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
edgewear
543 posts
 
@nandric following up on your last sentence I'm still hoping JCarr will revisited this thread and explain more about what judgment calls designers make in mixing & matching various materials within their basic designs. Every design and part choice has an effect on sound quality, that much we can agree on. And so the variations are pretty much endless, which explains why no two cartridges sound the same. I think it's fair to say that science and art are on equal footing here.

That being said, I still think it's interesting to know if diamond as a cantilever material is capable of potentially lifting the performance plateau as a result of its intrinsic properties. We don't know the answer to that one. A cartridge designer of reputation who has experimented with it most likely could, regardless of whether he decides to use it or not.

What interests me in certain vintage cartridges is that materials were used that are no longer available. Especially when it's very unlikely these 'elements' will ever be reintroduced on the market, like those one piece diamond cantilever/stylus units from Sony.
In a way it's the search for a sound that has gone and will never come back. Regardless whether that sound is any better than today's designs. Probably not, but that isn't really the point is it?


lewm
13,021 posts
 
I think you missed my point or are completely ignoring it. My point was only that in a moving magnet or moving iron cartridge, the coil does not move. That was a response to your earlier statement that moving magnet cartridges were inferior to moving coil cartridges having something to do with the mass of the coil. I think you know, and I know, that that is not correct. In a moving magnet or moving iron cartridge, the mass of the coil has no effect on the moving mass. And that’s all I meant to say.

As to coil wire, isn’t it odd that there has never been an MM or MI cartridge, to my knowledge, that was marketed on the basis of its having a copper vs silver vs gold coil?
mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,570 posts
 
Thanx Lewm for that. Saves me the typing. 

@rauliruegas , you are operating on lay instinct Raul. The coils function as a unit. The length of the wire only determines the coils overall performance/spec. The only problem with the larger coil is that capacitance can cause trouble in high frequency performance. Now, I could give a hoot about vintage cartridges. That is not my thing. I am only talking about modern ones with up to date cantilevers and styli. I am not in a position to hear a lot of cartridges any more. But the moving magnet cartridges I have heard specifically the Clearaudio Charisma, the Goldring 1042 and the AT VM760SLC are excellent performers. Given these cartridges perform well on relatively inexpensive phono stages they represent a much better cost to performance ratio for audiophiles on a budget. I do not think moving coil cartridges come into their own until you are spending $5000 and you will have to spend at least $2000 on a phono stage to get that performance. Ultimately, the absolute best performance may come from a moving coil cartridge but you are talking about equipment that few of us can afford so, it might as well not exist at all, never mind the cost of a diamond cantilever. I would never spend the additional money on one. I personally think boron makes a better cantilever. For constructs that have to change direction 20 k times per second mass is the major factor. 

@terry9 , I doubt the way the stylus is attached to the cantilever make any difference from a performance perspective. The diamonds have a square shank which is captured by a notch at the end of the cantilever. The only issue is durability. Styli that are glued on are easier to break off. I would not recommend them to DJ's. 

Regardless, Graphene will be the ultimate cantilever. It is lighter than Boron and stiffer than diamond. It would also make a better stylus as it is harder than diamond. Lord knows how you would shape it.
terry9
2,333 posts
 
Junctions make all the difference.

A wobbly junction is not a rigid junction. The most rigid junction is diamond-to-diamond. A less rigid junction is diamond-to-anything.

If we assume the a wobbly junction of stylus to cantilever is undesirable, and we further assume that a more rigid junction is a better junction, then the conclusion is clear.
lewm
13,021 posts
 
If moving mass is THE factor, as you say, Mijo, then MI or IM cartridges would rule. Actually I could live with only that type but I’d miss LOMC and MM. Raul is the mentor who made me the pantheist I am today, where cartridges are concerned. Thanks, Raul.
More to discover