a different story altogether. He experimented with different materials, including exotic things like cactus needles, Belgian Shepherd’s whiskers, wood and epoxies with silk microfibers. The Shake Streamliner is a bionic-based cantilever made of synthetic material that has the beneficial properties of natural structures. It combines lightness, durability, rigidity and resistance to mechanical resonances. The silicone damper does not have an expiration date, the needle is nude diamond with advanced profile. The coils are wound by hand, this is also important.”


Shake Streamliner MM cartridge is custom made by Bluelectric for 9920 CHF which is more than $10k

Japanese can’t offer this type of unique SYNTHOBIONIC CANTILEVER cantilever anyway :)

I’m proud for Europe, Swiss made!



So some of you who blame me for collecting The best Vintage MM should know that Diamond, Boron, Ruby whatever you name it  ... is technology from the 70’s. 


If you are about innovative know-how design of the 21st century then try Synthobionic Cantilever :) 

@mijostyn

Pretty good amateur opinion Raul. This is what I came up with. The specific gravity of Boron is 2.34. This means that Boron is 2.34 times heavier than an equal volume of water. The specific gravity of diamond is 3.52! Diamond is significantly heavier than Boron. A Boron cantilever will have a lower effective mass and theoretically track better. This does not take into account the stiffness of the two materials. Both are very stiff but I believe diamond is stiffer. The stiffer material would provide more accurate transmission. In order to know which is superior in any given design I think you would have to build the cartridge both ways and subject it to testing. I have this itch that tells me the diamond is more of a marketing strategy than anything else. 

On my Dynavector Nova 13D the diamond cantilever is only 1.3mm long,  therefore it is almost certainly lighter than most boron cantilevers of conventional length.

Regards to use of diamond, my understanding with the Dynavector Nova 13D is that the stiffness pushes resonances further up out of the audio band improving high frequency extension.

As an aside are your specific gravity numbers germaine to synthetic diamonds/rubies versus the natural material ??

With regard to short cantilevers look at the van den hul colibri - van den hul has certianly gone down a path of shorter cantilevers and medium compliance with his current generation.

@chakster 

So some of you who blame me for collecting The best Vintage MM should know that Diamond, Boron, Ruby whatever you name it  ... is technology from the 70’s.

If you are about innovative know-how design of the 21st century then try Synthobionic Cantilever :)

Funny how you eschew the use of materials from the 70's as outdated, but still fantasise that the suspension systems of the clapped out vintage cartridges from the 70's that you resell are in perfect shape after 50 years.

There are many superior vintage materials no longer available simply because of cost to manufacture, health and safety laws, not enough demand - high end audio is generally too small a market to produce specific materials.

Examples are
SPZ material used in the Final Audio VTT1 turntable that I own - a cast material that has superplasticity at room temperature and resonances between 10hz and 100hz are dissipated internally at a molecular level. The material was original invented in Japan for earthquake proofing build foundations, but was too expensive to manufacture and discontinued.
The original Final Audio VTT1 with the SPZ base leaves the big micros and most every other TT that I have heard, including your direct drives sounding coloured and vague. The Kondo Ginga is a cheap dumbed down copy of the original Final Audio Research VTT1 with none of the superior 1970's materials engineering.

Toxicity issues in the manufacture of hollow boron and beryllium cantilevers.

There are numerous other examples.

@dover , van dan Hul does that by eliminating the front pole piece. Sure a diamond cantilever 1/3rd shorter than a boron cantilever will weight about the same assuming the same diameter. The shorter cantilever is sure to have some disadvantages it terms of leverage and tracking error. I have no idea what all this means. You would have to build and test multiple designs to see what happens. My sense is that the cottage builders develop theories and build them assuming they work without a full understanding of other factors and  adequate testing other than listening, the artistic approach. Thus, you wind up with cartridges of different character. In reality cartridges of any type are not very complex devices and it should not be all that difficult to develop a full understanding of the various factors at play. It just takes time and money.
As Raul suggests a lot of it might be developing finer tolerances and better construction methods. Very few of us have the time, money or experience. We know a few things about the cartridges we use, how they sound, how they track and such. We have and defend pet favorites and some of us know a little about the physics involved but, that is about it. Raul has managed to gain a lot of experience by doing whatever it is he does. Between Raul and chakster you probably have 80 % of the cartridge knowledge on this site. My own meager experience seems diametrically opposed to the experience of others. I am beginning to think moving coil cartridges are a waste of money and that you can get equal or better performance out of much less expensive moving magnet and iron cartridges. 

