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

The supplied information by @jcarr about the Cartridge having been rebuilt to a condition that had shown to be Poor and there was non original parts in place is quite important, as there is a shift in the market to buying used Cartridges becoming more common, especially for the Higher Priced Items.

For some using the used market,  it is the most cost effective entrance into the creating the opportunity to acquire the Cartridges that have the Higher Price Tags. For another, it can quite simply mean a rare model has appeared and is the desired to own list. I have seen the latter happen very recently with a Ortofon Vienna, that surfaced in the used Market

In either case, it really is a case for the Buyer to do their home work and research, to ensure they are not buying into a known Model that has undergone 'cut and shut' standards of remediation on a faulty model, Caveat Emptor is the most valuable guidance, a very helpful vendor who supplies accurate information to inquiries, is a bonus. 

How the above weaves itself into the description of an occurrence that @jcarr was  exposed to is unknown, but which ever way, a party with no involvement was incorrectly labelled with the blame and this again, is unjust.   

I have no issue with not using non OEM parts in a Cartridge, as long as the design is seen to be for the better, and the decision is taken as a result of advise offered by a technician.

Secondly, at no time would this information be concealed, it would be described correctly, Third Party Service Provider and Methods chosen, this would be revealed, whether during a demonstration or if the decision was made to sell.

The Cartridge rebuild service I have used, will not work with a Cartridge that is showing evidence of not being an original spec model. The explained stance,  is that the necessary investigation of whether the Cartridge can be repaired to a improved condition, and undoing any work that has been carried out, is a cost the service are not going to pass onto a Customer. 

  

Selected parts was the ''argument'' for the AT Signet series ,also

for for the ''Precept'' series as if AT nomenclature was not sufficient

''extendeded''. Some scientist complain about ''too many variables''.

What about ''to many names''? 

Besides this imply that the parts are not equal . I avoid expression

''identical'' in order not to cause additional confusion. Those are, I think

PR ''arguments''. Besides how are we supposed to know or check? .

There was ever an linguistic theory about ''emotional meaning of words''.

I think that expression ''original'' causes ''emotions''. But this theory

lost from ''referential one''  which prefer names for the identity 

determination. But  there are to many objects in the know universe,

not to mention the parallel one, so we have not names for all of them.

That is why we use ''descriptive names''  like ''iron horse'' for the

first seen locomotive  or ''the teacher of Alexander'' , etc, etc,.. 

We also use words to pretend something or other. So be careful

by reading post in our forum.

 

That is why we use ''descriptive names''  like ''iron horse'' for the

first seen locomotive  or ''the teacher of Alexander'' , etc, etc,.. 

A great example of a "descriptive name" is the term   "a dead horse".

An example would be your fantasy that a retipper can rebuild a cartridge to better than new with a cantilever and/or stylus that resembles nothing like the original.

To indulge your fetish within your budget I would suggest you invest in an Audio Technica AT95E and a Paratrace Stylus from the Expert Stylus Company. This will indeed meet your budgetary requirements.

Dear dover, you still use the expression ''rebuild'' as the old Greek

''deus ex machina'' . An MC cart is ''composition'' of different parts.

Your ''rebuild'' expression  not one single one. There is this metaphor

 which state that ''whole'' is more than its parts. I was talking about

styli and cantilevers which manufacturer  as well retipper buy by

Namiki or Ogura. JCarr mentioen ''levels of styli'' and cantilevers 

but those are also produced by the same Japanese Jewel companies.

Gyger is out of business so one can say that those have monopoly

position. Axel Schurholz, one of the best retipper, complained to me:

''the Japanese increased their prices with 100% without any consultation''.

So he was forced to increase his own prices and had difficulty to explain

his customer his price increase.  We can assume that the ''first level''

of styli are those which are used in '''most cases'' and also that a

retip with boron or sapphire cantilever + micro ridge stylus cost +

500 euro. I am not sure if this  ''operation'' can be called ''rebuild''

but this ''operation'' consist in gluing this combo in the joint pipe

(aka aluminum tube ) front side. Why should any manufacturer do

this better than an retipper . If manufacturer would do retips they

would need one extra employee for this job. But why should they

when they buy those complete by mentioned Jewel companies?

BTW ''a dead horse'''is not an ''descriptive name''  but an ''metaphor''..

The problem with metaphors is that everyone is entitled to his own

interpretation. If one has a clear thought he does not need metaphors

but express this thought in ordinary language. You obviously have

difficulty to express your thoughts clearly . Problem with linguistics and

logic?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Why should any manufacturer do this better than an retipper ."

Um, having all the jigs? Extensive specialized experience with one configuration? Knowing the exact part with was used originally? Buying a lot of 100 and keeping 2? Having a lot more to lose? Maybe all of these?

And please spare us the elementary philosophy. Others have read Frege.