''Óriginal parts'', ''identity '' and ''retip'' conundrum

For all of the above it highlights that you can’t beat sending the cartridge back to the manufacturer for refurbishment. Note I did not say retip.

I have had my Dynavector Karat Nova rebuilt 3 times - each time it comes back completely rebuilt (including generator) with new test results for each rebuild - output, inter channel separation, optimum tracking weight etc all documented.

If you look at how the original diamond fits into the cantilever, in many cartridges retipping can never achieve the same level of fit - there will always be more glue than in the original. There is an argument for "should you replace the whole cantilever, diamond assembly" in order to maintain integrity. I don’t think retippers have access to precision micro laser cutters that Namiki possess.

On my original Sumiko Talismans with sapphire cantilever/microridge diamond you cannot see the glue at all. Compare that to the famous Garrott retips that I also have there is significantly more glue.

I recently stared the thread ''on what there is'' but , alas, this was not

an success. Beryllium is toxic and forbidden in order to protect labourer..

This means that production of beryllium cantilevers is forbidden. However

we can't know what individual retippers have in their stock. It is possible

that your retipper bought an ''huge amount'' when those were available. 

I have never heard about retip problems with cactus styli. My point was

that assumption that each manufacturer uses his own ''uniqeu stylus''

such that other styli are something totally different is based on sand.

Or that manufacturer and retipper use the same styli. However ''original

stylus'' suggest something else. That is the problem of the word ''original''.

''Original'' also assume identity otherwise we would have no idea what

we are talking about. Hower such persons can't be excluded,

Japanese economic success was based on improving western technology

and this presupposes changing their ''originality''. 

Otherwise there would be no such aversion against retips. My point 

is that retipper use the same styli as the manufacturer. My point is

nor ''what kind of cantilevers there are''. Identity assumes recognizing

the thing to be recognised. There is no other possibility . The owner

of object is supposed to know that this object is his ownership.   

Dear dover, Who would believe that you would use Rauls terminology?

I never understood what he meant with ''refurbishing'' but he deed this

all the time. Are you not confusing cart exchange with refurbishing?

Many manufacturer refuse ''retipping'' but offer exchange . For them

it is more easy to offer an new cart instead to mess with the old one.

However putting new generator with the rest in the ''old body'' 

may look as ''refurbishing''???

Dear dover, by wrestling with identity conundrum I forget the most

important thing. You as former owner of an , say, HI-Fi shop should

know this better than I. My assumptions is that manufacturer get +/-

30 % of the price, 30% importer and 30% dealers. Your refurbishment

other call  ''rebuild''. This is than an ''one to one'' relation between

customer and manufacturer. The so called ''íntermediary'' are

avoided . Does this mean that you got your cart for 30% of the

retail price? BTW refurbishing is as clear as rebuild. There are many

parts in an MC cart. One need to know which parts are rebuild 

otherwise we are there were we started.

I think rebuilding and/or retipping may be a bit like plastic surgery; one is better off not knowing too much about it.  Once you do gain the knowledge, the bloom is off the rose.