2. analog
  3. 140043-486

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
halcro's avatar
halcro OP
2,664 posts
 
@dover 
Thanks for that detailed and fascinating contribution...🤩
I love it....

I actually tried a number of 'approved threads' sent to me by Dertonearm for driving the Raven AC-2 as an alternative to the rubber belt.
Unfortunately....none of them could regulate the platter speed correctly due to the Raven's design of  requiring the 'rough' side of the rubber belt to 'grip' the Delrin edge of the platter.
However look at the evolution of the GP Monaco direct drive - it entered the market with "state of the current art" error correction algorithms, streets ahead of what was technically possible in the 70's/80's when the SP10mk3 & LO7D were built, and yet the GP Monaco is now on its 3rd or 4th upgrade path, and all owners describe massive improvements with each upgrade.
This point has not been noted by the Audio World in the way its importance warrants.
As you say....if you look at the published performance figures of each new version of the GP Monaco....they appear to be out of this world 🤯
Yet no universal adulation or praise has followed (except I think from Greg Gregory..?)
So from this reference and having had many top end TT's in my system, what I have found is -
All belt drives that use a lossy belt ( rubber the worst ) lterally sound rubbery in the bottom end. Leading transients are diffuse. 
And yet you thought the 'rubber' Belt-Drive turntable was a DIRECT-DRIVE in the above test...🤔

I think what this 'blind' objective test demonstrates (as others also have), is that we AUDIOPHILES will never release our own hard-won subjective beliefs formulated over years of personal experience.
Regardless of what evidence might be presented 🤥 👀

And so proceeds the High-End Audio world.......blindly into the ether 🙈 🙃
dover
2,247 posts
 
@halcro 

Thread Drive

I actually tried a number of 'approved threads' sent to me by Dertonearm for driving the Raven AC-2 as an alternative to the rubber belt.
Unfortunately....none of them could regulate the platter speed correctly due to the Raven's design of requiring the 'rough' side of the rubber belt to 'grip' the Delrin edge of the platter.

The problem with most turntable motors is that the motors are not designed to withstand side loads imparted by the belt. With some manufacturers they get the motors modded by adding roller bearings to support the motor spindle. Thats why they go noisy over time.
Thread drive presents higher loads than rubber belts, so you need a motor that is much stronger. The motor in the Final uses a large diamoeter spindle, sintered bushings top and bottom, and a thrust pad similar to a TT.
Also the pulley needs to be concave for thread drive. 

And yet you thought the 'rubber' Belt-Drive turntable was a DIRECT-DRIVE in the above test...🤔
Yes, I'm going to drown my sorrows with a very good Central Otrago Pinot Noir tonight.
Notwithstanding that obvoiusly the Raven AC is one of the better belt drives out there. Have you looked at the possibility of upgrading the platter ( 10kg ) to the Anniversary platter ( 20kg ).
According to Brinkmann they believe that magic number for enough mass is 15kg and if the bearing is up to it I would expect the Anniversary platter to be a good upgrade, particlualry in terms of stability.


frogman
7,456 posts
 
millercarbon, I take your “contribution” to mean that you guessed wrong both times? ☺️
jeff1225
172 posts
 

The user Halcro stopped posting in 2021. Anyone know what happened to him? @rauliruegas @dover 

noromance's avatar
noromance
9,825 posts
 

Halcro

More to discover