Hear my Cartridges....🎶

Dear @halcro  and Magicians : and I mean it in good shape. I know that all of you are really getting big fun in this cartridge party, good and please continue with.

For me is not very atractive this kind of " fest ". Anyway I wonder if this is a true cartridge " game " or something else and I have a question for all the Magicians:

how any one of you can separate the cartridge quality performance from the headshell or tonearm or TT or arm board where @halcro  mounted each cartridge?  I know for sure I can't do it especially for grading each cartridge quality level performance against others and if we add our each music/sounds preferences things goes more complicated for me. Btw the OP title is: " hear my cartridges ".

I know I can do it when everything is the same for each cartridge and even with is not an easy task.
 In the other side I never had patience for shoot-outs through headphones maybe because I'm accustom to live room/system.

I ask my self : It's a valuable excercise for the " magicians " that can't validate it?

Anyway and as I said this post is in good shape so go a head gentlemans  ! ! ! fun is fun no matter what.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Raul, I think the group (of which I cannot count myself a member, since I have offered no SQ opinions so far) has acknowledged the effect of tonearm and headshell (and tacitly, the turntable); the Palladian was run on both the SAEC/Victor and then on the Copperhead/Raven, and the group preferred the latter.  As for me, my computer speakers are lousy, so I dare not think I can judge at all.  Nothing sounds really good at my end.

Abracadabra!!!

Quick catch up to you guys:

For the sake of expediency, I’ll just say that neither the Shure V15/III nor Denon 103R impressed very much. If forced to choose, I would choose the Denon. I just don’t like the Shure “sound”. Too dry and bleached out; too “gray” sounding for me. The Denon (I owned one) is a little juicier sounding. Too juicy, but I prefer to go in that direction instead of the opposite.

I generally agree with the very good comments about the Sony vs the AS, but I’m not prepared to make definite conclusions. I agree there is a sense of more drive with the Sony. However, it could be due to the Victor’s DD. For that reason alone I don’t think that there is proof of superiority in that department. Probably as important, I think, is that the volume level of the Sony clip is slightly higher than that of the AS. That alone could sway one’s impression of “drive”. We are comparing two very good cartridges and perhaps Halcro can use an SPL meter going forward for setting volume levels and for more fair comparisons. What I like about the Sony is that one hears tonalities with more “meat on the bone” which would be a benefit in an overall leaner sounding system. On the previous doubled up clip that noromance referred to as “tricky”, one of my impressions of the Sony was that the lower octaves were too thick. I heard it on my end as a little muddy and indistinct. This I think contributes to the “more meat on the bones” impression on the Prokofiev (great recording) which, combined with the POSSIBLE greater rhythmic drive, gives the Sony more of what Halcro often refers to as more “magic”.

On the plus side for the AS, while the Sony makes the orchestra sound like it was recorded in a rich, reverberant hall with lots of wood, the AS sounds like the orchestra is in a more modern hall. A little leaner, less grunt in the lower winds and strings. I think there is greater tonal truthfulness and refinement with the Palladian and, as noromance points out, more overall fine detail. Listen to the entrance of the English horn @ 0:26. With the Sony it sounds like the EH enters. With the AS I can hear that it is English Horn AND oboe. However, as a colleague often says: “no one ever gets fired for bad sound”. Meaning: rhythm and timing is No.1. In this example and comparison, and assuming I am wrong about the effect of the slightly lower volume with the AS, the Sony wins.

Probably the toughest comparison yet. I generally agree with your comments. I would also think that in an all SS system like Halcro’s I might prefer the Sony. In an all tube system, I would probably prefer the AS. 

Now, where did that rabbit go? 😊

Dear @lewm  : Even tthat all here is about of fun you have to think that cartridge quality performance is " disturbed " by " thousands " of different kind of " parameters/conditions ". 
In the example you posted: 

one TT is BD and the other in a DD one, both arm boards different, both TT plynth different, both TT platter surface in touch with the LP surface different, both tonearms with different effective length and effective mass, both tonearms with different wiring, one tonearm with removable headshell and the other with out it, different resonance frequency in both tonearms, different tracking error too and other additional " disturbing " parameters.

When things are so different it's ovbious that exist differences in the overall performance.

Anyway, my target was and is not to go in deep about and as I said before: fun is fun and this is the thread target.

R.

Dear @frogman : In good shape. Don't you think that could be more appropiated to " talk "/grade not about cartridges but about two analog rigs?

In your posts and the other gentleamans ones always refered that this cartridge is better than the " other ", Denon, Shure, Sony or whatever.

If you think that it's ok to follow stating " this cartridge " and the " other cartridge " then I would like to understand how  you aisle the cartridge it self from the analog rig is surrounded when those analog rigs are way way different and where the cartridge overall set-up: alignment, VTA/SRA, AZ, VTF and the like were fixed by Halcro self music/sound priorities and even that SPL was not matched?

It has to be a coherent explanation to talk of cartridges instead analog rigs.  I know that you have a lot of fun with but I just " wonder " about because all of you are mature audiophiles and music lovers.


Thank's in advance,

R.