Hear my Cartridges....🎶

@frogman
Interesting - we agree on track 1. However on the Nina Simone I can hear the better resolution on the Palladian, but I’m getting more grunt from her lower registers coming from the abdomen - example .51 to 1.06 where she draws the note out and you hear more of the abdomen/lower chest with the FR. More expressive. At the end of the note on the Palladian she is tailng off, whereas with the FR she pushes out the last of the note from deeper down. Of course we dont know which is more correct since we were not there. I changed to air buds and the same result, although the upper mid lower treble "pressure"that I alluded to on track 1 is lessened on the air buds from the music hall debe’s. The debe’s may have problems in that area.

Listen in particular to the change in the quality of the voice at 0:15 and especially at 0:32 when she sings “and then some”; particularly on the word “then”. Simone’s voice naturally takes on a slightly nasal quality on “then”.

Yes I can hear the nasal quality you mention, on both cartridges, slightly more noticeable on the FR, it sounds almost like she has a slight cold, but I am still hearing more lower register from her voice with the FR as per my previous example. I still think there is more vocal nuance with the FR on this track, which is the opposite from the first track. ( subject to the vagaries of my computer/headphones). One of the imponderables is the impact of microphone distortions from the early mikes. Could be VTA differences between records that might explain differences between track 1 & 2 on the 2 cartridges.

I’m going to run it through my system either tonight or tomorrow and do another take.

@halcro - to avoid having to see your therapist - they are both pretty good.

Thanks for the great comments, dover.  You are of course correct when you say that not having been at the recording session one cannot know with certainty which tonal balance is correct.  I don’t disagree that there is “more grunt” in Simone’s voice with the FR.  As you correctly suggest “more” doesn’t necessarily mean better (more accurate).  Not meaning to argue the point, but for further clarification:

Extrapolating from the overall sonic character and not just the sound of the voice one of the clues that, in this case, “more” vocal grunt may not be correct can be found in, for instance, the sound of the piano and bass.  To me the sound of the piano sounds more linear (correct) with the Palladian.  With the FR it sounds slightly thicker as does the bass (although not as extended).  You correctly pointed out that the bass is better articulated with the Palladian.  This impression is I think a result of the better linearity.  Less articulation is I think the result of that pervasive, but slight thickness that the FR adds.  This is what is heard ad “more grunt” in the voice.  A specific example can be heard at 0:47.  A simple two note descending line from the bass.  To me those two notes sound closer to the sound of a real fingers plucking a real bass with the Palladian; better articulated and better texture and pitch definition.  With the FR I don’t hear as much realism in the sound.  

A clue to the answer of whether the nasality in Simone’s voice is natural or not can be found, as on the first track, in the sound of the drummer’s brushes.  Once again, with the FR the sound is too tight and hard, almost metallic.  With the Palladian one can more clearly hear the softer textured sound of individual bristles.  

I hate to use of the term “colored” as often (ab)used by we audiophiles since the sound of real instruments has a great deal of natural color.  However, the description that keeps coming up for me re the sound of the FR is “colored” in the way that some vintage gear is: a little bit of added thickness and darkness to romanticize the midrange, slightly rounded and generous bass range that is not as fully extended and slightly hard highs.  A general quality that I hear on both tracks.  Reminds me a bit of the sound of the two versions of the Denon 103 that I owned many moons ago, but on a much higher overall quality level.  

As you correctly pointed out both cartridges are clearly very good.  Thanks again for your insights.

Thanks for the great feedback guys 😘
It's good to have Dover's new perspective...
I know you are both Decca fanboys.....so as a reward, I hope you enjoy this comparison....🤗

FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7fz

LONDON DECCA REFERENCE

Let's see if Princi got it right again...?
Regards

Fabulous music. Great recording of one of the very greatest of all orchestral works; and a very good performance. For me, the most impressive sound from halcro’s great system so far. Thanks for that.

Well, it should be obvious which of the two cartridges I think wins simply by extrapolating from my preferences in previous comparisons. The short of it is that, IMO, it is not even close.

Whether we like it or not, comparison to the sound of unamplified acoustic music sets the standard for determining what “accuracy” in sound really is. The reality is that there is infinitely more nuance of tonal color and rhythmic interplay in a recording like this than in the vast majority of studio recordings; especially those on which electronic instruments are played. This is not a judgment about the validity of one type of music relative to another. So, it seems to me that if the goal is to determine which cartridge is “better”, the determining factor has to be which gets closer to the sound of acoustic unamplified music. IMO, a system (cartridge) that does the best possible job on a well recorded orchestral work like this will, on balance, do the best job with any type of music.

The Decca is a killer cartridge. In comparison, the FR sounds hard and borderline harsh in the highs while imposing a pervasive dark(ish) character to the mids. It seems to impart a tonal quality to the sound that reminds me a bit of a quality that I, correctly or not, associate with horn speakers. Strings sound steely and way too aggressive. The Decca does a much better job with the nuanced texture one hears from live strings. The sound of massed strings is fabulous with the Decca. The Decca also does a much better job of separating musical lines and doesn’t sound confused during complex and densely orchestrated passages as the FR does. The sounds of winds and percussion are equally realistic with the Decca. Listen to the marimba beginning at 1:55. Not only is the sound of the instrument beautifully woody sounding as it should be, one can actually hear the sound of the wall behind the player. The percussion instruments are typically situated close to the rear wall and with the Decca one can actually hear the reflection off the back wall. There is a unique quality to the sound of a section of instruments blending well and playing beautifully together; as if riding on a cushion of air. The FR obscures all these details by comparison.

Did I say I like the Decca? 😊






Sent from my iPad

Thanks Frogman,
You get no argument from me on this one....👌
Is there something that you are able to deduce from these comparisons with the LDR that separates the sound of the Deccas from LOMCs in general...?
Thanks again for a brilliant analysis 👍