@rauliruegas Happy New Year to You
In your reply that references a Post made by myself, it seems your reply does not reflect my added information that was subsequently posted when @mijostyn pointed out the Hardness of Diamond in comparison to other Jewels, which I assume was @mijostyn pointing out a information deficiency in a Post I had made, which did not cover this information, even though the intention by myself was to cover it, I was quick to correct the sentence in the follow up post produced.
@rauliruegas Your reply does not reflect the Subject of the Thread.
The Thread is a general inquiry about the form of a Styli, and whether the same Styli forms are available from different suppliers where the name given to the part is different, and Styli dimensions and Tip Shape is not shown, to be able to make a fair assessment of all the similarities between the parts.
The information about designers Top Choice as being Cantilevers produced from Boron and Diamond, is far removed from the subject of the thread and it is possible that the claim is not absolutely correct, I would say that the Miyajima designers would have a challenge to this theory, and I would assume Soundsmith also challenge this theory to, as either in their designs would also add the organic materials of Madake Bamboo and Cactus Spine to the list of Top Choice.
The suggestion about the use of Diamond Styli is undoubtedly the most commonly seen. I am not qualified in any way to suggest that a Natural Diamond used to form a Styli is a improved option over using a Styli formed from a synthetic produced diamond, but that is a topic far is seemingly far removed from the subject of the thread.
I am quite restricted to encountering experiences of demonstrations of Cart's where the Styli Form is being assessed. I am intrigued by this very interesting subject and it is undoubtedly a subject I have an interest in, to the point where I have been active in comparing a small selection of Differing Stylus Forms.
As made known previously, I have been instrumental in arranging for a demonstration to be put in place, and set up a Demonstration that was heading towards a useful analysis, where different Brands and Styli Forms on Similar designed Carts were placed in a line up for demonstrations.
Where Four Cart's were made available and Three were the same model, but one of the Three has a different Cantilever Material and Different Brand Styli. The other Cart's have the same Cantilever Material, but Two have the same Brand Styli Model and the other has a Styli from the same brand as the former, but a different model.
It would be reasonably fair to say all the Styli to be demonstrated are in the Manufacturers Sales Spiel, within the items that are considered to be offerings from their Top of the Range listings.
The Demonstration was carried out in a reasonably controlled manner, i.e, on a system where all attendees were familiarised with it over many years of visits to the home of the system owner, and all demonstrations Cart's were pre mounted onto a identical Headshell and used on the same TT > Tonearm. The exchange period of time taken for Three Cart's was the same for each one and required only about a minute in time as the Cart's are same models and the Tracking Weight is identical. One Cart' was an incremental amount heavier and required a tracking weight tweak, resulting in approx' a Two- Three Minute exchange time. This fast exchange time ensured that the recollection of the previous replay was able to be used for the comparison and assessment during the follow on demonstrations.
As there were Two of the same Brands Styli Model and One other Styli from the same Brand of the former, the effect of the Styli on a replay was suggested to be a consideration to be assessed when listening, i.e surface noise, and whether any comparatively noticeable changes to the information retrieval was being detected.
As said previously, not one attendee was able to say with conviction that they felt the Styli was solely responsible for the noticeable differences in the SQ and Performance on offer from a Cart'.
The discussions concluded with an agreement that leaned toward, the known differences about the methods used for the assembly of the Cart's, was most likely the reason why the Model used in the Standard Form, which was also the Model with most hours of usage of approx 200 Hrs, was the one showing the least attractors and the model with the rebuild to the New High Spec' Parts and approx' 100 Hrs of usage was showing the most attractors. The Cart' that was closest in similarities in performance to the Standard Spec' Cart' was the Model with a FGS Styli that had been overhauled, with approx 50 Hrs of usage, it was agreed that this was only marginally improved over the Standard Spec Cart', I recollect it being suggested that it was a worthy method to carry out as a Retip for the Standard Cart', when the Cart' was met with its time of noticeable demise.
The Cart' with the Differing Cantilever and Different Brand Styl and had new internal parts used during the rebuild, with approx' 100 Hrs of usage, was extremely close in performance to the overall preferred Cart', it matched the high frequency performance, projected a little further in the mid's and was noticeably not as prominent in the delivery of the Bass, but this was also suggested to be due to the low user hours on the new suspension and damper in use, and may improve over time, which was proved to be the case, as later comparisons between the Two Cart's had shown the differences were marginal in the Bass and the differences in the mid's projection was still noticeable.
I would not feel comfortable suggesting that the Styli Form is solely responsible for the detection that the projection of the mid range frequencies is noticeably more prominent between the Two Cart's being compared.
