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€—
128x128halcro
Thanks for the comments, Halcro.  Somehow, I feel we are not connecting with what we are each trying to say re our experiences and descriptions.  Dover is correct by pointing out that sometimes once a shortcoming or difference is identified it renders the component, if not always unlistenable, then obviously flawed.  I understand that you enjoy all the cartridges in your collection.  I would too; you have many of the best.  However, I still want to understand what about them, in this case the Shure and Decca, you hear as different from each other?  I approach this exercise (and the hobby in general) from the standpoint of determining which component gets me closer to the sound of music as I (!) know it.  Once that is established then one component necessarily becomes superior to the other and the other inferior.  I also don’t particularly enjoy swapping out components.  In the case of cartridges I have found that once I find a cartridge that I like, I prefer to live with it for some time and learn how very small adjustments in set up can optimize the sound.  Just one of the many reasons that I live the ET2; it makes this possible and easy.  I am a bit perplexed as to why  I keep getting the feeling that there is resistance to the idea that one cartridge might be superior to the other.  Again, they can’t all be equally good.

**** But they CAN all be wrong....even the LDR.****

Exactly right!  And, once again, proof of just how far removed even the best are from “the absolute sound”.  

But, some get closer to it than others.  And that is what I hear and try to describe.  The differences may be very subtle, but they are there.  To me, the Decca sounds closer to the sound of music as I know it than the Shure does.  So, if that is to be the case, then there have to be differences between the two.  I suspect that you are reacting more strongly to what I am describing as the differences (and reason for the preference) than is warranted?  Also keep in mind that, as should be obvious, that for me the most important aspect of all this is to all issues.  For me that is the most important aspect of it all.  

**** Could you perhaps try to listen through speakers (or iPad) to see if you can hear some differences in presentation? ****

I have!  And not just for comparing cartridges.  I have been doing so for many years.  Not only do I not think the method is flawed, I have found that for determining differences in timbre and things like musical phrasing my Stax/tube driver setup is superior to speaker listening.  Keep in mind that my speakers are also electrostatics (Stax F81) or transmission line (Paragon Regent).  As good as the Paragons are they are no match for the Stax as far as faithfulness to tonal issues.  I will concede that headphones are inferior to good speakers as far as sound staging issues are concerned.  But, those are secondary concerns for me.  Btw, about a year ago a friend who owns the Audeze and I did a comparison to my Stax and while the Audeze sounds very good I (and he) felt that the Stax did a better job of revealing tonal differences as well being more rhythmically lithe.  The Audeze setup was very good, but to me was overly full sounding.  I kept thinking “this reminds me of the sound of better Grado cartridges”.  

Thanks for the comments and comparisons and keep them coming.  


Thanks for the comments Dover.
There have been more than a few cartridges I've had that "I simply cannot stand"......two of them, much-acclaimed LOMCs with $12,000 pricetags đŸ˜±
In these cases, I sell them off fairly quickly....
Of the other 50 I still have, they all have "shortcomings" but also they all have 'something' that enlightens me and their "shortcomings" are not significant enough (nor annoying enough) to prevent my enjoyment.

Unfortunately....I 'fried' my original XV-1s (don't ask) and sent it to Axel who saved it by rewiring the coils (and replacing the stylus).
In doing so, he reduced the output to about 0.12mV but it sounded good 😃
Then one day......the right channel 'burnt out' đŸ„”
And I haven't decided if I liked it enough (in comparison to some of my other cartridges) to send it to Peter Ledermann.....?
The spell check gremlins strike again.  In my last post (in case it matters)....

**** as should be obvious, that for me the most important aspect of all this is to all issues. ****

.... should read:

” as should be obvious, that for me the most important aspect of all this is TONAL issues.”

Regards.
I thought it might be interesting to hear the differences between the two cheap Fidelity Research MM cartridges the FR-5E and FR-6SE.
There are different opinions on which is the better cartridge 🧐
The FR-5E is a low-compliance elliptical stylus on aluminium cantilever obviously designed to suit the heavy Fidelity Research tonearms like the FR-64s and FR-66s.
The FR-6SE is a similarly specified elliptical stylus which cost $210 (on release) compared to the $130 of the 5E.
What the differences are with the 'motor' I have no idea.....?

FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-5E MM Cartridge

FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-6SE MM Cartridge