Dear friends: The Halcro sample has no Shibata stylus but eliptical one and its construction/specs are different because the X1 with shibata stylus was designed in that way for 4-channel that needs a wide open frequency response at the up part of the frequency spectrum. Exist real differences between the Z-1 and X-1 shibata stylus and where both were marketed with berylium cantilever in Japan? Yes and not only because the higher X-1 price but because true different performance that we can see and read here ( we can read that both models were not available in Canada and USA, at least according with the information. ): file:///C:/Users/Rub%C3%A9n/Downloads/ve_jvc_x1%20(4).pdf The Halcro version is totally different, even does not " say " JVC but Victor and does not has the 4-channel sign. JVC designed several MM cartridges ( more MC than MM ) and exist too the Z-4 models and the 4-MD models ( I own the top one on this series. ). As I posted I was and am lucky enough to get the X-1 and latter on the MK2. In the other side, the quality of all the SAS stylus replacement were manufactured to an specific price point ( IMHO not top quality. ) and many times with out to much knowledge of the cartridge overall charactheristics. You can read read here what's happening about and the experience of that Agoner is exactly the one I had with the same cartridge with dedicated SAS replacement: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/telarc-1812-revisited-2 Regards and enjoy the the music, R. |
Dear friends: I can't be sure but my speculative opinion is that the X-1 cartridges with the Victor denomination and the X-1 with the top plate JVC denomination are not exactly the same or performs the same.
Of course this is not the first time that my experiences are different from the ones of some of you .
I read the Dover post and he talks about the Victor X-1 and he compared against Koetsu and Glanz and he found out that the X-1 ( overall ) is an inferior one.
My experiences with my JVC X-1 and MK2 is the other way around.
Anyway, enough for now on this topic.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Pryso: "
Some assumed you simply grew tired of the trials (or found musical nirvana "
Thank's to ask, as a fact I received several/many emails asking for that all were really appreciated. Things are that I'm to busy and need focus on what I do day by day.
Tired by the trails? never I could think that other/some agoner's maybe could be " tired " of me. found musical nirvana? well I'm still in its quest, as all we know an endless target.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear jbethree: As I posted years ago the JVC ( X-1 MK2. ) along the MF-2500 are stellar performers.
Sooner or latter on the net , I hope, can appear for some of you can delight with.
Good that the Z-1 " dance " for you. Btw, the presentation of the JVC against the Denon you name it are just different and maybe the JVC does not beat it. I like that Denon and I like my JVC and MF, maybe different kind of " like ".
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Sorry, error on VTF, 31L: 1.5grs is the right value. |
Dear chakster: ""
If it was top Astatic model ever made i have the feeling that Glanz top model beats them all. This is only my suggestion. Since these brands are clones of each other, ...........................
The Astatic mf 200 equal to Glanz mf 31L is a good one, ...... """"
Where do you read or who told you that Astatic cartridges are clones of the Glanz? In my understood Astatic ( that's a very old corporation. ) only took the Glanz patent ( moving flux. ) and that's all about.
The " clone " you name it: MF 200/ mfg 31L is a good example that those cartridges are not clones. The output level on both cartridges is different 4.2mv vs 3.5mv. Inductance 90 vs 110. VTF: 1.75grs vs 1.25 grs. Cartridge weight: 6grs vs 5.5grs. Frequency response: 10hz to 20khz vs 20hz to 20khz with a 2 db deviation in both cases and I can go on with those differences. As you can see far away to be clones.
The Astatic MF 2500 was an earlier cartridge than the MF 100/200, even its inductance value is different in between and IMHO the 2500 is the best performer in the Astatic catalog and way better than the MFG 71L. I can't talk on the 61 till I heard it.
As I said Astatic is an old and experienced corporation and did not to copy/clone Glanz in the way you posted.
Yes, I can be wrong and the best judge about obviously is you.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear chakster: I think that you have to re-read what I posted to you again. Here it's:
"""
The " clone " you name it: MF 200/ mfg 31L is a good example that those cartridges are not clones. The output level on both cartridges is different 4.2mv vs 3.5mv. Inductance 90 vs 110. VTF: 1.75grs vs 1.25 grs. Cartridge weight: 6grs vs 5.5grs. Frequency response: 10hz to 20khz vs 20hz to 20khz with a 2 db deviation in both cases and I can go on with those differences. As you can see far away to be clones. """
Please let me know where you can " see " ( read on those numbers. ) that both cartridges are clones?. For me it's a" disturbing " ( for say the least. ) statement.