@mijostyn

I am beginning to think moving coil cartridges are a waste of money and that you can get equal or better performance out of much less expensive moving magnet and iron cartridges.

I dont agree. MM’s have an inherent issue in that the high frequency response has phase and linearity issues, the capacitive loading is essentially tuning the high frquency response to get some semblance of linearity at the cost of phase anomalies. Even Raul after trawling through gazillions of MM's has concluded that he prefers LOMC's.

The issue with MC's I believe is the paucity of really good moving coil phono stages. Of course there are duds out there, but there are excellent MC's from even quite modest pricing ( example Audio Technica AT33Ptg ) provided you have a good phono stage.

Moving Iron is a better alternative to LOMC's than MM's in my view - Decca, Soundsmith both produce excellent cartridges at a variety of price points. 

If someone has an average turntable/arm and/or phono they are more likely to get less issues with MM/MI than LOMC. That is the crux.

I still have a Glanz MFG61 moving flux, JVC X1 MM and a few others in the box - I never listen to them, any decent LOMC for around $1500 blitzes them. Same with Chaksters much vaunted Audio Technica's he pushes, they are brittle and lack body. Soundsmith & Decca I can listen to ( and the odd Grado ).

It’s not funny Dover, because all your passage has nothing to do with unique cantilever used exclusively in Bluelectric MM cartridge that cost $10 000. And if you are so concerned about damper then his silicone damper will last forever, even if I will “re-sell” it to you 40 years later the properties of this damper will not change. This is what you want? The cost is only $10k today if Mr. Adreoli will accept your order, unfortunately his cartridges are not available from the dealers or shops. And if you can search and read about him you will understand his philosophy and his opinion about the whole high-end market today.


Regarding specific type of cantilever made in the 70’s I can assure you that I have them all (Diamond, Boron Pipe, Beryllium and even Ceramic Pipe you may never tried, it was Grace exclusive for MM). I really like them on specific models of cartridges.


Regarding suspension/damper condition on those vintage high-end cartridges: Do you think people are so stupid that they can’t define lowrider (cartridge) with softened suspension or a cartridge with stiff suspension? Or maybe they can’t measure compliance using a Hi-Fi News Test Record counting it from the actual tonearm/cartridge resonance figure? Or maybe people can’t send their cartridges for $30 inspection? Or maybe they can’t return a cartridge with bad suspension for full refund using their paypal buyers protection? Where are the feedbacks from the customers cheated by sellers of vintage carts with stiff of softened suspension? Maybe some negative threads on various forums? Or maybe it’s impossible to compare 2-3-4 samples of the same model to make sure what is good? Or maybe they can’t swap spare styli? Please tell me what’s the point to lie about cartridge condition (including suspension condition)? Only retippers capitalize on service (still an option for the buyer).

Save your stories about your luxury gear from Final Audio for your old rich friends, I am not interested in overpriced audio gear. This is not my style of living, but music is very important part of my life.

I do not re-sell cartridges, I collect them, I buy them!

And I’m looking for exceptionally good cartridges only for a reason, blast from the past (not interested in vintage junk).


But posting all the BS could you please at least provide a link to my sales list or online shop or whatever? Or maybe my current ebay or ukam listing with any cartridge for sale or something like that? May you can provide my sales score using buyers feedbacks on my ebay or ukam? I did not sell anything to you.

Bit I’ll tell you once again that I sell whatever I want to sell from my own collection only if I wish to, just like any other person in this hobby. I’ve been doing the same with my rare records from my own collection for a long time. This is a natural way to survive in this expensive hobby if you are not rich. It’s hard to understand for you, because as an ex hi-end dealer you’ve been able to buy with 30-50% discount about 40 years ago and capitalize on it. But luckily I am not at the age of grandfather, so the stuff from the 70’s wasn’t available for me, not only because I was born in the 70’s, but also because I was born in Russia. Modern high-end market is madness, this is why music lovers and audio enthusiasts are happy with vintage gear (cartridges, speakers , tubes ...).

