2. analog
  3. 140043-486

Hear my Cartridges....đŸŽ¶

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 😎
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.....đŸ€Ș
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.....đŸ€—
halcro
halcro's avatar
halcro OP
2,664 posts
 
I want to thank you again Frogman for that detailed, informative analysis.
I can’t admit to being able to hear exactly what you describe between MMs and MCs.....but your examples in these ’shoot-outs’ enable me to perhaps ’train’ myself to listen more intently....?

You read my mind......đŸ€Ż
Knowing of your predilection for the wonderful London Decca Reference....I was going to conduct exactly the ’shoot-out’ you wish for, between it and the Palladian...👍

And if it’s confession time........
One of the first MM cartridges I bought (after my flirtation with LOMCs) was in fact the AZDEN YM P50VL and I’m embarrassed to admit that at the time.....it just didn’t make the CUT.
It’s been sitting in a drawer collecting DUST for 10 years...đŸ˜±
Lucky I didn’t sell it....đŸ„ł
It will now receive the royal treatment and will be appearing at an iPad near you shortly.....
Any particular request for music genre in that ’shoot-out’...?

Regards
noromance's avatar
noromance
10,208 posts
 
Looking forward to more comparisons. Frogman summed it up. Always a great read. Thanks for the compliment Halcro. I'm partial to your Ketty Lester Love Letters track. I was somewhat disappointed by the London Reference when you played it before. I know the Decca's style of presentation can be a little Garrardy but was surprised by the relatively low level of fine detail. My Super Gold with Reference diamond sounds better. Something I put down to losses in the recording. Maybe this time, it'll be better!
frogman
7,574 posts
 

Thanks, halcro and noromance.  Re the Azden:  No need to apologize.  Keep in mind that I referred specifically and only to the Azden’s ability in the instrumental color dept.  I like it overall, but can definitely understand why in the company of the great cartridges in your collection it didn’t make the cut.  I can say, for instance, that my Empire D4000III Gold soundstages much better and has more powerful and extended bass, but is too soft and slightly grainy and that my Acutex has much better rhythmic drive than either.  Also, I use the ET2 linear tracker; a different animal (sorry, Princi).  Point is, I think that we each prioritize certain aspects of sound.  I key into instrumental color first and foremost. 

As as far as genre for the Palladian/Decca shootout:  How about a nice London/Decca orchestral recording?  Would you happen to have the Solti/London Symphony, Bartok “Concerto For Orchestra”?.  The finale is amazing.  If not, you probably have the Reiner/Chicago LSC?
halcro's avatar
halcro OP
2,664 posts
 
This comparison is a little more complex.....
Not only do we have different arms, but also different turntables.
The Direct-Drive Victor TT-101 against the Belt-Drive TW Raven AC-2.
There are many who will claim this renders the comparison 'invalid' and I can appreciate their viewpoint.
However....I switch between the turntables on a regular basis and find the differences between the two, to be 'technical' rather than 'emotional'.
The Victor is precise and detailed with unflappable timing and rhythm.
The Raven is more relaxed and just slightly less precise....but sometimes more enjoyable 🙃

AS PALLADIAN LOMC Cartridge

LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge

noromance's avatar
noromance
10,208 posts
 
I’ll listen later. But for now, I see the Decca is in the belt drive. Is this the same video we saw before? If so, it might explain the slight softness and lack of detail I heard. I think the Decca excels when in an idler (or perhaps a DD) with no damping (like springs or cork etc.) whatsoever.
More to discover