""""
the answer is very simple: I've learned about Astatic vs. Glanz right here on the forum reading posts of owners of the both models .... ""
WOW!, I don't expect this kind of answer because I know several of the gentlemans posting here for years and many of them know about " cartridge differences on numbers ".
With all my respect to you I think that what you read it was a misunderstood or a " fault " from you and if not then what you read it was totally wrong.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear friens: How could be that two " different " cartridges with different specs and different people cartridge design voicing can sounds/performs the same ( as the MF 200 vs MFG 31L ) for many of you? or that could performs so nearest, for some of you, ( like the Z1/SAS vs JVC X1-MK2 ) when both are way way different in all parameters ?
Maybe each one of us have a different explanation. I think that in a " perfect " audio world that can't happen but in our real audio world and talking of cartridges quality level performance and with vintage ones could happen many things:
- down-graded ( anywhere. ) cartridge sample because natural aged . - damage in the cartridge samples. - too many hours of play on that sample. - cartridge set up not fine tuned in one or both of the vs cartridges. - different SPL on audition where the cartridges has different output levels as the ones I mentioned.
- Non sufficient audio system resolution level to discriminate. - Not enough training in our ears/brain to really make the discrimintating very hard process during an evaluation comparisons. - that we want to hear ( that way for any reason. We are biased in that " route ". ) what in reallity we are not hearing. - because is the " new " toy. - obviously, different audio/music priorities. - and several other reasons that you can think about.
Something that's " weird " for me is that after the last 2-3 years ( that I was out of this forum. ) I follow reading from many of you that still exist many differences in your cartridge samples quality performance and mines
Perhaps I did not grow up. Who really knows.
I would like to know and maybe others too to know your overall opinion about. What's happening down there?.
I really appreciate ( from all of you. ) and need and want to know it and learn about. What " link " or " links " I'm not taking in count or still I do not give enough importance. Thank's in advance.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
""" ...
( like the Z1/SAS vs JVC X1-MK2 ) when both are way way different in all parameters ? """" even the cartridge body design/construction and stylus/cantilever holder are different!!!!!!
same cartridge body resonances?????
R.
|
Dear chakster: So, you have no facts and only:
"
The Astatic is a very good cartridge but I do not feel that it is in the same domain as these Glanz ... " just feelings with no real/objective facts that can confirm that opinion.
In the other side no one saids are clones. Example:
"""
Coil windings, materials used, coupling mechanisms and output are distinct across them. """ and even this gentleman has no single reference that confirm his words but " saids " are different and no clones.
"""
Glanz and Astatic carts are made by Mitachi Corporation. Even the boxes are identical. The only difference are the styli: Shibata by MF 100 and 200 and line contact by Glanz 7131. The corpusses look to me also identical. """", this gentleman said are differences but the cartridge body and box. Did he ( or you. ) knew/know the whole internal specific cnstruction?.
chakster if we see two Honda Civic cars where one of them was modified to participate in a real race car to improves its performance : could we say that both are clones just because the looking is the same? or could we say are clones when those cars has different drive/running/design specifications?
I can tell you that for me makes no sense to say are clones. I think are differents.
Again, I think that you are not carefully reading or you have a misunderstood on the FACTS and explanation I gave you in my first post about . You need to read it again and read too my second post where I began: "" Dear friends """
It's weird that not a single gentlemans of the regulars in this thread posted, yet, to help you or help me on this very critical subject.
Seems to me that till now I'm not wrong, yet.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear chakster: Exist many audio subjects where we learned or understood in not the right way.
It's almost imposible to have even " twins " as you named on cartridges not even with cartridges coming from the same manufacturer.
Audio Technica, Stanton, Sonus and other manufacturers are a good example on my statement. Example: In the MM AT 20 series all the models ( " top of the line ". ) has same motor and loks identical but are not the same and does not performs the same, in that series the 20 SS were " hand selected " because best stylus polished and specs performance on play. Stanton had the 980 and 981 ( same everything. ) where the 981 was " hand calibrated " to meet exactly cartridge specs and in the Sonus Dimension 5 happens the same with the calibrated version.
