Yes, Boron is superior to any other materials but diamond in cartridge cantilevers and of course that is way important the cartridge motor quality design and excecution to that design quality.
R.
Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?
Dear @pryso : I owned the Shinon Red that for whatever reasons almost always had suspension problems but when in good operation condition was and is an excellent quality performer. Yes, Boron is superior to any other materials but diamond in cartridge cantilevers and of course that is way important the cartridge motor quality design and excecution to that design quality. R. |
Dear @pryso : "
one of my all time favorite cartridges was the Shinon Red Boron I enjoyed for many years...." As you I had problems not only with one of my Shinon Red but with a Saphic too. I bougth a new second Red Boron that works prety nice for a few months and in mint condition and very good operation condition I decided to put on sale ( to buy more cartridges. ) and I sold it. Well the gentleman was really satisfied with for no more than 2 weeks when he started to have some problems/noises with the playing cartridge so I suggested to him that I will paid to a re-tipper to fix that problem due that the cartridge was in as new condition and he accepted to do it and he sends it to a very well regarded re-tipper who after " fixed " return to him only to found out that the problem in reality was not fixed and the retipper asked to return the cartridge to make a new check up and fix it. After 2-3 weeks the Shinon return and guess what: the problem was not fixed and the retipper gave up and he told us a wide history about with no solid explanation. Only very lucky audiophiles had success with Shinon cartridges. Now, if you want something similar kind of sound but a little better quality overall performance levels then my advise is that you can look for a Carnegie 2 that was a co-design and manufacture by Benz-Micro and Dr. AJ van Denhul. Was expressely designed and builded for Madrigal . Btw, exist the Carnegie 1 too that's very bad quality performer and keep aways from it. The Carnegie 2 is way way different and a keeper. R. |
Dear @dimitry The B&O tagential tonearm accept directly the B&O cartridgeas.
If you want to mount a B&O cartridge in a non B$O TT it happens several good and bad " things ".
A bad thing is that we need an adapter to mount the cartridge in a different tonearm and here happens at least two things: first the cartridge output pin connectors have to be connected ( additioanl metal connection. ) with the input addapter headshell connectors and second is that the cartridge body goes hold by a screw to a second " cartridge " body that's the addapter.
What I did it with my B&O and Technics cartridges is to take out the addapter input connectors and the removable headshell input wires connectors just reduce its internal hole to connect directly to the cartridge pins and that's it. Works and performs really nice with pivoted tonearms.
R.
|
Dear friends : More vintage cartridge reviews.
I have a very special edition of this very fine class Audio Technica AT 160ML:
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1984-09.pdf page 72.
This one by Shure needs no presentation:
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1982-11.pdf page 65.
Whom out there did not yet experienced this famous Grace one, yes the Ruby:
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1983-07.pdf page 92.
I own other cartridge models by Nagatron but even that I look at really hard never keeped its unique Ribbon design that’s very very low output cartridge. Here in Agon forum I know ( I can’t remember his name/moniker ) only one audiophile that owns it and runs through the top Technics SUT: go figure "
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1979-05.pdf page 66
I own or owned all models of this old Pritchard works ADC XLM:
page 55.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dear friends: Last year I posted several links of cartridge reviews on vintage MM/MI cartridges, almost all what we learned in this thread. Now, I will post additional links reviews of very well regarded cartridges:
this one was the last Pritchard design colaboration with ADC it's the Astrion with saphire cantilever. I really like this MI model. Look for the page 35: https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-High-Fidelity/80s/High-Fidelity-1981-07.pdf
This one was and still is one of the Audio Technica with higher sales by the brand it's the AT 155LC. I'm sure than some of you owned or still own as me, really good. Look for page 30: https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-High-Fidelity/80s/High-Fidelity-1981-07.pdf
R.
|
Well I don't know what I made wrong but that review is of one of the best Stanton ever the 980, I still own the 981HZ.
This was the latest MM Technics design and something to have or at least listen it, it's the 205 MK4. Look page 79:
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1986-01.pdf
Here the glorious best Empire ever design the 4000 D3. Look page 37:
This Grado cartridge is not top of the line but at next down setp catalog model and a very good example of what Grado designs were in those old times, it's the 8MR. Look page 87:
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1986-02.pdf
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R.
|
Dear friends: Yesterday I posted information about MC patent due that a gentleman posted that Grado was whom invented and patented the MC cartridge principle and that is not true but a misunderstood by him because the one that in vented the MC cartridge principle was ORTOFON in 1950, even that year Grado company just dis not exist.