I’m not “pushing” anything, even if your opinion is different (why it should be the same as mine?) you are free to buy whatever you want and tell everyone what exactly do you like and why. I can compare cartridges in my system and I posted a lot about this system with images. I have no idea about your system, but for some reason I think it’s not a low power amps with high efficient speakers like mine, also completely different music I guess. I don't need anyone telling me about a sound of turntable drive itself, some audiophiles are sick. 

@chakster 

The cost is only $10k today if Mr. Adreoli will accept your order, unfortunately his cartridges are not available from the dealers or shops. And if you can search and read about him you will understand his philosophy and his opinion about the whole high-end market today.

Its spelt Andreoli, with an N between the a and the d.
No doubt you will be even more sickened that I have been using a custom built Reto Andreoli moving coil phono preamp for 20 years. Its very good, as are his cartridges. but your 1970's & 80's MM used retreads are not built to that standard.

I’m not sure what are you trying to prove me?
I have 20-30 years ahead to improve my system, but you guys are already retired, glad you are not broke at your age and still thinking about the sound.

I remember we discussed his phono stage long time ago on audiogon.

But I have mentioned him in this thread ONLY because of his innovative cantilever. Some people have no sense of humor, a cartridge for $10k is nonsense (no matter what it is). But it is well suited in the DIAMOND thread.

P.S. I am quite happy with a cartridge made by people who teached him in Australia back in the day. I think I paid no more than $200 for original Garrott P77 and it was so sweet on Reed 3p.

I still have a Glanz MFG61 moving flux, JVC X1 MM and a few others in the box - I never listen to them, any decent LOMC for around $1500 blitzes them.

You never listen to them, but you think ....
I think Halcro (the OP) was very impressed by Victor MM cartridges and Steve Dobbins praised Glanz 61. I believe both of them were able to compare those cartridges to some of the best LOMC out there.

Gentlemen, pleeeze......

This thread is about the merits of diamond cantilevers or the lack thereof. We finally had JC back in here, the one person with more knowledge about cartridges than all of us combined. We were hoping he would be willing to shed his light, especially as he has never used diamond cantilevers in Lyra cartridges, which is probably not by accident.

He hasn’t yet taken the bait and respond to that question. I assume this childish and hostile bickering amongst yourselves isn’t going to help. This kind of behaviour probably drove him away in the first place.

My problem is that I like both; Dover and Chakster  So my way
out is to state that both are right. 

Addendum. I am familiar whith the ''whole story'' about Andreoli.
I have even read his ''thoretical work'' in German. But I deed not
''grasp'' his preference for aluminum cantilever not to mention
his preference for spherical styli. So when i heard that he uses
new kind of cantilevers and styli I posted my Magic diamond to
Expert stylus in order to ''improve '' my Magic. The new sapphire
cantilever + ''ultra low mass Paratrace stylus''. Cost me 400 GBP.
And the result is? Nobody want  to buy my Magic because it
is ''retiped''. Tanks chakster (grin). 

Shoot nandric, cut the political crap. This is fun. I've got two pairs of boxing gloves. Let's have at it. Better yet, how's about a dual! Raul get out those dueling pistols of yours. Back to back gentleman.

@dover , forgetting about the signal to noise issue, modern moving magnet/iron cartridges are now using the same styli and cantilevers of even the most expensive moving coil cartridges and have response curves over 30 kHz forgetting that it is unlikely you can hear anything over 12 kHz. the high end of many moving coils is exaggerated. Many like that. They think it adds detail. It does not and I do not. There are a few neutral MCs I like like the Ortofon Windfeld Ti but even that does not have the punch of a moving magnet cartridge. Eventually I will probably get a current mode phono stage which I understand is more dynamic with a better signal to noise ratio. Until then I will stick with high output cartridges that are not MCs. It is not like I have a crappy system either. I would think it safe to assume someone willing to put up with 8 foot ESLs cares about what he is listening to. 

At any rate my experience with diamond cantilevers is limited, like nonexistent. It does not seem to be the best way to spend your money all things considered. I have had a cartridge with a sapphire cantilever, the Talisman S and now have a cartridge with a Ruby cantilever that I have not had the chance to listen to yet, The Voice, by Soundsmith. IDEA!

retipper, if you are available perhaps you can help us out here. What ar the advantages of a diamond cantilever, disadvantages. You seem to prefer ruby and cactus. Could you tell us briefly why? Thanx so much in advance for helping us out.