In other cartridge manufacturers they do the same ( for the top modelñ ) and don't " disclose " it.
""
Glanz 61 I would say there is nothing like that made by Astatic in their top of the line cartridges ... """
why should exist that? Astatic took only the patent and that's all. As I said the voicing of Astatic cartridges was do it from a totally different gentleman than for Glanz cartridges. This subject is critical to understand the whole cartridge design.
Do you think that Lyra just send to Scan-Tech ( Lyra manufacturer as was Mitachi for the Astatic. ) what they want with out makes a deep cartridge voicing to know if what ST did it meets the Lyra " specs "? or we can think that through that voicing and modifications on the cartridge on its building characteristics is what permit Lyra to have the final product. That's the way things happen.
Every thing is impórtant in the design/building of a cartridge and its deep voicing could be one of the higher importance.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear Lewm: In that Astatic series the top of the line is the MF 100 that's IMHO is very good neutral performer where rhe MF 200 is very good too with more " drama ". You can't go wrong with any of those two Astatic's.
In the other side, I owned the CS 100 that many of us ( as me . ) could think the best of the best Stanton but the 981 calibrated beats with some " easy ". For some people is the top one but IMHO not on quality performance.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: The Collector's Series 100 was one model that in theory was the top of the line in the Stanton catalogue ( over the 981. ).
Nowe, we can't compare the HZ with the LZ because are different cartridges that IMHO both outperforms the 100. If I remember Stanton gave the model name ( 100 ) because they builded 100 cartridges but this I can't confirm 100%.
Anyway, you already have it just listen and decide about.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: On the JVC X-1/Z-1/SAS topic and when all of you have very diferent quality performances experiences than me I always re-think what's happening with what I heard and in the last days I was busy listening both JVC cartridges through my own evaluation/comparation process.
First I would like to know whom of you own the X-1MK2 where you can read in the top plate: JVC X-1 ( not Victor. ) and in the stylus holder 4 channel.
Now, after my listening days my opinion is that the Z-1/SAS still is a mid-fi cartridge and not near the overall performance, stellar one, I experienced with the JVC X-1 MK2.
What do you think of my latest evaluation about? why exist so high differences on these experiences with your collective bias?
Your answers be appreciated.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear friends: This is for those owners of JVC X-1MK2 and Victor/SAS that decided not participate in my open dialogue.
People say here in México: """ Whom stay quiet/silence consent """"
So, I understand no one but me owns the JVC X-1MK2 and my different point of view against all of you could be because of that and about the Victor because my two Victor/SAS samples are in bad conditions and yours are first rate.
Good!
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear jbethree: Maybe I need a third Victor sample or maybe today I prefer a different kind of distortions. I can tell you that every one of us " day by day " are learning.
I respect your opinion and hope you can find out the original JVC X-1MK2 that IMHO is a totally different cartridge that the Victor you own.
Btw, it's a pity that the DVD-A almost disappears. Fortunatelly digital always is wroging up on quality level and today 32/384 technology is almost unbeatable even by our be loved analog hobby..
I take advantage of this post to send to every one of you and your dearest family my very best wishes in these holidays!!
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear Fleib: I own and owned all those Ortofon cartridges and IMHO the MC 2000 is unsurpassed not only by the 2000 MK2 but even both 3000 are no better.
The 2000 MK2 was the Ortofon answer to the buyers in two issues: where the 2000 was a " problem " for its very very low output and very high compliance the MK 2 is a higher output cartridge with lower compliance, same for the 3000. The other change was the body cartridge material instead of aluminum the other use ceramic and in the 3000 stylus is different and I think ( I'm not sure right now ) cantilever material too.
As you said, different cartridges but very good ones.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear griffithds: Thank's to answer. Keep enjoying what you like.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: I was and am a fan for Ortofon cartridges and yes the MC 2000 is a hiden gem with a quality levbl performance to spread every where.
Right now I'm exploring in my system another vintage ( non Ortofon. ) MC cartridge that I bought several years ago and that I had it in new condition and never touched, I will report on it when I be sure can be of interest to the audio community but right now I like it .
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear diamond ears: Nagaoka is a very older cartridge manufacturar that IMHO always works with is own cartridge/motor principles.