Here that first patent and other that came before Grado: https://patents.google.com/patent/US2591996A/en
https://patents.google.com/patent/US2983796A/en
https://patents.google.com/patent/GB805221A/en https://patents.google.com/patent/GB690490A/en
Two of them by Ortofon and one from Garrad. Anyway, all before Grado.
R.
|
Dear @pryso : I’m sorry for your limited view about. This is not if this review or reviewer is good or bad and ceratinly not if you like it or not because you can be sure that several audiophiles/gentlemans as @dimitry really appreciated.
The whole issue is that trhough all those vintage audio magasines samples I shared here ( more than 20+ different from Stereo Review, Audio and High Fidelity. ) are writed part of the whole audio industry History. There we not only can read about cartridge reviews but other reviews of TTs, tonearms, speakers, amplifiers, phono stages, line preamps, CD, tape decks, cables along the kind of advertasing and several audio articles that even today are important or have important analog and digital subjects analisies. It’s the audio industry " legacy " with the effort showed by those designers/manufacturers of any kind of audio items. Any one trhough those magasines at least can figure out from where we all come and why we are " seated " here, all that is part of the overall audio development and as a plus we can read the review of some of the cartridges that some of us still own or owned with an unknowed information for us and the magasines are all very good examples of how could or must be a full audio item reviews because today we really ( at least me. ) have not critical information in today magasines reviews than in the past we all had and in any audio item. We can take today cartridge or tonearm or TT reviews with no single real time measurements or even reference on its full specs. We have to learn, the audio industry has to learn.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R.
|
Dear friernds : I know that audiophiles as @edgewear @neonknight @lewm @nandric and more will appreciate the Ortofon MC2000 LOMC cartridge ( that Iwas a proud owner with 3 new samples. One modified with boron cantilever: just sublime. ) review that was reviewed by Pisha that is a gentleman that along Baerwald, Stevenson, Bauer and others followed the Löfgren tonearm/cartridge alignment solutions, yes exist the Pisha alignment. Page 83:
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1984-12.pdf
I would like that in the past 10+ years of any cartridge reviews all those " regarded " analog gurus " from STHP or TAS been reviewed in that " same " shape ". It's pity and a shame no one of them did it or do it. Please take a look how deep was the committed by those " old " reviewers with their job and with the magasine readers. I can say nothing less than : W O W !
R.
|
Dear friends : I can’t imagine how today top LOMC cartridges could do under the same tests did it in the MC2000. Today not even manufacturers give us a chart of the cartridge FR by channels when the humble vintage Denon 103 did and does it ! !. We don’t know almost nothig critical/important of the today cartridges we are listening other than " we like it " BUT in an objective way I think we customers has the rigth and the manufacturers the responsability to tell us about those kind of tests.
Why not? perhaps @jcarr can gives us an explanation or at least puts some kind of ligth down there. I don't ask for reviewers including Atkinson because all them showed that just do not cares about even that has a responsability and we pay for it to those " proffesional " magasines. Today top LOMC cartridges Lyra included " sounds " great but: are that great under objective tests? I could think " maybe yes ", so please shows us.
R. |
Dear @dogberry : At the end my goal is the same when the cartridges inside my room/system puts me nearer to the recording and this nearer to the recording means and have several characteristics.
Cartridge measurements that today we can’t have in any way other that do it by our self could and should confirm why we " love " the quality levels of this or that cartridge or why we prefers this over the other or confirm we are rigth or wrong even if that wrong cartridge measurements came from the cartridge that " pleases me maximally ".
If we like what we like and we are sure why we like it and why is so near live MUSIC measurements can’t change those fact. I just posted in other thread: what we like is our privilege that been personal is untouchable.
Btw, i like the mix between objectivity and subjectivety, always exist a gradation level of that mix but that's me.
R.
|
Dear friends: From almost just when I began with this thread I was looking for a LOMC cartridge by EXCEL due that in Japan was a very well regarded cartridge in an extremely way competitive market on those old/vintage times.