The simplest thing to do is to consult some old designers who worked for Sony or Matsushita or others and ask them when at the end of the 70s there was the race between the majors to conquer the supremacy in the r & d of experiments and weights of mobile crews of cartridges as lights as possible, including all research on cantilevers.
There was huge funding at stake for innovation and research, funding that now (and this applies to all brands) is no longer almost more there; currently the manufacturers cannot afford to make a mistake a project.

mijostyn, are you shure you want an duel with an Serbian
warrior? We, my dear mijostyn , don't need any reason
to start an war. Pure passion. 
The problem in our forum is the grammar. To be more
specific the simple ''subject (is) predikat'' form. One is
so focussed on subject and what ''it'' possible refer to that
 by all those guessing about cantievers each of you forget 
to mention my Ikeda Rex which has no cantiever whatever.
Typical example of  western jealousy and illusion to be the
 smartest in the world. 

@larrryi

"that diamond would have to be pretty low-grade to start with..."

I don't think we are looking for D grade flawless here.


Given the tiny forces that transmit the signal, SQ will be optimised if the cantilever is very hard, stiff and short, so that the displacement at the stylus tip is transmitted accurately to the movement at the coil/magnet end, hence....
Diamond.

Hence also that a unified diamond stylus cantilever might improve on a glued joint that can possibly allow some flexure.

We also need to think carefully about the design and construction of the suspension.  It should hold the cantilever so that its pivot point is retained in a fixed location in three dimensional space. i.e. like a seesaw allowing three dimensional movement.  The permitted movement is analogeous to a gimalled arm, and for the same reasons of SQ.

Dear @mijostyn : Boron alone is way more stiffer that any other cantilever but natural diamond ( again, I don't know if the synthetic/industrial diamond shares exactly the same characterisitcs than the natural jewel. ).

Boron Young Modulus is 656 when aluminum is 68 or synthetic ruby 372.

I think  that exist a limit where above it higher stiffness makes no difference, so maybe the higher stiffness of the natural diamond ( 1,050. )  could not make a true differences in this specific cantilever " job ". Who knows?

In the other side many things around the cartridge cantilever diamond models makes no sense other that manufacturers goes way higher in the cartridge price tag and I say this because from some years now has in its cartridge catalog 1 or 2 diamond cantilever models ( not expensive ones. ) and things are that no one is the top of the line but ( like today ) cartridges with boron cantilevers ! ? ! ?

@dover  is rigth and I disagree with you about LOMC quality level performance that can be outperformed by MM/MI cartridges that's an " inferior " cartridge design.

Now and this is critical: dover said the importance of the rigth phono stage that can or can't be the " problem " with LOMC cartridges because for a LOMC one could shows all its glory we need a very good phono stage and these units are not inexpensive one ( except the PS Audio Stellar unit. ).

Everything the same a LOMC quality level performance beats an MM or MI cartridge. As dover I prefer too MI.

Everything has its own quality levels and I have to say that there are MM and MI cartridges that are ( specially MI ) really good performers.

If we comment this with JC he will tell us that MM develops higher distortions that LOMC cartridges and I know because that was his answer in the long MM thread.

Yes, I'm with LOMC but I know too that I can't totally diminish the other cartridge design contenders.

R.

Raul, that is sort of a wishy-washy answer. There are quality levels in all categories. My point is there are MM and MI cartridges that out perform some LOMC cartridges. There can be no question that the signal to noise ratio and dynamic capability are better. I am not saying that ultimately the highest performers are not LOMC cartridges. However, JC may think they are better but Joe Grado and Peter Ledermann did/do not. All these people have an iron in the fire and you have to interpret what they say as such.

You and I seem to have the same opinion of diamond cantilevers vs boron. Diamond may be stiffer but boron is lighter. Graphene is stiffer and lighter than both! Eventually someone will make a cantilever out of it. At any rate I think it is obvious that many think Boron makes the better cantilever for whatever reason. I suspect lightness trumps stiffness as inertia is critical. The stylus has to stop and start up to 16,000 times/sec. At least I think that is the highest frequency recorded on vinyl, is it not?

