Victor nails it for me on my Macbook Pro.....more musical...less mechanical
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.....🤗
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.....🤗
- ...
- 628 posts total
Excellent observations and comments by Dover. His reactions to the three different cantilevers are almost exactly in line with mine and I rank the three in the same order. For me, the Ruby ranks a distant third, sounding rough and less refined than the other two. That one out of the way, the choice between the Boron and the Sapphire is more interesting. Plainly put, for me, the Boron sounds more natural (realistic). The sapphire, while it "appears" more resolving in the highs, I hear as more generous in that range, but a range that is not as well integrated with the midrange. For me, a top end which is more generous will often tend to cause the midrange to seem less fully developed. The better integrated highs of the Boron help its midrange to sound more "fully developed". As far as overall tonal balance goes, in the context of a different system, one might easily be preferable to the other. In this context, he Boron wins for me. Two observations that would tip the scale for me in favor of the Boron regardless of system context: Listen to the kettle drum roll that one hears at the opening of the Prokofiev (thank you, Halcro) and its percussive accent on the arrival of the roll which is accompanied by the entrance of the low brass. With the Sapphire, I hear a hint of strain in the sound of demanding (loud/densely orchestrated) passages in the music. The Boron sounds a bit more composed (sorry) in those spots. While I suspect that it does, this may or may not be related to the second observation: Listen to that great violin section beginning at :59. Wonderful musical passage with very exciting syncopated and accented notes intended to "jump out" of the overall texture of running sixteenth notes. With the Boron those accented notes leave that texture of running sixteenth notes more obviously and decisively....more music. Interesting comparison as always, Halcro. Thank you. Now, and please forgive me for this, but the subject of the Weavers’ song is a little too close to home (literally) for me to ignore. As we all know, that is a wonderful and wonderful sounding record. As wonderful sounding as is that "Guantanamera" , a beautiful song that is practically a second national anthem for Cubans, it leaves some to be desired on stylistic grounds. Here is a more stylistically authentic version; hope you enjoy it (or, at least appreciate it): https://youtu.be/gdYIpvnzoW8 |
Dear @sdrsdrsdr : Many years ago but with no doubt the boron version performed better. Now, the 180 is very good cartridge but not the best MM out there. His ceramic body material used is way resonant but in those times manufacturers of analog items were in love with ceramic: SAEC headshells, JVC/VICTOR headshell, AT turntable mats, Audiocraft turntable mats and many more. From there Ortofon started to use ceramic in its MC 3000 to the MC5000. Now ceramic is not only resonant but to fragile too. R. |
Dear @frogman : You are rigth, technically are not the " same " but on cartridge cantilever job performs the same. Btw, I had the ruby/sapphire and boron JICO with the Garrot and my first hand experiences with was like you: boron hands down the jewels. Everything the same is almost imposible to beat boron cantilever material. Boron get together all desired characteristics to fulfill top cartridge designs, it's as this material exist becauase the needs for cantilever cartridges. R. |
Dear @dover : """Â
At the end of the day there is no magic bullet - the sound of a particular cartridge is just the sum of parts, materials and technologies employed and the overall design objectives of the designer. " Totally true, that is all about and that's why halcro does not likes the cartridges he experienced with boron cantilever but he did not like it not because the boron but because the cartridge overall design and quality level excecution to that design. Tha's all because per sé boron is a superior material in that specific application. R. |
- 628 posts total