I never cared on which other cartridge manufacturer took the Moving Flux principle but now that you mentioned that one was Micro Seiki whom name it Vartiable Flux, I have two samples ( I think ) some where and the cartridge body design is similar to Astatic ones but if I remember they did not use plastic but metal material in its construction and I remember that the MS are good performers. Years ago I think I mentioned some where in this thread.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear nandric: you have good memory on the JVC X-1 MK2 because was you ( thank's again. ) whom bought it for me ( MK2 NOS JVC stylus replacement. ) in Europe with out knowing what in a " hell " was the JVC X-1.
Now, when you own several great cartridges and one has a diferent and higher quality performance, like the Astatic MF-2500, you can choose whatever adjective you want: stellar, outstanding, fabulous, marvelous, etc . I choosed " stellar " because it belongs to a unique and diferent " league ". I own or owned some: fabulous, outstanding, etc. cartridges but IMHO " stellar " MM is the adjective that the 2500 deserves, at least till today.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear nandric: I can't dispute about your modified 7 fz because I owned in original shape where I agree with JC about. The cartridge is a good cartridge but IMHO both frequency extremes are only " so, so " and nothing to " die for ".
I posted here that if we want a real FR winner we need to listen the MCX-5 that was not designed by the " master " but for engineers that work in FR and that latter founded Entré. This MCX-5 is the one in FR quality level performance.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear nandric: For good reasons I have not any more the 702. Normally I don't like to stay sticked with one or two cartridges . I like to learn and one way to do it is: listen, listen, listen and listen to diferent cartridges ( today/vintage ) and diferent audio systems.
The series 7 is not for me. Please do a learning exersice: take any of your stand alone cartridges and connect to the headshell with the oldest wires you can have on hand, listen it and then change those headshell wires for the best ( today ) you have on hand. Certainly will be a " huge " diference in the quality level sound performance in the side of the newest headshell wires ( at least this is what happen in my experiences always. ).
Well the 7's has a very old internally wires and that's what you " like " along what that integrated headshell makes not for the better but the other way around. Years ago I like those kind of distortions, not any more.
Anyway, I'm sure that like me you will learn too or : maybe not?. In the mean time enjoy it.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear normansizemore: What look I for any type ( headshell wires, tonearm internal wire, IC, speaker ones, etc. ) of wire/cable for my system?: a dead neutral cable and ( please ) I don't want to have a dialogue here about neutrality, maybe only that characteristic needs a dedicated thread.
Normally I use silver or silver/cooper blended cables, even some of my power cables.
I can open a cable store with all my tested cables through so many audio years. I can tell you ( for example ) that I own over 400 sets of headshell wires.
Now, each one of us have diferent audio/music sound priorities and this is what many times makes the diference and is the main issue on audio dialogues.
At the end the important subject ( for many and diferent reasons. ) is to listen what we like.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear nandric: What I know is that you and me are in diferent treads on that learning curve/stair. ""
I myself was never obssesed with any wire whatever and am convinced that this myth is invented by P&R people. "" and you gave you an answer that you are wrong with that statement:
"""
I know that copper sound different than silver """", so needs no additional coment from my part.
"""
Kondo-san used by preference the ''old kind'' , say, 100 years old silver from Italy... """
with all my respect : who was Kondo-san?, japanese people are very skillful but......????????
Do you know when bought I my Ikeda ( no cantilever ) cartridge sampler?. I already posted here and in other threads ( years ago ) my opinion about. You are starting with, we will see what the time can tell you on that cartridge.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear normansizemore: You are welcome.
For me was and is a surprise that exist a real alternative to MC cartridges, too.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear ddriveman: Happy new year for you and your family too!
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear griffithds: """
I guess we all should discard our Marantz's, McIntosh's, and Dynaco amps """
I agree with you on this sentence, good.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear nandric: Yes, I could be wrong so I appreaciate your explanation about: you posted: """
with any wire whatever and am convinced that this myth is invented """""
so for you is only a myth that was/is invented.
in the same post you said:
"""
I know that copper sound different than silver """
I would like to know what do you mean with those statements?
is still a myth for you or you know but can't hear it? opr what?
Btw, any one knows who was Kondo-san. Siome japanese audio manufacturers like to surround they products with " mystic and mysteries " and Knondo was a good example. Sugano-san was other: I can remember at the began of the Koetsu cartridges no one ( included the japaneses. ) knew any single spec on the Koetsu cartridge, not even the VTF. In those old time ( even the professional reviewers ) were " inventing " the VTF on those cartridges and every one used diferent VTF. That was a myster AND THAT'S ALL
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear tubed1: Reading over the link seems to me that there is nothing new in the cartridge design that other cartridge manufacturers not did/do it.
