2. analog
  3. 151891-2199

Testing the Yamamoto HS-4 Carbon Fiber headshell.

Received the Yamamoto HS-4 Carbon Fiber headshell today and tried it on my 12" Jelco 850L. I guess this is a common upgrade path for many Jelco users so I succumbed to temptation.
Turntable is a modified Garrard 401 in a slate plinth on a maple and concrete support with new third party bearing, platter and idler.
I tested it with my Decca "Garrott Brothers Microscanner" Gold with new line contact stylus and Decapod.
Three records were played. Ketty Lester - Love Letters (1962), Cole/Davinport/Tate/Dickenson - French Festival Nice France 1974, Buddy Tate - The Great Buddy Tate (1981).
I played sample tracks from the records before swapping the standard magnesium Jelco headshell out. From the first needle drop using the Yamamoto, there was a soft grey veiling. Not a great start. There was definitely greater depth and improved bass - I could hear the kick drum pedal hitting the skin in a very specific location and acoustic bass was well delineated and easier to follow. Soundstage was more of a wall of sound with greater height. I remember the same effect using grey plate Sylvania Gold 5751s once which are acclaimed but not to my taste. Female vocals didn’t have the articulation and airy projection I normally experienced and it was that which forced me to stop going any further and I duly put the original shell back. The greyness was gone, replaced by a transparent black background and what I can only call a vast increase in precision and focus. I deliberately didn’t mention the mids and highs with the HS-4 simply because they were compromised and wholly unsatisfactory. With the Jelco, the tremendous detail returned: The color and metallic shimmer of cymbals, the beauty of vocal inflection, instruments speed and clarity. Piano hammers sounded fast and believable. But most importantly, dynamic range now soared with startling realism. That bass drum is not as clearly evident and it is the one area I’ll give to the Yamamoto. Make no mistake though, this carbon fiber headshell was an enormous fail for me. I can only assume the material imparted its soft plasticky sonic signature onto the music. Not recommended.

128x128noromance
noromance's avatar
noromance OP
9,897 posts
 
Thanks again @chakster .
There are two questions raised in this whole quandary. 
1. What is the quality of the sound produced in a system where the damping is such that the music appears to be either bright, lively, detailed, and transparent or sound dark, muted, flatter, and less dynamic?
2. Why would one prefer one type of rendition of the music over the other?
nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 
Either the extralinguistic objects have ''inherent'' properties
or properties are ascribed to them by humans. Say ''a sheep is an useful animal because we like its meat''. To the sheep however
it may look strange to be ''useful'' because humans like its
meat.
 From the fact that different persons value the involved ''materials'' different one can conclude that some ''contradictions'' are involved.
It is obviously not about ''inherent'' properties of the materials
because those can't contradict each other. As far as we know the
external objects don't have language capabilities and consequently
can't contradict each other.
noromance's avatar
noromance OP
9,897 posts
 
De gustibus non est disputandum!
But not really.
There have to be other phenomena at work here. I do not believe the disparity of human physiology can be so diverse that we hear so differently. 
But not really.
Maybe neural density of the brain accounts for the alternative psycho-acoustic interpretations of the auditory transmission from system to mind.
nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 
Dear noromance, Deed you forget ''nature versus nurture''?
To put this otherwise is music not cultural determined. I ever
mentioned Chinese opera as example. I can't imagine anyone
from the West who likes those operas. We in the West have an
enorme cultural riches of music. Can you imagine any education
by us without music? 
nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 
Addition, ''degustibus non est disputandum''. That is the point.
Value statements are not ''truth-functional''. This means they
are not ''true or false''. The truth criterions does not apply to
them. But despite of your , say, title, you try to find some scientific
base for your opinion. 
More to discover