2. analog
  3. 151721-486

Who needs a Diamond Cantilever...? 💍

So suddenly, there seems to be a trend for Uber-LOMC cartridges released with Diamond Cantilevers...😱
As if the High-End MC cartridges were not already overpriced....?!
Orofon have released the MC-ANNA-DIAMOND after previously releasing the Limited Edition MC-CENTURY...also with Diamond Cantilever.
Then there’s the KOETSU BLOODSTONE PLATINUM and DYNAVECTOR KARAT 17D2 and ZYX ULTIMATE DIAMOND and probably several more.

But way back in 1980....Sony released a Diamond-Cantilevered version of its fine XL-88 LOMC Cartridge.
Imaginatively....they named this model the XL-88D and, because it was the most expensive phono cartridge in the world (costing 7500DM which was more expensive than a Volkswagen at the time)....Sony, cleverly disguised this rare beast to look EXACTLY like its ’cheap’ brother with its complex hybrid cantilever of "special light metal held by a carbon-fibre pipe both being held again by a rigid aluminium pipe".
The DIAMOND CANTILEVER on the 88D however......was a thing of BEAUTY and technological achievement, being formed from ONE PIECE OF DIAMOND including the stylus 🤯🙏🏽

I’ve owned the XL-88 for many years and recently discovered that it was my best (and favourite) cartridge when mounted in the heavy Fidelity Research S-3 Headshell on the SAEC WE-8000/ST 12" Tonearm around my VICTOR TT-101 TURNTABLE.
Without knowing this in advance.....I would not have been prepared to bid the extraordinary prices (at a Japanese Auction Site) that these rare cartridges keep commanding.
To find one in such STUNNING CONDITION with virtually no visible wear was beyond my expectations 😃

So how does it sound.....?
Is there a difference to the standard XL-88?
Is the Diamond Cantilever worth the huge price differential?
Is the Pope a Catholic....?

This cartridge simply ’blows my mind’...which is hard to do when I’ve had over 80 cartridges on 10 different arms mounted on two different turntables 🤯
As Syntax said on another Thread:-
When you have 2 identical carts, one regular cantilever and the other one with diamond cantilever (Koetsu Stones for example), the one with diamond cantilever shows more details, is a bit sharper in focus and the soundstage is a bit deeper and wider. They can sound a bit more detailed overall with improved dynamics
I’ll leave it at that for the time being. I will soon upload to YouTube, the sound comparisons between the two Sony versions on my HEAR MY CARTRIDGES THREAD.

But now I’ve bought myself a nightmarish scenario.......
There is no replacement stylus for this cartridge!
There is no replacement cantilever for this cartridge!
Each time I play records with it, I am ’killing’ it a bit more 🥴😥
If I knew how long I had left to live......I could program my ’listening sessions’ 🤪
But failing this.....I can’t help but feel slightly uncomfortable listening to this amazing machine.
128x128halcro
best-groove's avatar
best-groove
842 posts
 
The simplest thing to do is to consult some old designers who worked for Sony or Matsushita or others and ask them when at the end of the 70s there was the race between the majors to conquer the supremacy in the r & d of experiments and weights of mobile crews of cartridges as lights as possible, including all research on cantilevers.
There was huge funding at stake for innovation and research, funding that now (and this applies to all brands) is no longer almost more there; currently the manufacturers cannot afford to make a mistake a project.
nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 
mijostyn, are you shure you want an duel with an Serbian
warrior? We, my dear mijostyn , don't need any reason
to start an war. Pure passion. 
The problem in our forum is the grammar. To be more
specific the simple ''subject (is) predikat'' form. One is
so focussed on subject and what ''it'' possible refer to that
 by all those guessing about cantievers each of you forget 
to mention my Ikeda Rex which has no cantiever whatever.
Typical example of  western jealousy and illusion to be the
 smartest in the world. 
clearthinker's avatar
clearthinker
1,582 posts
 
@larrryi

"that diamond would have to be pretty low-grade to start with..."

I don't think we are looking for D grade flawless here.


Given the tiny forces that transmit the signal, SQ will be optimised if the cantilever is very hard, stiff and short, so that the displacement at the stylus tip is transmitted accurately to the movement at the coil/magnet end, hence....
Diamond.

Hence also that a unified diamond stylus cantilever might improve on a glued joint that can possibly allow some flexure.

We also need to think carefully about the design and construction of the suspension.  It should hold the cantilever so that its pivot point is retained in a fixed location in three dimensional space. i.e. like a seesaw allowing three dimensional movement.  The permitted movement is analogeous to a gimalled arm, and for the same reasons of SQ.

Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
13,005 posts
 
Dear @mijostyn : Boron alone is way more stiffer that any other cantilever but natural diamond ( again, I don't know if the synthetic/industrial diamond shares exactly the same characterisitcs than the natural jewel. ).

Boron Young Modulus is 656 when aluminum is 68 or synthetic ruby 372.

I think  that exist a limit where above it higher stiffness makes no difference, so maybe the higher stiffness of the natural diamond ( 1,050. )  could not make a true differences in this specific cantilever " job ". Who knows?

In the other side many things around the cartridge cantilever diamond models makes no sense other that manufacturers goes way higher in the cartridge price tag and I say this because from some years now has in its cartridge catalog 1 or 2 diamond cantilever models ( not expensive ones. ) and things are that no one is the top of the line but ( like today ) cartridges with boron cantilevers ! ? ! ?

@dover  is rigth and I disagree with you about LOMC quality level performance that can be outperformed by MM/MI cartridges that's an " inferior " cartridge design.

Now and this is critical: dover said the importance of the rigth phono stage that can or can't be the " problem " with LOMC cartridges because for a LOMC one could shows all its glory we need a very good phono stage and these units are not inexpensive one ( except the PS Audio Stellar unit. ).

Everything the same a LOMC quality level performance beats an MM or MI cartridge. As dover I prefer too MI.

Everything has its own quality levels and I have to say that there are MM and MI cartridges that are ( specially MI ) really good performers.

If we comment this with JC he will tell us that MM develops higher distortions that LOMC cartridges and I know because that was his answer in the long MM thread.

Yes, I'm with LOMC but I know too that I can't totally diminish the other cartridge design contenders.

R.
mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,492 posts
 
Raul, that is sort of a wishy-washy answer. There are quality levels in all categories. My point is there are MM and MI cartridges that out perform some LOMC cartridges. There can be no question that the signal to noise ratio and dynamic capability are better. I am not saying that ultimately the highest performers are not LOMC cartridges. However, JC may think they are better but Joe Grado and Peter Ledermann did/do not. All these people have an iron in the fire and you have to interpret what they say as such.

You and I seem to have the same opinion of diamond cantilevers vs boron. Diamond may be stiffer but boron is lighter. Graphene is stiffer and lighter than both! Eventually someone will make a cantilever out of it. At any rate I think it is obvious that many think Boron makes the better cantilever for whatever reason. I suspect lightness trumps stiffness as inertia is critical. The stylus has to stop and start up to 16,000 times/sec. At least I think that is the highest frequency recorded on vinyl, is it not?

@nandric , I'm Jewish. Pure cunning. Never Again! God help Iran if they get close to a nuke.
More to discover