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
frogman
7,562 posts
 
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.


noromance's avatar
noromance
10,198 posts
 
Check this out! What a performer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orNpH6iyokI
frogman
7,562 posts
 
That was a great TV show. “Night Music” with host Dave Sanborn on saxophone and the sorely missed Hiram Bullock on guitar. Thanks for the clip.

I’m not sure “honest” (comparison) was the best choice of words in my post above and could be misconstrued. “Even playing field” is much better.
halcro's avatar
halcro OP
2,664 posts
 
- 7f is fuller sounding
- 7f is slightly more “refined” sounding 
That's what I hear....đŸ€—
For me, more so with the 7f and while both sound very good they both sound “dated”. 
Interesting Frogman. Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "dated"?
unless I’m mistaken, the first in which the tone arm and turntable are the same for both cartridges. 
Almost ALL the tests between MM cartridges are conducted on the same turntable with the same arm (DV-507/II).
And the test with the vintage SPU and the modern SPU are on the same turntable with same arm as is the test of the LDR and FR-7f and the LDR and TK-7LCa.
The DenonDL-103R and FR-6SE are also on the same turntable and arm as are the Sony XL-55 and SPU Silver Meister as are the Palladian and MIT-1 and also the FR-7fz vs the LDR.

Thanks again for the feedback and glad you enjoyed the "fun" with Screaming Jay Hawkins....😀
frogman
7,562 posts
 
Right you are, and sorry about that.  Not quite sure why I wrote that other than the fact that I was always bothered by the comparisons in which the arms were not the same.  I understand that you chose the arms in which each cartridge performed best, but still not an even playing field to my way of thinking.  To be frank, most times I purposely chose to not pay too much attention to the arms or table used so as not to let any bias creep into my assessment and to simply concern myself with the sound.  I guess that in trying to avoid a bias I fell victim to one of a different kind đŸ€Ș

“Dated”:

These are some of my comments re FR in previous comparisons and should help explain what I meant by “dated”:

*** My main issue with the FR is the stereotypical criticism of early MC’s: the highs are unnaturally etched and hard. ***

*** 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. ***

*** 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 ***

Imo, excellent modern MC cartridges, the Palladian in particular and as heard in your comparisons are generally more refined sounding and offer better performance at the frequency extremes, the highs in particular.  They do a better job of conveying the natural timbres and texture of instruments without harshness.  



More to discover