@nandric , I'm Jewish. Pure cunning. Never Again! God help Iran if they get close to a nuke.

Raul, that is sort of a wishy-washy answer. There are quality levels in all categories. My point is there are MM and MI cartridges that out perform some LOMC cartridges.

Absolutely, no questions about it.

I’ll tell you more: there are MM cartridges that outperform MI or IM cartridges.

Also LOMC cartridges are different, some of them are too bad, some of them are amazing.

We can only say what we like in our systems with our gear.

For me it’s important to have all types of cartridges ready to use when I’m in the mood for MM, MI or MC. Using high quality cartridges, tonearms and phono stages I want to switch from one to another, because at certain mood I prefer one type of another. And there is no absolute for me. Two turntables and 4 tonearms are always in my system.

At the moment two different Fidelity-Research tonearms (64fx and 64s) and cartridges (fr7f and fr7fz) are battling in my system with 3 different phono stages (one is current-injection type) with additional LUX SUT and ZYX Headamp. Each has it’s own advantages, but they are all great, just slightly different flavor. My First Watt buffer preamp was off for a year or so and yesterday I put it back to compare to my bigger Pass Labs preamp. When another amp from my wantlist has arrives (Red Wine Audio 30.2) I put it in my main system and I was so happy about the sound, it’s battery powered amp in my system that never gets hot like my Yamamoto with nearly 100 y.o. RCA Globe tubes, or First Watt power amp ... those are super heaters.

In my opinion it’s nice to change the sound, it’s a sort of re-freshness.
Cartridge swap is always a good idea in this situation. If I prefer one variant today it’s not necessary that I will prefer it tomorrow. It’s important to have a choice, this is why I don’t understand people who can speak about one particular cartridge (or cartridge type) as an absolute best.

+1 for chakster.

I guess my brain works differently than lewm and chakster. When I have multiple set ups I always wind up preferring one of them and the others sit and languish taking up space and money. I have never had more than 4 cartridges at a time. I'll buy a cartridge and decide whether or not I like it better then sell the loser. Occasionally I'll use a cartridge for an extended period preferring to spend money on other parts of the system that require upgrade. I used a Grado Statement for over a decade. 
I might in the future go for a Dohmann Helix after he develops his vacuum clamping and dust cover. That table takes two arms. I can keep an high output cartridge on one and a low impedance moving coil on the other for different types of music but that is a very expensive endeavor. I really have not got room for two tables.

Dear @mijostyn : "  I am beginning to think moving coil cartridges are a waste of money and that you can get equal or better performance out of much less expensive moving magnet and iron cartridges. "

Everything the same ( as I posted before. ) there is no single MM that can outperform the LOMC.

You said that the LOMC cartridges has not the " punch " of the MM and by coincidence this kind of " punch " was what impressed me with hundreds of cartridge in the long thread and I posted several times down there. 
But that " punch " is non-accurated, the MM bass range it's not it has not the tigth LOMC bass performance that's more as what we listen in a live MUSIC even at near field position. 
Yes that " punch " could be addictive but " false ", it's a distorted frequency sound. The time decay in MM ( especially vintages. ) is way longer and with overhang. The best MM by a wide margin is the Technics EPC100 C MK4 ( stand alone version. ) and the closer one to a LOMC cartridge.

MI makes a better overal job and certainly are nearer to the LOMC ones but as @dover  posted if you have the rigth phonolinepreamp LOMC is a little superior design. 

""  My point is there are MM and MI cartridges that out perform some LOMC cartridges. ""

Of course that could be true but depends the choosed MM/MI against which LOMC is the comparison and in which room/audio system.

""  JC may think they are better...""

I think that he not only " think " that LOMC are better but can prove it if necessary.

Unfortunatelly we audiophiles puit a lot of subjectivity in our opinions  and almost no facts as comparisons against live MUSIC events seated a near field position. The main issue is not what we like but what is rigth or wrong.

Anyway, the thread is about diamond cantilevers.

R.

I think it’s the wrong thread to discuss MC vs. MM again...

Cartridge is not a girlfriend (not a wife), so you can have as many as you wish at the same time if you like them.