Maybe the more atractive characteristic be its price if the quality level performance is higher that the cartridge competition inside its price range. Sooner or latter we all can be informed by its owners or maybe a audio magazyne review.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear griffithds: I don't discard any cartridge because we have not alternative to listen to. In the other side you can't compare the kind and length of the wire used in the cartridge coils against an amplifier.
Please read again my post to you where I said that I agree only with that " sentence ". I don't posted about wires ?????
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear nandric: Ok, you are not deaf: good!. That's all about.
Regards and enoy the music, R. |
Dear griffithds: """
because articles written by actual Electrical Engineers, do not agree with what you have stated. The difference being, they have test results that have been verified through repeated lab testing """"
unfortunatelly and with all my respect almost all those Electrical Engineers are not ( at the same time ) TEA.
In the other side maybe they are measuring not what they have to measure that has a direct relationship with music/sound quality performance characteristic.
I read it and agree with you on that part of your overall sentence, that's all.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear lewm: """
some DIYers that old transformers, obtainable by parting out high quality vintage amplifiers, like Acrosound, Marantz, etc, do sound superior to newly wound transformers... """
I'm not an expert on wire-wound and I suppose not every coil/inductor is wounded the same. I know for sure that not all cartridge coils are wounded the same even inside the same manufacturer. In the other side could be, some times, that those DIYers what are listening not always is better quality performance but only DIFERENT quality performance.
Anyway, each one of us have diferent opinions and dialogue inn between could helps to understand in better way the complexity of audio subjects.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear danvignau: I don't know to whom you are refering about that "
MC hummed ". Certainly not my case.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear florence4/lewm: There are at least two cartridge Grace series that never been marketed out side Japan/Asia: the Level II and the 14 series ( both with more than 7 diferent models, even the 14 serie has a Disco model for DJs. ).
The 14 top model appeared in 1985 with a boron cantilever and MR stylus and this is the one that could outperform the 9Ruby ( Level II has too a Ruby model. ). Sellers take advantage that in America/Europe are not well know cartridges and put on sale at very high prices that seems to me don't justify its quality performance.
I seen on Agon/ebay the 14 entry level asking more money for it even up than the 9 ruby!.
Obviously that we can try it, certainly not me in this time.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Chakster: You posted:
""" Do you like SAS or prefer the original stylus of Victor X1II or XIIE ? I think the best is to find NOS Victor. It was you who said earlier that SAS made with specific price tag in mind when Victor is more complicated design made to be the best in competition between companies in the golden age of analog and MM design. It was not a big problem for me to find NOS original Victor X1II (with original stylus) and later another lightly used X1IIE.
I don’t care about SAS since it was on my Technics 205c mk4. The original technics mk4 stylus was much better.
There are plenty of new design with similar Micro Ridge stylus profile available today but who cares? Pretty much detailed sound but somehow boring compared to some vintage eliptical, shibata or line contact models.
In most cases SAS replacement looks ugly on nice vintage cartridges that never been designed to wear sas on them.
p.s. Now i remember your post about Ortofom M20FL when you clearly explained that M20E (eliptical) is your choice over M20FL (fine line). So why the most advanced profile is not always mean the best? So why bother with SAS aka Micro Ridge? """
Chakster, first I’m not convinced that the Victor cartridge branch designation been exactly the same design than the branch name JVC model, even that both were designed/builded by JVC. Somewhere here in the last 3 thread pages already gave my explanations about.
I tested the Victor/SAS and IMHO is far away on quality performance against the JVC X1-MK2
Now, SAS stylus replacements were a good option against some original cartridge stylus on non-top/average cartridge performers. Your exoeriences with your top Technics confirm it and you are not the first person that report about that same SAS replacement in the same Technics model. I own the Shure M97 Xe a mediocre cartridge that I bougth because many people on VE loved with the SAS replacement and yes it sounds a little better but still in the mediocrity.
Yes, the SAS ones were designed with a very strictly price range on mind and that’s why were so inexpensive replacements but far away from the very best stylus replacement or re-tipped coming from the cartridge manufacturers. Not all MR or Shibata’s or whatever are manufactured with the same quality level, either: stylus and cantilevers.