I owned other top cartridges made by Excel as Lux and Audiocraft and other and in my thread early times I bougth almost all the top or one step down to the top LOMC that appeared in the Japanese audio bible. You can name it and can be sure I still own or owned that cartridge, I think that only I never been in my system was Final and Excel.
For my " fortune " about and like 2.5 months ago a gentleman in the Argent thread posted a long list of Argent NOS ( over 50 samples ) cartridges and between that list came nothin less that the Excel ES-10 that was one step down the top of the line where thedifference in between is that the tp one came with micro-ridge stylus against the PH in the ES-10 but everything ( cartridge motor ) is exactly the same. Excel never puts in the market outside Japan these MC cartridges till they do it latter on with Argent for Europe and USA. Argent looks as the ES-10 but are not exactly the same: when the cantilever in the Argent 110 is titanium the Excel is berylium and other minute differences. Anyway I pull the riger for the Excel that's a 0.2mv output and runs at 1.7-2.0 grs with a medium compliance 13cu and where the cartridge top plate is a " plattform " of around 7mm of hard ruby/saphire. Excel specify that's FR is : 10hz to 50khz and inside the original box comes the chart measures of my sample where you can look that the cartridge is dead flat from 20hz to 16khz and with a deviation of 1.0db at 20khz, output for each channel measured exactly the same 0.21mv ( exceptional . ) and the measures where made running the cartridge at 2.0grs.
I have to say that we are finishing the latest Essential 3180 " fine tunning " phonolinepreamp in my personal/system unit.
Ok I mounted the Excel ES-01 in our own tonearm design and for the first 5 tracks ( with out yet any fine tunning sessions. ) in the LP was not disappointed but " extreme " disappointed " and was after 3 LP sides that the light comes on and on and on an almost indescriptible quality level. Yes is an overwhelming cartridge and top performer by any today cartridge standards. Was I surprised by its quality performance ? not really because Excel today it's behind all pricey Etsuro cartridges and behind ,as in the past , of many other cartridges in the audio market: they know what they do and they did and does it with a very low profile: seems to me that they does not needs other kind of profile and what we need as audiophiles is to know who is Excel . Not surprised but true satisfied as ever before, I never imagined how the cartridge will be speciaLLY BY BEEN A 1981 design/manufactured. By specs the cartridge is a medium compliance but during play it plays anything including way demanding recordings like the Telarc 1812 that even some high compliance cartridges can't do it. As is with my Essential 3180 unit the ES-10 change your room/system perspective to a real new level that, at least me, was unknow by its rewards. After a little more than 2 weeks with it past week-end an almost new audio friend ( he was at my place only one time. ) came to my place and brought 2 cartridges: Etsuro Gold and other AR wood body and ruby cantilever that was unknow for me and he told me that paid around 15K for it.
Btw, I ask him if his Gold Etsuro was the Gold Special and he told me that he unknow if it's ( The Etsuro site says nothing on that " Special " model. I know that exist the model because @mikelavigne own it and maybe he could explain us which differences are in the Special against the Gold becauser nowhere exist a clear explanation. ). Well , first my friend and I listen the Etsuro Gold with LPs that he choosed and that I know very well too. This is my first time in my system with the Gold and I can say is a very good performer and a little better than the Umami Red that's manufactured by Excel too. I test the Etsuro with specific 6 tracks ( from MoFi Power and the Majesty, Sheffield Drum Record, RR Dafos and RR Fiesta. ) of my comparison normal proccess and repeat very good performer.
Now the true moment when stiched to the ES-10 usinge exactly the same tracks he choosed and the ones I choosed too and what was his reactions? his first words ( because during playing those tracks he with closed mouth. ) were: almost the same I said here: new perspective due the cartridge habilities to handled the transients and this unique characteristic makes all differences for the better ( along the Essential 3180. ) where both cartridges shared the same room/system and guess what? he never mentioned to listen his AR new cartridge but only following listen and enjoying MUSIC for at least 4.5 hours. My audio friend owns D'angostino electronics mated with the Sonus Faber Aida II speakers that I listened at his place. Last Monday I was by second time at his place because he ask me to bring with me the 3180 so we listen what for him is deep knowledge system. Now, could be that the similar look of the Argent 110 performs exactly as my ES-10? maybe the Excel signature of those old times but not exactly. All of you have the opportunity to have for " penauts " the 110 and listen in your system.