It’s funny how some people trying to find a cartridge that combines everything in one (normally for insane price), they want “the best of the best” and they’re ready to pay their dues.


They can deny their previous love, just like after divorce, pretending their next relations is better and will last forever, but then ... oops ... another love affair and someone lost his mind.


And he thought brunettes are better, but once he met blonde and she blew his mind away! She’s so different, but they are together for much longer... Life in harmony even at the shelter.


His ex girlfriend was looking for very special treatment, luxury life and money, and finally left him.


Discussion about MC vs. MM is like discussion about Brunettes vs. Blondes.

What is good enough for YOU is the most important. Someone else opinion is irrelevant!

For some people a $10k - 30k MC cartridge is just a part of their luxury life, just another disposable unit with 3000hrs life span, whatever. But the level of distortion is a bit lower at this price :)) Try to tell it to the musicians who recorded those records in the studio, it will be cheaper to hire the whole band to perform live several times with the whole studio PA rented (just infront of you).

Dear @mijostyn : which one of these cartridges performs the best: Lyra Etna or Lyra Etna SL ).

Rigth, the SL that has lower output and this means  less wire in the coils where the sensitive audio signal always takes degradation. Lower inductance too.

I like a lot Vdh cartridges but I don't like its medium/high output models but the lower than 0.3mv.

To much coil wire in the MM cartridges.

Anyway, as I posted we can follow with the diamond cantilevers that in some ways looks as a builded " mirage ".

R.

to make very good busine$$ today.

Nothing wrong with that because customers are free to choose or not about.

I think that Mulveling nailed it when he posted, "Maybe it could be argued that and a (possibly) more rigid stylus bonding could account for the improved sound over boron on the same cartridge, if the mass vs. stiffness is a wash :)"

A photomicrograph of my Koetsu D/C shows a diamond stylus embedded in a diamond cantilever, embedded, not glued. That's got to make a difference: diamond-diamond vs diamond-glue-material X.

Anyway, that was my thought process, and that's what I hear.

Raul, the accepted rationale for why low output moving coil cartridges sound better than high output moving coil cartridges has to do with the moving of the coil itself. In other words lower effective mass. However, that same reasoning does not apply to moving magnet or induced magnet cartridges, where of course the coil isn’t moving at all. So do you still think the amount of coil in the wire of a moving magnet cartridge is a major determinant of its sound quality? If so, due to inductance? At any rate it is not due to moving the mass of the coil.

Parts, wholes and language. Putting together similar things is
called ''aggregation'' while putting together  different things
is called ''coalition'' or composition. Whomever invested his money
in different assets made an composition of them. ''Curiously''
musical works are not only called ''compositions'' but also
''art''. Do we call mathematics ''art'' or ''science''? Confronted with,
say,  many variables they invented ''formulae'' to deal with them.
Those can't be expressed in ordinary language. Why? Because
of limitation to ''x is P'' sentence form. There are obvious limitations
to what one can say in this sentence form . More in particular relations  which we try to express by parts and wholes. Frege proposed to threat relations as functions with 2 or more ''arguments''.  But we are not able to handle sentences with many
''subjects'' as ''x is P'' demonstrate. All our ''threads'' are about
''some subject'' such that members should limit their contributions
to the ''subject in casu''. Why is ''devition form the subject matter''
called ''deviation? 

Dear @terry9  : Maybe you are rigth maybe not . I think that the glue could be a kind of damping to those stong forces developed not only by the groove modulations but by the friction of the stylus tip, I don't know.

Perhaps only a cartridge designer/manufacturer can pút some ligth about.

In a cartridge design/build every single part counts for the better or degrading the overall design.

What's more or less clear to me is that the synthetic diamond per sé makes not the touted differences against an extreme good cantilever material as boron.

Anyway, with out a post of experts as @jcarr  we really can't know about, at least not me.

R.

Dear @lewm  : ZYX, Vdh and other cartridge manufacturers use: cooper, silver and gold coil wire models and the owners experienced different kind of quality levels in the reproduced sound ( models with the same output. ).

All those owners experiences/facts shows the critical importance of the coil wire quality and not only that but the coil shape and obviously the length of that coil wire that as shorter the best.

Any wire in any audio high end application degrades the audio signal so as shorter the lower " damage ". We have to understood that coil wires is the first wire where the extreme sensible cartridge signal must pass through, what we lost there is losted for ever. Pure and simple.