Do you know why some replacements through after market retippers ( as Alex in germany. ) have so low prices? Exactly, because the stylus/cantilevers they buy are not top/first rate because on many of those rettipers they even can’t get it from the original builders.
Yes, I made a mistake to retip several of my cartridges through Axel and now in the top ones I’m retipping again with top ones replacements.
In the other side, I own both Ortofon cartridges ( at least two samples of each one. ) and I prefeered the e over the l but I have several years I don’t " touch " neither. Now even today some top cartridge manufacturers still use elipthical stylus tip and the old Shibata shapes. We have to remember that is more easy to make a precise cartridge set up with ellipthical stylus tip than with MR ones and in reality I can't know if what in theory is true about the advantages on the MR and the like stylus profiles is absolutely true during playback tests with same cartridge and with different stylus shape. Those Ortofon's were an experience about.
No, I don’t bother about SAS, I’m with you on this subject.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear CH.: Maybe I don't explained very well. I'm not saying that Axel is not and skilled and knowledge as a retipper because is very good doing what he does. What I want to say is that his stylus/cantilever combinations are not the premium ones that comes with many of the today top LOMC cartridges.
For that suspension problem Axel is fine. My retipper source is VdH.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: Nandric posted: """
Dear Raul, Your info about Axel is misleading... """"
I don't thik so:
time before that you or any one is this forum and other net analog forums I found out Axel cartridge rettiper and investigated his works before I " tested " to fix by him one of my cartridges, after I did it and received that cartridge I brought to " the audio community " Axel. I know perfectly and repeat again : before you, anything how was and is the Axel's work who first than all email me his options price list for the cartridges retips.
He never had premium cantilever/stylus parts. Even he contacted with me expressely for I can give him some information where he could buy those premium parts.
The problem with premium parts suppliers is not only that are only 3-4 of them but that the really premium parts are reserved to the cartridge manufacturers and no one else. Many times even those suppliers choose the best of their samples for that cartridge manufacturers. So we can't wait that rettipers can buy those top premium parts. Perhaps only that gentleman in UK with his paratrace patented stylus.
You can be shure that even through VdH or Benz Micro ( top rettipers. ) the rettiping is first rate but not the one choosed for their top VdH/Benz Micro models.
VdH not only fixed my 100MK4 but at least other sample with the same problem of other Agoner.
Chakster VdH could be a good option for you or try through Benz Micro.
In the other side, I respect a lot to JC and I can be wrong but my opinion in that problem with those top Technics cartridges in its suspension is that that tension wire has an utility to tame the Technics quality level.
It's dificult to think that Technics used some kind of characteristics in their designs with out need it. That other gentleman that fixed his 100C MK4 through VdH latter on bougth the Lyra Atlas and somewhere he posted that he prefered the Technics to the Atlas.
IMHO and till today Technics research and designs are second to none and till today no one even its greatness. Technics was not the company/enterprise of one or two persons but part of the greates/bigger consolidated electronics gigant in the world: Matushita. So, full of resources of every kind to the research, design and manufacture. Period. It's pity that we can't have that Technics today in our top audio analog world.
Now, the 205 MK4 is not a total different anaimal than the 100C MK4. The 205 MK4 quality level performance level is just remarkable and has the 100C MK4 legacy.
The 205 MK4 was the last top cartridge Technics cartrige and started in the audio market in 1984 against 1982 for the 100 C MK4.
Btw, the latest Technics LOMC 305 MK2 is a must to listen it and can put on " shame " some today top LOMC ones.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear N: """ The expression ''low rider'' is a kind of friendly substitution for defective suspension... """"
that statement is part of each one ignorance level and in your case no experiences about. Low rider?, low riders the VdH Colibri even after the 300 hours fine tunning. The FR MC X5 or the Linn Akiva and many more. So don't spread that kind of statements.
In the other side: """ that is why you needed to search for some other re-tipper """ Wrong, totally wrong. That's was not the reason but that I learned about premium retips. In the other side, I email you in private/confidence way about that " conflict " trusting in you but now I know that you are a news paper. Shame of you, pity.. regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
N.: WRONG again in all what you posted.
Btw, who wants and enemy with " friends " like you?, no thank's.
