Hear my Cartridges....🎶

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 👍

Most audiophiles never have the opportunity to hear the legendary Fidelity Research LOMC cartridges comprising the FR-7 Series.
Here's what Jonathan Carr says:-

Here you can see just how huge the magnet structure is, and if you understand cartridge design, the uniqueness of the 7's innards will be very apparent. The magnet structure alone would spill over the body sides of any non-integrated headshell MC cartridge (at least that I am aware of), and underscores why FR never made a non-integrated headshell version of the 7. From my perspective (that of an active cartridge designer), the closest thing to a non-integrated headshell version of the FR-7 was the PMC-3, but even this remained quite a way off. The FR-7 had a radically different coil former (cube-shaped), likewise for the magnetics (dual magnets, quad polepieces). IMO, the FR7s were by far the most interesting of FR's MC designs, but the 7's basic design concept dictated that they would always be big, heavy monsters, suited for relatively few modern arms... My favorite FR-7s are the f and fz. The very low coil inductance of the FR-7 implies that loading can be fairly flexible, so I wouldn't be so concerned with the low impedance. Also, none of the FR-7s are overachievers in detail, and the top end extension is a little curtailed. so the downsides of transformer stepups won't be overly apparent. However, in consideration of the low coil inductance, should you choose a stepup transformer, I would look for a toroidal-core type. 

FR-7f
Fidelity-Research FR-7f specs:

■ Price in 1980 was 77,000 yen
■ Power generation method: MC type cartridge
■ Output voltage: 0.15 mV (3.54 cm / sec., 45 °)
■ Output voltage: 0.2 mV (5 cm / sec., 45 °)
■ Output power: 2 × 10 -8 W (5 cm / sec 45 °)
■ Needle pressure: 2 g to 3 g
■ Load impedance: 3 Ω
■ Coil impedance: 2 Ω
■ Playback frequency: 10 Hz to 45 kHz
■ Channel separation: 28 dB (1 kHz)
■ Channel balance: 1 dB (1 kHz)
■ Compliance: 7 × 10 -6 cm / dyne (100 Hz, 20 ° C.), the compliance measured at conventional 10Hz will be about 13cu!
■ Tip: 0.15 mm square Refined contact, Solid Diamond needle (LINE CONTACT)
■ Weight: 30 g

Even fewer audiophile ever have the opportunity to compare the BEST of the FR-7 Series.....the FR-7f and FR-7fz

FR-7fz 

Fidelity Research FR-7fz Specifications

Frequency Response: 10 Hz to 35 kHz 

Channel Balance: 1 dB at 1 kHz 
Dynamic Compliance: 13 m/mN at 10 Hz 
Output Voltage: 0.24 mV at 1 kHz, 5 cm/s 
Internal Impedance: 5 Ω 
Tracking Force: 2.0-3.0 g, 2.5 g recommended 
Stylus Tip: Modified with Ultimate Q4 Diamond 
Weight: 29 g (including integral headshell)

FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7f LOMC Cartridge 


FIDELTY RESEARCH FR-7fz LOMC Cartridge

For me, a particularly interesting comparison because, unless I’m mistaken, the first in which the tone arm and turntable are the same for both cartridges. Even playing field and, arguably, the first truly “honest” comparison.

FR-7f:

- The better tracker of the two. Both exhibit audible breakup on Screaming Jay’s screams, but noticeably less so with the 7f.
- Sibilants are better controlled with the 7f.
- 7f is fuller sounding
- 7f is slightly more “refined” sounding

So, the 7f is the better cartridge? Not so fast.

FR-7fz:

- In spite of its less extended high frequency spec, with the 7fz one doesn’t hear the obvious high frequency “ceiling” that one hears with the 7f. I hear more high frequency air with the 7fz. The 7fz sounds more linear while the 7f sounds slightly tubby and rounded by comparison. (So much for specs telling the story). I think this is the reason that:
- 7fz sounds slightly more rhythmically incisive. The leading edge of the sound of the rhythm instruments is more natural and incisive with the 7fz while the 7f dulls those leading edges slightly. As a result the wonderful triplet rhythm of the tune is more “groovy” with the 7fz.
- It took me several listens to figure out whether the rhythm instrument playing on 2 and 3 of the triplets was an unusual sounding keyboard or a guitar. The 7fz let me hear that it is, in fact, a guitar (sounds like a guitar with nylon strings). The 7f obscures this detail.
- Also contradicting the specs, the 7fz sounds very slightly less loud than the 7f. Probably a psychoacoustic result of the fuller character of the 7f.

Very close comparison; but, for me, the 7fz wins; sounds closer to real. J Caar is exactly correct (no surprise): “the top end extension is a little curtailed.“ For me, more so with the 7f and while both sound very good they both sound “dated”.

Fun recording and thanks for the opportunity to hear these classic cartridges.