Anyway, all single day in audio is a learning one. Thank's Excel.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Btw, other than the fenomenal transient response of the 3180/Es-10 couple is its developed true low distortion levels that the Etsuro Gold can't showed.
Even that both cartridges comes by Excel its cartridge motors are different and the output level says that: 0.2mv vs 0.4mv in the Gold and this one has not the tracking abilities that shows the Excel Es-01.
R. |
Dear @mijostyn : As @lewm pointed out is our self design/manufacture PhonoLinepreamp. After several tests in my room/system and due that some top high end México distributors been here and were them who borrowed samples to me coming from top designers and with top quality level performances like: FM Acoustics, Gryphon, Levinson, Krell, Boulder, etc, etc, with no tests with tubes electronics that in those times I already left behind me ( I used 10 years only tube electronics. ) and I dit it all those tests looking for a phono+line stage that could satisfy my demanding quality level during playing recording MUSIC. My last phonolinepreamp was the Classé Audio DR-7 that was modified by us to goes to a next step a top the original ( btw, in those ( old times ) I owned the NIL-2 by Classé too pre-preamp that was a current design but Classé never mentioned "current " but Natural Impedance Loading ( no input resistor for loading ) and it was running as today current phono stages. Because I could not found out what really satisfy me José and I ( 18 years ago ) started to " play " with our self design and in our few starting phonolinepreamp even we had a battery powered unit ( I still have it just as a " remember " ) but that was how we decided to start our adventure where through the time we have to solve many many obstacles to stay where we are TODAY.
15 years ago appeared the first unit made/designed only to use in my room/system and I posted here the quality level achivement we did it and in those times a gentleman that was and is an Agoner ask for a unit for him ( he lives and born in England. ) an we said NO ( because we are not members of the manufacturer market, we are only two audiophiles/MUSIC lovers with a deep passion for MUSIC/Audio and still we are. ) ) but after several emails we accepted to do it and it borns the Essential 3150 that we shared with him a other 3 gentlemans that still own it.
Around four years latter and through some modifications to the original design born the Essential 3160 that was similar to the unit lewm mentioned. Our laboratory is the unit I still own that today even that's a " frankestein " it performs truly better and I could say that even better that any CH or similar units ( I never had a CH in my room/system. ) I remember that when I been in San Diego CA showing the 3160 we made it a live ( several audiophiles down there ) comparison against nothing less than Dartzeel and guees what : the 3160 not only was a challenge for it but outperformaed overall. 3180 as the 3160 is a differential balanced design totally dual mono in pure class A with no feedback input to output and obviously with a dual mono external Power Supply and from the umblical chords connectors that are nothing less but Swiss Lemo ones as all parts were choosed not for its high price out there but first target was " zero colorations " . So the unit has a wide bandwith over 1.5Mhz, a very fast rise time, extremely low noise level ( lower than your Zeta. ) and almost unmeasurable distortion levels. Even that all the circuit design is 100% analog ( no digital any where. ) the Essential 3180 RIAA deviation is around: 0.011 db ( if you look a chart both RIAA channels stays in the same frequency line, you can't see any deviation between both channels. All the unit dual mono configuration mimic every parameter in between channels. Now the 3180 as the 3160 has not only one phono stage internally but two totally separated balanced dual mono phono stages along a dual mono separated line stage.
The critical importance of all those is how it sounds: well there is no signature sound of any way in the 3180 only true enjoyment of MUSIC: hardware just disappeared and runs with any cartridge ranging from 0.01mv yes with very low noise even at full position of both level attenuators. Current design? are you kidding me?, the 3180 is voltage gain, yes voltage gain. Other time I will leave to José why our design is not current but voltage one and he coincide with wynn palmer about but José explain in the same way that him but is really " brutal " against all the why's exist current designs and I don't want to be agressive against not only audiophiles but manufacturers too, at the end every one has its own " ideas " and we respect all gentlemans. Yes and as you are with what you did and do with your room/system we are proudly of the 3180. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dear @mijostyn : I will do, please email me your cell phone to do it.