Have a good time, R.
|
Dear chakster: """ Still great sound quality though. """
is " normal " that the vintage cartridge suspension is really out of spec as when manufactured, some times a little " loose " sometimes a little " firm ". Now, the quality level of its sound is a good parameter to " measure " in some way if exist a real problem there and from the frequency range we have to discern/listen carefully through a very well knowed LP tracks if both frequency extremes are " optimal ", if no one of them puts a non equilibrated kind of sound. Here what we have to listen are subtle sounds changes in those frequency range, not easy. I remember when one of my 6-7 samples of the Ortofon 20 super suddenly colapsed its suspension. In that model the quality of the high frequency extreme was just gorgeous as I think never heard it in any other cartridge but against the rest of the frequency range was out of context: too much of that lovely high frequency sound. I had more than 3-4 experiences with cartridges that suddenly colapsed and those experiences were never exactly the same changes in the listen sound.
Btw, in the VdH Colibri is almost imposible to measure the distance between the below of the cartridge body and the LP surface even we can think that with the LP warps it will hit that surface, this never happen but that distance is at minimum at least in my four samples of that VdH samples I owned and own.
Btw, I see in your Technics cartridge picture that you own the headshell integrated models, if you can try to get the stand alone models on both cartridges where you can choose for the right headshell and headshell wires for each cartridge model.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear chakster: I don't know if Dominic still has the same prices as 3 years ago ( maybe higher today. ) but here it's his prices then:
"""
I prefer fitting either boron, ruby or my own nickel cantilevers.Tips include elliptical, micro ridge and Fritz Gyger II and S tips.Guide prices include-fitment of boron cantilever with micro ridge tip £250fitment of ruby cantilever with FG S tip £350fitment of FG II tip to existing cantilever £250. I can also straighten bent cantilevers within reason.Inspection fee of £30 applies to all carts sent in for examination. Included if work undertaken. """
all that plus shipping.
Now, as I told you the best way to do it is to send the cartridges to him because with cartridges as the 100C MK4 or 205 MK4 money can't be object, those cartridges deserves it. Rewards comes for sure.
I will send to him with out ask some of my cartridges where one of them is for recoil. Of course that I ask for Dominic only on those cartridges that are worth for his premium job.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear chakster/jpjones3318: I think that no one here is a cartridge expert/designer or manufacturer to give you a clear and precise answer. We are just audiophiles like you. To solve both of you yours Technics cartridges you have to send it to an expertise for he can analize each single cartridge grading/level of " damage ". Asking by emailo is ot the way to go. This link can gives you a true opportunity to fix those cartridge problems. Dominic is the only retipper that even offer a cartridge recoil! where no one else evenj thinks to do it. I know very well Dominic where I had information through several emails, he was the gentleman who told me about that " gem " name it Goldring 800 and in its time I posted here all about that cartridge and the Dominic site. I do it again for you and any one ( btw, no here you don’t find out those low prices of other rettipers. Here we are talking of premium repairs at all levels and this has a price a fair price for that kind quality of job. Dominic is a music lover, an audiophile and an enthusiast of the analogue experiences, in that order. ): http://www.northwestanalogue.com/cartridge-repairs.htmlRegards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: For a long time I had not the opportunity to listen again my Precept 440 LC till 2 days ago and all I can say is: gorgeous performance.
The ones of you that own it and as me do not listen it for a time I think is time to do it. What a wonderful experience. For thepeople that don't own it yet is time to go for it. Recomended.
This 440 LC could put on " shame " almost any of our beloved " gems ", with it I'm not in a " hurry " to listen something diferent or even " better ".
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
@jeff1225 : Good choice.
R. |
Dear @jeff1225 : The Ortofon M20 Super ( both models. ) are a good MM experience. As all cartridges those ones are very sensitive to load impedance and to load capacitance. As always system dependt too and dependent against our music/sound priorities.
Now, if you have opportunity to buy it then do it and give it the chance to shows in your system its good quality level performance. You can't go wrong with the Ortofon's.
In the other side the 77 is a diferent performer and very good too and you can find the A&R 77 ( same as the Garrot. ) normally on Canada or UK ebay sites.
I can't now if the 77i is really an improvement or in reality a diferent performer.
Talking of the Garrot/A&R cartridges you can't find out the SAS stylus replacement because from months now is out of production.
