2. analog
  3. 137714-74046

Theory about Fidelity Research MC & PMC Carts

I have a theory that the Fidelity Research MC 201 and 202 were the US market version of the PMC-1 and PMC-3. They were all produced from 1980 to 1984 and the specs on each look very similar.

Also, I have searched the entire internet and found no evidence of either the PMC’s being available in USA or the 201/202 being available in Japan.

Does anyone have any info to support or reject this theory.

Thanks in advance.


ateal
nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 

Dear chakster, To be more accurate I used Vienna as example

51 times. The reason is simple. This is the easy way to explain

how different names can refer to the same object. The so called

''co-referring names''. But those do cause confusion. Besides

we all assume that new names don't mean new products but old

one with new prices. You know how much I admire Ikeda san.

However I don't believe that that different names of those

''cantileverless'' kinds refer to different carts. My comrade Don

swears that 9C, mk 2 is exactly the same as 9C. mk 3.

Think of those Jelco (25?) headshells . There are unknown

many all the same and all with different prices.  It is, I think,

our duty to our co-members to warn them when we discover

such cases. But some theory about those ''co-referring names''

may be useful (grin).


chakster's avatar
chakster
6,144 posts
 
@ateal
ok, i will leave you alone with your thread, good luck

seems like you have no information and you’d better look for english manuals for the carts that you call "japanese only", i believe japanese can’t read in english and vice versa.
ateal OP
97 posts
 
As promised I thought I would update this thread with my findings on the FR 202 cartridge and I have to say without ANY reservations that this is the most perfect cartridge I have ever owned, it now beats out my Spectral Reference LOMC cartridge.

Like every Fidelity Research cartridge the tone of instruments is amazing and lifelike and this cart takes that way beyond what I have experienced before.

As for frequency range the cartridge goes down very low indeed and is very solid. Bass notes slam you in the chest. Nothing flabby or bloated at all. The upper frequency range is more prominent than other Fidelity Research cartridges I have owned, but it is very smooth and not at all harsh. It was a little harsh at first but now the cartridge has been broken in it is not harsh at all.

Soundstage and imaging is phenominal to the point it is holographic.

Best of all it is musical and engaging and allows you to get lost in the music without analyzing everything.

I absolutely love this cartridge and I’m so glad curiosity got the better of me and I bought it. 

nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 

My ''theory'' (aka ássumption'') is that Ikeda san deed not spend

much  money for advertising. This explains  the lack of information

about the most of his carts. Thanks to Dertonarm I learned about

FR-7 series but needed to hear all of them in order to decide which

to keep. My comrade Don (Griffiths) and I repeat the same procedure

regarding Ikeda 9 series ; the ''cantileverless kind''. We started with

9 C 2 and 3 and are now ''inspecting'' the REX and SUPREMO.

The big (?) difference between those and the rest is VTF : 1.5 g

versus 2-3 g. Those cantileverless kinds are not good tracker.

On test records by tracking ability one can hardly get 50 microns

''pure''. Our assumption based on this ''theory'' seems to be correct.

Don who already tested (my) REX got 60 microns pure with 2 g

but prefer 1,75 g. sound.

bimasta's avatar
bimasta
227 posts
 
I have two MC-201s. One is used — no idea of hours but stylus looks quite good at 150X to my highly inexpert eye. The other is NOS; I played it once, to confirm it works. It does and sounded lovely, but it was not really critical listening, and it hasn’t broken-in — or whatever a 40-year old suspension does.

I also found a NOS 202 and I was happy to get it, until I opened the box: the cantilever was bent 90° to the right. Even so, he wouldn’t reduce the price — odd for a retailer, maybe he thought someone would come along and buy it without looking.

The 201, though mentioned at the outset, is not discussed thereafter. Of course I’m intrigued when Ateal says the 202 is "the most perfect cartridge I have ever owned...now the cartridge has been broken in...."

The styli differ slightly in the minor radius: a slight reduction of detail? Are there other significant differences between the two?

Can someone give me an idea of what my 201 will be like, broken in? Anything like what Ateal so greatly enjoys in his 202?
More to discover