In the mean time I want to " complete " the whole 3180 information:
it’s a full discrete design even the output buffers, circuit board is 4 layers, the unit can’t be overloaded by any cartridge " situation " due that’s headroom is a huge one, obviously no SUT in the 3180 we don’t need it it’s designed as an active high gain unit, MC gain stage designed with bipolar transistors and the MM with FETS but the unit can comes with two MC stages and no MM stage, signal has the shortest path we can achieved and this as all the design we have on mind that the cartridge signal always suffer for hard and heavy manipulations inside any phonolinestage ( no matters what ) including the 3180 and due to that fact one of our main targets is to " impede " it loweing manipulation to that signal and that the 3180 manipulation be made in " delicated " way if this could exist, yes it comes as a choice the RIAA 3.18u pole that’s how the recordings/LP comes to be played in each one of us room/system so it’s a choice that you or I want or do not to use. R. |
You just have it.
Btw, the 3180 comes ( as the early models. ) with a logic dual mono control independent circuit board where exist a proccessor that whe we switch on the unit starts its job checking in both channels that main parameters stays spot on and blinking for around 8 seconds and after that is ready to play with. If after the checking time exist a " trouble " will stays blinking and does not permit to play. I have and can say that the play operation design and build is almost bullet proof.
All the active and passive parts that we choosed are running at no more of 60% of its capabilities under any condition.
Take care, R. |
Dear @dover : In some circuit stages are parts with over 1000% overload margin but I was not speaking of that.
I posted: " the unit can’t be overloaded by any cartridge " situation " due that’s headroom is a huge one, " but you as always looking words or whatever just trying to hit me but as always you failed again. The 3160 MC overload margin is 30mv and in the 3180 is even better. Your whole Marantz is with all respect a ridiculous item vs the 3180 level. So, stay calm and instead to post again with that negative attitude try to enhance the overall issues in favor of all audiophiles that read it. Be positive, can you?
R. |
Dear @mijostyn @lewm and friends: Here the brochure of the 3160 phonolinepreamp with really important information about its design and how that design José took with extreme care. In page 4 comes the specs measured that are conservative because the unit surpass it:
Essential 3160 brochure.pdf (canva.com)
here you can look/read that is a fact that the 3160 not only accomplished those specs but even beats some of them as is the case of the RIAA deviation that in those times we compared against Halcro, Boulder and Dartzel where non came close the 3160:
The phonolinepreamp RIAA calibration uses a propietary digital multitone audio signal with 24/192 resolution, with the multitone frequencies and amplitudes calculated according the values of the RIAA eq. curve. This technique allows an overall phono re-equalization accuracy to within 0.01 db, guaranteeing that the musical information decoded by the 3160 is completely neutral to the input source.
Well all those in the 3160 and in the new Essential 3180 is just unimaginable because not even us think it was possible a few years ago but over the last times we mad i some mods here and there and the 3180 borns this year and no today phonolinepreamp can not only be a challenge for it but can’t outperform it. Yes we are proud that the 3180 fulfill all the cartridge needs and all that what any audiophile with any audio/MUSIC standard levels/targets can want it and can enjoy in his room/system for the very first time in his life no matters what due that the unit is truer to the recording with the lower noise and distortion/coloration ( I can say no coloration, no unit signature bu only signal reproduction. ) you can’t even imagine.. No I’m not boastful/arrogant it’s that that is a fact. My last comparison experience was against today D’angostino ( less than 10 days ago. ) unit and before that against today FMA, VDH and others of that level including Dartzel.
As lewm shared we hope to build only a few units that we can count with our hands fingers. We will see.
Comments are welcomed, R.
R. |
Dear friends: This time and thank's to the link that posted @theophile we can read the review of the Stanton Epoch HZ9S ( page 32. ):
HiFi-Stereo-Review-1985-01.pdf (worldradiohistory.com)
R.
|
Dear @eaneverson :
SimAudio Moon 610LP MM & MC Phono Preamplifier | eBay This is very high quality performance level that permits that your Umami Red can shows at its best.
R. |
Dear @eaneverson : Please to re-start our dialogue in the stages you are looking and for we can have a wide dialogue by both parts I suggest you to send me a: Hi in the following link:
Thank's in advance, R. |