Vintage AT MM cartridges are very good and you still can buy: 20SS, 20SLa, 15SS and the like.
The MM cartridge experience is really wide and normally a very good one.
Now that you mentioned the Ortofon I will give a listen and I'm sure I will deligth it.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @jeff1225 : I can read that you already experienced the MM alternative, so the " road " is to listen diferent very good " flavors " that asm you said gives " more fun ". Good.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @o_holter : I owned/own the 99, Helikon, Clavis, Clavis D'capo, Kleos and heard the Skala ,Titan, Titan i, Etna and Atlas. These last two Lyra models along the Kleos are way diferent performers against the other Lyra kind of designs.
Lyra started with the Kleos a new cartridge kind of design/concept that goes up to the Atlas. Is this kind of design I really like it and way better than the " old " one designs where I was not enterely satisfied.
Yes, I agree with you: if in some one system the Etna, Kleos or Atlas performs " bad/not good enough " it's just because the system and not those Lyra great performers.
Congratulations to be a proudly Atlas owner. I envy you! in good shape.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|
Dear @jeff1225 / @chakster : Exist many information in the net about the original P77 vs A&R P77. This is a minimum part of it: """
Recently a very knowledgeable friend, told me to try this combination:
Get a A&R Cambridge 77 cartridge from e-bay or similar source, and combine it with a Jico SAS Stylus 1 http://stylus.export-japan.com/index.php?cPath=88&osCsid=nmk8hofpu6vfml9e6v8tmutso4
He said that he had measured the generator to be exact as the Garott Brothers 77 cartridge and that the SAS Stylus 1 will fit the generator and it might even surpass the sound of the well known and very very good sounding Optim http://www.garrottbrothers.com/opt.html
I was really intrigued by these statements, and because i trust my friend very much on vinyl sound matters, i proceeded to buy a second hand A&R Cambridge 77 cartridge off e-bay, and combine it with the SAS Stylus 1...
Well immediately i noticed detail and timbre that my Benz Wood L2 didn't bring out... i haven't got many hours on it yet, but i am really amazed by the sound quality... and i wish to share this finding with you...
A&R Cambridge were no cartridge manufacturers, though their cartridges did enjoy some success in the UK in the 70´s and 80´s.
The A&R P77 is a mid 1980s vintage moving magnet high compliance cartridge designed in the UK by A&R Cambridge and manufactured in Japan to very exacting standards.
The P77 featured a Weinz Paroc (parabolic oval cone) stylus on an aluminium cantilever, and was noted for its warm musicality and punchy output. It became a very popular cartridge due to its ability to work well in a wide range of tonearms from budget level to the more expensive. Although now long out of production, the cartridge is still much sought after today, a testament to both its lasting musical capability and good build quality.
At 6 grams, this is a medium mass cartridge.
Specification Output Voltage @ 5cm/sec 4mV Channel Balance @ 1kHz 1.5dB Channel Separation @ 1kHz >20dB Frequency Response 20Hz - 20kHz Compliance 20μm/mN Recommended Tracking Force 1.8g Tracking Force Range 1.6 - 2.2g Recommended Load 47kΩ in parallel with 200-400 pF Cartridge Weight 6.0g Stylus Type Profiled Stylus Radii 50x7 μm Cantilever Type Aluminium Dual Tube
Tonight I've also fitted the roughly 25 year old A&R p77 that came with my secondhand Linn and played some charity shop records. Wow, what a match compared with my DV10x5! Despite not maybe being the highest of Fi, there's a fullness and richness that seems to complement the IBLs very well. The P77 stylus was originally supplied to Arcam by The Expert Stylus Company in Kent. As far as I know they are still around and can still supply replacements. It's worth a try. """
IMHO Garrot and A&R have the same generator/motor design ( Dynamic Coil concept. ) but with diferent cartridge voicing and not exactly the same and precise cantilever/stylus shape combination, maybe ( even if the same stylus. ) not with the same polished quality level. So, the P77i maybe is not necessarybetter performer, only diferent.
Now, with original vintage cartridge the quality performance on cartridge samples could be diferent because " agging " and in diferent operation conditions. In the other side cartridge quality performance is system dependent and not only because the " kind/quality " of system but because diferent levels of accuracy during the cartridge/tonearm set up overall parameters.
Regards and enjoy the music, R.
|