Dear Nandric: Months or years ago I posted to Dgarretson something like this:
++++ " hey why you suddenly change what you was supporting " yesterday " and not today " +++++
and he gave me an answer like this:
+++ " Raul, I have the right to improve my self and improved..... " ++++
that explain per se what means our each one " audio learning curve " and where " I'm " today.
Things are that many of us read and hear and even discuss on many different audio subjects through different forums/threads. This exercise in theory gives us the opportunity to grow up the opportunity to learn and the opportunity to apply those audio learning lessons.
Unfortunatelly only a few of the persons really " learn ". " Really learn " means , IMHO , to take action or actions on what we learn to put on practice what we learn and to have an " audio attitude " according with that learning and according to that learning experiences.
Now, maybe 30-40 years ago when started the " fashion " for headshell integrated cartridge designs, the manufacturers/designers thinked that the cartridge/tonearm alignment was not so important like other factors/characteristics on cartridge set up to achieve the best of any cartridge.
My self not 30-40 years ago but 20 years ago I was unaware on the critical importance subject of cartridge/tonearm alignment and in those times I never took in count.
Even when I " arrived " to Audiogon I can't remember any one that talked/posted on the importance of cartridge/tonearm alignment through Baerwald, Löfgren, Stevenson, etc, etc. kind of alignments. Audio dealers and the " analog gurus " in the audio magazines normally never touched that alignment subject.
I was one of the first persons in Agon whom started to analize the importance of that cartridge/alignment set up. Latter on more and more persons been aware on the subject and appeared several threads in Agon where we discuss in deep the whole subject and the conclusions in every single thread was that we need to make the cartridge/tonearm set up according to any of those alignment/geometry alternatives.
The subject was and is so important that started to appear several cartridge/tonearm alignment protractors to make it in the " rith/precise " way because any tiny deviation on that set up increment the sounds/music distortions on what we are listening.
In all those scientific/math alignments the target is to find out the precise cartridge offset angle and overhang for the set up. We analize how tiny deviations on overhang and offset angle or in both take the distortions to higher levels we can imagine and that we can hear.
One of those protractors was the now famous MintLP that has a lot of owners where each one of them bless and blessed this protractor and its precission because in the very first day that they maade their cartridge/tonearm set up alignment through that protractor everything changed for the better and by a wide margin.
I can't remember no one that could tolld the that protractor did not improved his cartridge quality performance level.
Now, in a monolitic headshell integrated cartridge design as the Glanz and the FR ones we can't make a precise alignment and can't change an alignment according to what the carfridge/tonearm needs or according what we want.
Why is that?, plain and simple:
IN THE FR7GLANZ DESIGNS YOU CAN'T MAKE ANY SINGLE CHANGE IN THE OFFSET ANGLE AND OVERHANG ACCORDING TO THE SET UP NEEDS!!!!
in the best " scenario " with those monolitics exist ( at random ) only one kind of set up that could coincide with the cartridge needs.
Everytime that we need to change the VTA/SRA the overhang change and in those monolitics you can't change the overhang so you will have higher distortions and if you need to change the offset angle to align in precise way the cartridge cantilever in the MintLP protractor you can't do it either and this means that you have to stay in the way you are hearing/listening those higher distortions and are these " kind of distortions " what you, Desmond, Halcro and several other persons are enjoying!.
I think that all the Glanz/FR monolitic owners ( including me. ) read it or participated in those cartridge/tonearm alignment threads and learned ( as me ) on the whole subject but through the posts of many of those owners seems to me that almost no one learned about, even Halcro put his money in his monolitic retipping it: for what if those high distortions can't change because a retipping?
It is these kind of actions by several owners what makes no sense to me when I know that many of those persons ( including you ) want to improve the quality performance level on your system.
Let me to tell all of you cartridge monolitic owners: IMHO through those monolitics you can't ever improve nothing but to listen to higher distortions degrading and precluding any tiny single improvement you want to achieve.
This was happened just two days ago in other thread, please read it and LEARN:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1357321298&openflup&26&4#26
IMHO those Glanz/FR monolitics are the deepest aberration/error/mistake in analog, at least Audio Technica/Technics/ ( examples. ) designed its cartridge integrated designs with " systems " that permit changes in overhang and Azymuth but no offset angle.
Any one of you think that azymuth could be important for a cartridge can shows at its best?, yes?, well in the Glanz/FR you can't make any azymuth changes either!!!!!
As Dgarretson I learned on the subject and improved my self.
Nandric, I'm not a cartridge seller or a seller of any one like the ones that came years ago to this forum to gave their " teaching " to us " ignorant " people. Unfortunately some of you were so " ignorants " that today are in love with those monolitics and even with that kind of people. Nothing wrong with me, the real subject is that you monolitic owners be happy and if your monolitics are the cartridges that made the magic to put you happy then: good because this is what it matters and not my simple opinion.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
++++ " hey why you suddenly change what you was supporting " yesterday " and not today " +++++
and he gave me an answer like this:
+++ " Raul, I have the right to improve my self and improved..... " ++++
that explain per se what means our each one " audio learning curve " and where " I'm " today.
