Hear my Cartridges....🎶


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.....🤪
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.....🤗
128x128halcro
I agree with @frogman on the piano being recessed somewhat and the better air around instruments on the Victor. However, in other aspects, it's as if he's listening to swapped versions of what I hear. I hear the Palladian as romantic and euphonic, and even colored, overly saturated and dense. The Vic sounds like someone is in the room - clean, neutral, airy, transparent. The Palladian like it's been studio enhanced. Admittedly, there are qualities of warmth and woody tone with the MC, and the piano is definately more present. I just prefer that cooler, more honest rendering of the MM.
Re 1rst vs 2nd generation YouTube videos:

No comparison. Differences were so obvious and immediate that it seems almost pointless to describe in detail. I was taken aback the contrast as I wasn’t expecting it to be so great.

2nd generation, overall much lower "fi". Loss of detail in about every respect. Loss of highs, muddy mids and lows, shrunken soundstage both side to side and front to back. As a result and most importantly, obvious decrease in musical aliveness. Wow!

Fascinating our perceived differences between the Victor and Palladian, noromance. When I read your original comment describing the Victor as "crisper"/"cleaner" and the Palladian as more "euphonic", I had the same reaction as you; like the cartridges were swapped. I hear it as just the reverse. A semantics issue perhaps? I wlll even up the ante (so to speak) by pointing out that what I described as "subtle texture in the air around instruments" was not meant to suggest that the Victor had better air as you hear; just the opposite. I heard an extraneous texture in the spaces between instruments that the Palladian did not add. Palladian sounds cleaner to me and certainly not romantic, nor the Victor cooler; as I define the terms.

All very interesting and I don’t doubt for a moment that this is what you hear. Fascinating. Vive la differance!!
I used reasonably good over the ear headphones on my phone. It's weirding me out! I'm going to have to try on PC to my second rig downstairs later. Keep well.
2nd generation, overall much lower "fi". Loss of detail in about every respect. Loss of highs, muddy mids and lows, shrunken soundstage both side to side and front to back. As a result and most importantly, obvious decrease in musical aliveness. Wow!
Yeah....massive deterioration 😱
I wanted to objectively establish a 'gauge' for the relationship between the recorded YouTube Video and the 'Live Event' (so to speak).....
I've been fairly pleased with the quality of sound on the videos compared to what I hear in situ....
Of course we all know that 'The Real Thing' must be better than a recording of it.....but there are nowhere near the losses that are evident from 1st to 2nd Generation recordings.
I don't know how to explain this as the 1st Gen recording is being played back through the same preamp, amps and speakers using the same interconnects and cables.
The only difference I can pinpoint is that the signal for the 2nd Gen is going through the Line-Level input of the preamp rather than the phono....?
But all my other sources which do the same thing (tuner, tape, CD, aux) sound wonderful...🤗
Something is causing this which might be evident to others....?

Thanks for the evaluation Frogman.....
It took awhile but I read the whole thing. Thanks for sharing. Im not setup to listen to this properly with headphones but appreciated everyone’s comments. And I must say, excellent writing. I’ve been following your crowd for years and just recently experiencing vintage mm cartridges. An nos Stanton 881s. Have acquired a couple others (top models) but haven't tried them yet.  @halcro 
A  question  about the AT-ML180/OCC. I always thought the OFC was the earlier version and was Beryllium. And the OCC was later and boron?