2. analog
  3. 140043-486

Hear my Cartridges....šŸŽ¶

Many Forums have a 'Show your Turntables' Thread or 'Show your Cartridges' Thread but that's just 'eye-candy'.... These days, it's possible to see and HEAR your turntables/arms and cartridges via YouTube videos.
Peter Breuninger does it on his AV Showrooms Site and Michael Fremer does it with high-res digital files made from his analogue front ends.
Now Fremer claims that the 'sound' on his high-res digital files captures the complex, ephemeral nuances and differences that he hears directly from the analogue equipment in his room.
That may well be....when he plays it through the rest of his high-end setup šŸ˜Ž
But when I play his files through my humble iMac speakers or even worse.....my iPad speakers.....they sound no more convincing than the YouTube videos produced by Breuninger.
Of course YouTube videos struggle to capture 'soundstage' (side to side and front to back) and obviously can't reproduce the effects of the lowest octaves out of subwoofers.....but.....they can sometimes give a reasonably accurate IMPRESSION of the overall sound of a system.

With that in mind.....see if any of you can distinguish the differences between some of my vintage (and modern) cartridges.
VICTOR X1
This cartridge is the pinnacle of the Victor MM designs and has a Shibata stylus on a beryllium cantilever. Almost impossible to find these days with its original Victor stylus assembly but if you are lucky enough to do so.....be prepared to pay over US$1000.....šŸ¤Ŗ
VICTOR 4MD-X1
This cartridge is down the ladder from the X1 but still has a Shibata stylus (don't know if the cantilever is beryllium?)
This cartridge was designed for 4-Channel reproduction and so has a wide frequency response 10Hz-60KHz.
Easier to find than the X1 but a lot cheaper (I got this one for US$130).
AUDIO TECHNICA AT ML180 OCC
Top of the line MM cartridge from Audio Technica with Microline Stylus on Gold-Plated Boron Tube cantilever.
Expensive if you can find one....think US$1000.

I will be interested if people can hear any differences in these three vintage MM cartridges....
Then I might post some vintage MMs against vintage and MODERN LOMC cartridges.....šŸ¤—
128x128halcro
halcro's avatar
halcro OP
2,664 posts
 
I think you are right about the sticker on the box Chakster......
I wonder if there is a difference in sound between the Boron tube and the Beryllium cantilever...šŸ¤”
My cartridge model preferences have overwhelmingly consisted of those with Beryllium cantilevers.
Because no-one can use Beryllium for their cantilevers
anymore.....modern cartridges just cannot compete IMHO and those who haven't heard vintage models WITH Beryllium.....simply have no idea what they're missing šŸ˜›Ā 
lazarus_long
13 posts
 
Listen with headphones on.... as the recording setup is identical for each cart, it is possible to hear differences. This does not mean that it will sound anything like that when you get it home!Ā 
harold-not-the-barrel
895 posts
 
Henry, I havenĀ“t tried a V15/III so far unfortunately but with a modern SAS stylus it would be greater that it originally was. This is not my experience but a friendĀ“s who had the original III, as he wasnĀ“t excited of its high register performance, likewise you discovered.

Can this `newbornĀ“ III outperform the 500... as many audiophiles say the III is better than the IV and the V... Well not really, IĀ“m afraid of. The Ultra series 500 w/ heavy metal body is a very special design and the 400 series also is a different design. And to remind all, to get the best out of MM carts one needs to have the right/most appropriate settings for capacitance and impedance values.
And in general, itĀ“s all about how the music flows... this makes the very best cartridges when the music itself takes over, no listening fatigue you just canĀ“t stop listening your records over and over again.
frogman
7,364 posts
 
Further comparisons would be very interesting. Ā Thank you, Halcro.

We all have somewhat different ways of describing certain characteristics of sound and it might be beneficial and more meaningful if there were, if not consensus, at least a good understanding of how others use certain terms/descriptions. Ā Speaking for myself and acknowledging that tonal characteristics do affect our perception of a componentā€™s ability to project the emotion component in music to a degree, I tend to separate that ability from tonal aspects. Ā What I mean is that I find that a cartridge can be very ā€œwarmā€ and still be emotionally uninvolving, or ā€œleanā€ and still be very ā€œaliveā€ and involving dynamically. Ā For me emotional involvement has less to do with ability with tonal issues and more so with dynamics. Ā A cartridge can be more ā€œlinearā€ and more tonally natural than another, but not as natural dynamically. Ā If forced to choose I will always choose the component that is more dynamically natural since I find that it is far easier to tweak for tonal naturalness. Ā 

Interesting thread, thanks.
unreceivedogma's avatar
unreceivedogma
898 posts
 
Maybe itā€™s just me, but I find it to be oxymoronic to be asked to judge the performance of anolog equipment over a digital platform.Ā 
More to discover