2. analog
  3. 136468-5377

Dynavector cartridges, old and new

For more than 40 years Dynavector has been producing very high quality moving coil cartridges in Japan. Sadly we don't have a dedicated Dynavector thread here on audiogon. It would be nice to collect info about some nice rare models in one topic. 


My first Dynavector was high output model, very attractive headshell integrated as one piece - Dynavector DV-30A was released in Japan 1 year before the Karat series and 4 years before the fabulous Karat Nova. The first high output Moving Coil Dynavector DV-30 series was the next generation of the Ultimo cartridges. The Ultimo’s were manufactured by Onlife Research Inc., which later became Dynavector. The 30-series was introduced in 1978 with 3 different models DV-30A & DV-30B (HOMC) and DV-30C (LOMC). Till the early 80s it was top of the line Dynavector models.... 

But then the KARAT was released with short Ruby and Diamond cantilevers (depends on the model). I've been looking for KARAT for a long time, i found the Dynavector KARAT 23RS special calibrated version with Micro Ridge stylus tip and prism Ruby cantilever. This particular model has been introduced in 1988 and claimed to be superior to the earlier generation of Karat carts. I'd like to seek more info about this rare cartridge, but very little info available online. Anyone can comment on Karat Ruby 23RS mkI (not mkII) ?  

I know some mebers are enjoing the more expensive Karat Nova series, XV-1, XX-2, Te Kaitora Rua etc 

Modern Dynavector site is: http://www.dynavector.com/ 

But the rare models can be found here. 
 

  
128x128chakster
dover
2,251 posts
 
The closest to no cantilever I know about would be the new Audio Technica ART1000, where the coils are just aft of the stylus tip. Has anyone here heard that one?
On the contrary - the Art 1000 has quite a long cantilever.
http://www.the-ear.net/review-hardware/audio-technica-art1000-moving-coil-cartridge
What you fail to comprehend is that the coils are mounted at the end of the cantilever where the stylus is located, but there is still a long cantilever slewing around whilst tracking the groove. By locating the coils at the end of the cantilever any flex in the cantilever will be magnified to a greater degree than say the more rigid Decca/Ikeda system.

With the Decca and Ikeda there are cantilevers.
In the case of the Decca it is a vertical cantilever with little compliance in the vertical plane.
In the case of the Ikeda from the 90’s the cantilever is a vertical inverted hoop. Contrary to what some have published in this thread there is some compliance in the vertical plane and much more in the horizontal plane. The hoop flexes side to side.
http://illusionofsound.blogspot.com/2013/10/cartridgetransducer.html

I have owned several of both the Decca and Ikeda cartridges, and still use the Ikeda and Dynavector Karat Nova 13D which I also own. I have used these in a multitude of tonearms over the years.

In my experience tonearms and phono stages play a significant role in how these individual cartridges perform and sound. Shortcomings elsewhere in the system are ruthlessly exposed by any of these cartridges. So whilst we can pontificate on the various merits on each design ultimately they can only be described in the context of the environment in which they are placed. Comparing these cartridges in the same arm is irrelevant, you have to try them in multiple arms to ensure a good assessment of each cartridges merit within each individual system.
nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 
Dear chakster, Our MM thread remind me of Wittgensteins 
''phiiosophical   investigation''. He was not able to formulate any
consistent theory but made ''endless many'' philosophical
''remarks''. I was not able to remember more than 10. I have no
idea about the others. According to me you can remember more
contributions in the MM thread than anybody else. Even so you
overlooked J. Carr's contribution about cantilevers ''materials''.
The only advantage of aluminum (alloy) in comparison with
other is that the stylus can be ''pressure fitted'' . All other kinds
are fragile and will shatter by so doing. That is why styli in
such cantilevers must be glued. This however ''imply'' glue
between the stylus and the cantilever preventing this way 
''rigid connection'' between them. 
As he also explained there are many other material properties
involved and in this context he also explained why he uses
boron.

Dear Dover, Wittgenstein deed state that there is no such
thing as ''private language''. As social invention and means
for communication we need to understand ''words in use''.
In this context we say about Decca and Ikeda 9 C series that
they are ''cantileverless''. This imply that for you ''cantilevers''
means something else than , uh, ''cantilevers'' for us.
Anyway thanks for your kindness to answer Lew's difficult
question addresses to me.  I never made any ''schematics''
in my life and he wants me to draw one of Ikeda 9 C? (grin).





harold-not-the-barrel
895 posts
 
I´m glad that also Dover keeps bravely carrying the torch. Actually I was waiting for his entrance. He has that mighty Karat Nova 13D you see.

" ... ultimately each design they can only be described in the context of the environment in which they are placed..."
Exactly. TAs in particular and TTs/decks plays another key role, addition to phono preamps. Decca, Dynavector, Soundsmith, Ikeda , Audio-Technica etc have a different approach to the questing we are asking for. The finest there are but all different.
nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 

The problem of ''wholes and parts'' is obviously where to put

the border line and prevent this way the inclusion of the whole

universe (grin). However why should extension of cartridge

''subject'' include ''only'' the tonearm , TT and phono-pre?

I, for example, still consider speakers as the most important

''part'' of the whole (''system'') while avoiding or overlooking the

 most important part is obviously ''strange''. The case is, as I see

 this, that we assume implicit knowledge by others. This help to

keep the amount of our explicit statements in check. Otherwise

we will get ''endless'' Mexican stories (grin).

The other problem is the assumed ''difference'' between (MC)

carts. The usual assumption is that the whole construction is

''simple'' and nearly as old as its invention (by Ortofon?).

This problem is connected with our desire to see and describe

differences among ,uh, ''identical ''. ''The same construction''

imply some kind of ''indiscernibles''. The real problem is

''exaggeration'' of assumed differences. The so called

''marginal value addition'' suggest the ''same'' problem.



lewm
13,182 posts
 
Dover, Thank you for correcting me.  But we are talking about two different things.  However, I do take your point; there is a "cantilever" upstream from the coils.  What I do not appreciate is your inability to make a point without also throwing in an insult.  If you knew me better, you might find that I am not in fact stupid.
More to discover