MIT vs Victor X1-IIE
Again, difficult to tell how much of what is heard is a result of the way the music is recorded for uploading to YouTube, but certain patterns emerge. The piano on this recording is heard from a more realistic perspective than the previous piano recording with some distance between the instrument and the mics which allows some room sound to be heard.  In this comparison, for me, the Victor wins hands down.Â
MIT:
While I like the immediacy and speed, I just donât like what this cartridge does to the sound of the right hand of the piano. Â The same thinness and clangy quality that I heard on the previous recording is here again. Â Beginning around 1:30, with the accented right hand chords, the sound of the instrument takes on a very unnatural metallic and thin quality. Â Again, how much of this is the result of the upload or the less that sophisticated recording method is hard to say, but this is what is heard.
Victor:
Better balanced and more natural piano sound. Â Much less, almost none of the metallic and clangy quality in the right hand heard with the MIT. Â Unlike the Garrott in the previous comparison, it doesnât sound as if the high frequencies and harmonics are tamped down, but simply closer to correct. Â As a result the midrange doesnât sound too thick and lacking brilliance as with the Garrott. Â
Any advantage that the MIT may seem to have in the dynamic aliveness department is probably a result of its more brilliant character. Â I would say that both are about equal in this department; surprising to me given that the Victor is a MM. Â A bit of a leap considering that they have been heard with different recordings, but this may be my favorite Victor so far. Â Is this X1- IIE the same cartridge that chakster referred to early on as simply the X1-II? Â If so, I understand why he prefers it to the X1.
Again, difficult to tell how much of what is heard is a result of the way the music is recorded for uploading to YouTube, but certain patterns emerge. The piano on this recording is heard from a more realistic perspective than the previous piano recording with some distance between the instrument and the mics which allows some room sound to be heard.  In this comparison, for me, the Victor wins hands down.Â
MIT:
While I like the immediacy and speed, I just donât like what this cartridge does to the sound of the right hand of the piano. Â The same thinness and clangy quality that I heard on the previous recording is here again. Â Beginning around 1:30, with the accented right hand chords, the sound of the instrument takes on a very unnatural metallic and thin quality. Â Again, how much of this is the result of the upload or the less that sophisticated recording method is hard to say, but this is what is heard.
Victor:
Better balanced and more natural piano sound. Â Much less, almost none of the metallic and clangy quality in the right hand heard with the MIT. Â Unlike the Garrott in the previous comparison, it doesnât sound as if the high frequencies and harmonics are tamped down, but simply closer to correct. Â As a result the midrange doesnât sound too thick and lacking brilliance as with the Garrott. Â
Any advantage that the MIT may seem to have in the dynamic aliveness department is probably a result of its more brilliant character. Â I would say that both are about equal in this department; surprising to me given that the Victor is a MM. Â A bit of a leap considering that they have been heard with different recordings, but this may be my favorite Victor so far. Â Is this X1- IIE the same cartridge that chakster referred to early on as simply the X1-II? Â If so, I understand why he prefers it to the X1.