I am a convert to having a Cartridge Treated by a Third Party Service.
This has come about through personal experiences as well as having a interest and attempting to learn a little about MC Designs and reasons why certain materials are adopted into the designs.
I have also been able to compare my owned Third Party Treated Cartridge to the Original Model, 'from a Listening Point of view only',
the Third Party Service Treated Cartridge was delivering at a noticeably different and improved level when compared to the Original Model.
The good thing for the Comparisons undertaken, is that both Cartridges were mounted on the same Head Shell Model and used on the same Tone Arm and TT and Support System.
This will allow for identical environmental influences on the Replays.
There are differences to be considered as follows:
1, The Third Party Treated Cartridge had about 100ish ( Quite Accurate) Hours of usage and was with a Short Period of time exposed to the Ambient Environment,
2, The Original Model was said to have about 300+ (Not Entirely Proven) Hours of usage, as well as having been exposed to the
Ambient Environment for a much longer period of time.
3, IMO, the longer a Cartridge is left exposed to the Ambient Environment the more it is becoming contaminated with a unwanted collection of Particulate on the working parts, and it seems there will be a time when these contaminants can be a impedance to the overall performance of the Cartridge.
(I have no real proof of this)
What is known is that both owners were sure in their formed views the Third Party Treated Cartridge was with a very desirable SQ and was a improvement over the Original being compared against.
My Purchase of a Donor MC and the Third Party Treatment was at a lesser cost that purchasing the Original Model as a New Purchase.
The risk taken by myself was that the Donor Cartridge could have been rejected for a rebuild by the Technician and the Cartridge Cost and Inspection fee would have been to produce a 'no avail' outcome.
I have followed a Enthusiast Blog produced by a Cartridge Builder.
There are very nice Photo Records of the Deconstruction and Reconstruction of the Cartridges being worked on.
What is off additional interest to me as a content within this Blog,
is that the Technician is claiming that many Cartridge Brands are all using the same internal materials as parts.
The Companies are producing the Sonic Differences for their Models are being achieved by the following:
1, Coil Wires used with differing amounts of Windings.
2, Different Gauges for the Metal used as Coil Wire.
3, Different Metal Types used as the Coil Wire.
I will also add that a Cantilever Material, as well as the Cantilevers Length and Set Up Angle, along with the Cartridge Body Design will contribute to the Cartridges Uniqueness in the Presentation Produced.
I am on board with the Enthusiasts Blog report that there are commonly used materials being seen as the Parts in use to produce a Cartridges Internal Structure.
With this in mind, it does not concern me if a Adept Technician is used as a Third Party Service to overhaul a Cartridge that is wanting.
Maybe a List of Cartridge Brands can be compiled to show would be owners, Cartridges that share a common material assembly for the Internal Structure.
It might help with seeing through the Mystique of the Hype through the Advertising.
In a nutshell, we are going to sell you a 'Bently', but would prefer it,
if it was not known that a Ford / Mazda will be used under the Body Shell.
I at present have another MC Model Purchased to undergo a Similar Third Party Treatment in keeping with my one in use at present.
I have been offered a Design for it that is almost to my wish list.
I am yet to have the MC Inspected, so the Punt, has still got a few Hurdles to be cleared before the outcome is seen as worthwhile.
There are a few HiFi ideas on a bucket list that will be my Post COVID Projects, off which this is to be one.