Things are that many of us read and hear and even discuss on many different audio subjects through different forums/threads. This exercise in theory gives us the opportunity to grow up the opportunity to learn and the opportunity to apply those audio learning lessons.
Unfortunatelly only a few of the persons really " learn ". " Really learn " means , IMHO , to take action or actions on what we learn to put on practice what we learn and to have an " audio attitude " according with that learning and according to that learning experiences.
Now, maybe 30-40 years ago when started the " fashion " for headshell integrated cartridge designs, the manufacturers/designers thinked that the cartridge/tonearm alignment was not so important like other factors/characteristics on cartridge set up to achieve the best of any cartridge.
My self not 30-40 years ago but 20 years ago I was unaware on the critical importance subject of cartridge/tonearm alignment and in those times I never took in count.
Even when I " arrived " to Audiogon I can't remember any one that talked/posted on the importance of cartridge/tonearm alignment through Baerwald, Löfgren, Stevenson, etc, etc. kind of alignments. Audio dealers and the " analog gurus " in the audio magazines normally never touched that alignment subject.
I was one of the first persons in Agon whom started to analize the importance of that cartridge/alignment set up. Latter on more and more persons been aware on the subject and appeared several threads in Agon where we discuss in deep the whole subject and the conclusions in every single thread was that we need to make the cartridge/tonearm set up according to any of those alignment/geometry alternatives.
The subject was and is so important that started to appear several cartridge/tonearm alignment protractors to make it in the " rith/precise " way because any tiny deviation on that set up increment the sounds/music distortions on what we are listening.
In all those scientific/math alignments the target is to find out the precise cartridge offset angle and overhang for the set up. We analize how tiny deviations on overhang and offset angle or in both take the distortions to higher levels we can imagine and that we can hear.
One of those protractors was the now famous MintLP that has a lot of owners where each one of them bless and blessed this protractor and its precission because in the very first day that they maade their cartridge/tonearm set up alignment through that protractor everything changed for the better and by a wide margin.
I can't remember no one that could tolld the that protractor did not improved his cartridge quality performance level.
Now, in a monolitic headshell integrated cartridge design as the Glanz and the FR ones we can't make a precise alignment and can't change an alignment according to what the carfridge/tonearm needs or according what we want.
Why is that?, plain and simple:
IN THE FR7GLANZ DESIGNS YOU CAN'T MAKE ANY SINGLE CHANGE IN THE OFFSET ANGLE AND OVERHANG ACCORDING TO THE SET UP NEEDS!!!!
in the best " scenario " with those monolitics exist ( at random ) only one kind of set up that could coincide with the cartridge needs.
Everytime that we need to change the VTA/SRA the overhang change and in those monolitics you can't change the overhang so you will have higher distortions and if you need to change the offset angle to align in precise way the cartridge cantilever in the MintLP protractor you can't do it either and this means that you have to stay in the way you are hearing/listening those higher distortions and are these " kind of distortions " what you, Desmond, Halcro and several other persons are enjoying!.
I think that all the Glanz/FR monolitic owners ( including me. ) read it or participated in those cartridge/tonearm alignment threads and learned ( as me ) on the whole subject but through the posts of many of those owners seems to me that almost no one learned about, even Halcro put his money in his monolitic retipping it: for what if those high distortions can't change because a retipping?
It is these kind of actions by several owners what makes no sense to me when I know that many of those persons ( including you ) want to improve the quality performance level on your system.
Let me to tell all of you cartridge monolitic owners: IMHO through those monolitics you can't ever improve nothing but to listen to higher distortions degrading and precluding any tiny single improvement you want to achieve.
This was happened just two days ago in other thread, please read it and LEARN:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1357321298&openflup&26&4#26
IMHO those Glanz/FR monolitics are the deepest aberration/error/mistake in analog, at least Audio Technica/Technics/ ( examples. ) designed its cartridge integrated designs with " systems " that permit changes in overhang and Azymuth but no offset angle.
Any one of you think that azymuth could be important for a cartridge can shows at its best?, yes?, well in the Glanz/FR you can't make any azymuth changes either!!!!!
As Dgarretson I learned on the subject and improved my self.
Nandric, I'm not a cartridge seller or a seller of any one like the ones that came years ago to this forum to gave their " teaching " to us " ignorant " people. Unfortunately some of you were so " ignorants " that today are in love with those monolitics and even with that kind of people. Nothing wrong with me, the real subject is that you monolitic owners be happy and if your monolitics are the cartridges that made the magic to put you happy then: good because this is what it matters and not my simple opinion.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R.