R.

It may look like Nandric philosophical exercise but it is about
parts , wholes and langugage we use to describe their 
''connections''. The part in casu is cantilever. There are comparisons
expressed as ''better than relation'' : a > b> c >...n. But whatever 
the  properties of whatever cantilever it is the whole of the
cartridge that determine its ,say, ''value''. By MC kinds one can
state that all are ''composed of the same parts''. The parts are
produced by different companies while all producers and repair
services use the same cantilever/stylus combo. That is to say
that nobody produce his own cantilever/stylus combo. So one
can state putting together al (same) parts is the whole story.
However we recognize that, say, Ikeda, Takeda,  Van den Hul,
Allearts , Lukatschek and Mori ''adds'' something of their own to
 the ''whole cart''. They ''tune'', ''listen'' and try to improve the sound 
of their carts in , say, ''some special way''. This we can name
''the art of the master''.  So the question ''who made the cart''
become one of the criterions to judge. 

lewm, what's your take on the cartridge coil wire length? doyou don't care about. Has a role or not in the overall cartridge quality performance?

R.

@nandric following up on your last sentence I'm still hoping JCarr will revisited this thread and explain more about what judgment calls designers make in mixing & matching various materials within their basic designs. Every design and part choice has an effect on sound quality, that much we can agree on. And so the variations are pretty much endless, which explains why no two cartridges sound the same. I think it's fair to say that science and art are on equal footing here.

That being said, I still think it's interesting to know if diamond as a cantilever material is capable of potentially lifting the performance plateau as a result of its intrinsic properties. We don't know the answer to that one. A cartridge designer of reputation who has experimented with it most likely could, regardless of whether he decides to use it or not.

What interests me in certain vintage cartridges is that materials were used that are no longer available. Especially when it's very unlikely these 'elements' will ever be reintroduced on the market, like those one piece diamond cantilever/stylus units from Sony.
In a way it's the search for a sound that has gone and will never come back. Regardless whether that sound is any better than today's designs. Probably not, but that isn't really the point is it?

I think you missed my point or are completely ignoring it. My point was only that in a moving magnet or moving iron cartridge, the coil does not move. That was a response to your earlier statement that moving magnet cartridges were inferior to moving coil cartridges having something to do with the mass of the coil. I think you know, and I know, that that is not correct. In a moving magnet or moving iron cartridge, the mass of the coil has no effect on the moving mass. And that’s all I meant to say.

As to coil wire, isn’t it odd that there has never been an MM or MI cartridge, to my knowledge, that was marketed on the basis of its having a copper vs silver vs gold coil?

Thanx Lewm for that. Saves me the typing. 

@rauliruegas , you are operating on lay instinct Raul. The coils function as a unit. The length of the wire only determines the coils overall performance/spec. The only problem with the larger coil is that capacitance can cause trouble in high frequency performance. Now, I could give a hoot about vintage cartridges. That is not my thing. I am only talking about modern ones with up to date cantilevers and styli. I am not in a position to hear a lot of cartridges any more. But the moving magnet cartridges I have heard specifically the Clearaudio Charisma, the Goldring 1042 and the AT VM760SLC are excellent performers. Given these cartridges perform well on relatively inexpensive phono stages they represent a much better cost to performance ratio for audiophiles on a budget. I do not think moving coil cartridges come into their own until you are spending $5000 and you will have to spend at least $2000 on a phono stage to get that performance. Ultimately, the absolute best performance may come from a moving coil cartridge but you are talking about equipment that few of us can afford so, it might as well not exist at all, never mind the cost of a diamond cantilever. I would never spend the additional money on one. I personally think boron makes a better cantilever. For constructs that have to change direction 20 k times per second mass is the major factor. 

@terry9 , I doubt the way the stylus is attached to the cantilever make any difference from a performance perspective. The diamonds have a square shank which is captured by a notch at the end of the cantilever. The only issue is durability. Styli that are glued on are easier to break off. I would not recommend them to DJ's. 

Regardless, Graphene will be the ultimate cantilever. It is lighter than Boron and stiffer than diamond. It would also make a better stylus as it is harder than diamond. Lord knows how you would shape it.