Replicant 100 stylus

If any of the Styli mentioned in this thread that are produced are appearing to have evolved from a similar origin and are close mimics of the Styli form that is the origin.

Is it not a belief by many that such a Styli is able to be used as an upgrade part to be exchanged with Styli selected to be used on another Brands Model.

The question 'is' and one that has already been loosely addressed in previous posts, as a report on how subjective assessments have been made on the impact of a Styli on a Cart' , how much does such a Styli Form impact on the overall performance for the better.

The subjective assessments referred to earlier, seems to suggest the 'for the better' is achieved when the whole of the assembly is considered as being responsible for the improvements detected.

I can purchase a  (Ska) SKYANALOG Cart' that is a Companies own Brand, and from a Company that has become an established Manufacturer , which has been producing Cart's for Brands most with a enthusiasm for Vinyl will have come across.

With the (Ska), I can get latest technology materials used and from reports on offer from growing users, have access to a Cart' that has put known and admired  Branded Cart's on the Sub's Bench.

Will taking such model from the (Ska) range and putting a Gyger 'S' or a variant on to it, now produce a Cart' that will be a cut above all (Ska) models without the Tip Exchange ?

 Will taking such model from the (Ska) range with latest technologies on board and putting a Gyger 'S' or a variant on to it, produce a Cart' that will hold its own and perform at a level that much more expensive Cart's are able to deliver ?

As is the case by all ''collective valuations'' the members of our

forum which participate in this and the other connected thread

should decide which contribution is more clear. 

''names and reference'' again.

The dominant sentence form consist of ''subject connective (is) and

predicate'' . The name say nothing about its bearer that is why

we need predicates to ''describe'' the bearer. 

This however is different in trade relations. Among intellectual properties

there also trademark. As example we can name the case of ''Audio

note Japan'' and ''Audio note uk''. Kondo san designer and owner

of Audio Note Japan was cheated by Audio note UK. Audio note was

trademark in UK and as such protected  by British law. This made

stealing of Audio note Japan products possible.

ASR from Germany known as ''Basis Exclusive phono-pre'' and

''Emitter II amp '' has as trademark in Germany ''HIFI Exclusive'' but

this does not apply abroad. So for their export ASR needed some

other tradename.

Well Gyger is also an trademark  so this explains why ''Paratrace'' is

different name . Patents are not relevant because expired while

trademarks can be prolonged.

“Well Gyger is also an trademark so this explains why ’’Paratrace’’ is

different name . Patents are not relevant because expired”

This statement is just confusing because you are comparing a company name, Gyger, and a product name, “Paratrace.”

A company name distinguishes one company from other companies. A brand name distinguishes the products of one company from the products of another company.

It would be very odd indeed for Expert Stylus to market a diamond called the Gyger. I suppose they could, but I assume that Gyger keeps the trademark up to date on its brand. Expert is the only company we are talking about that doesn’t actually bear the name of the company founder. Both Gyger and van den Hul are both eponymously named. Gyger could probably produce a diamond called the “Paratrace” is they wanted to and it might not even cause an issue. After all, people are confused already as to what’s what. MicroLine is often used generically to describe any line contact. But it’s actually a trademarked name, although I notice now that in the latest Audio-Technica materials, the name MicroLine has a large circled “R” for copyright. Legally, I don’t understand how MicroLine is protected by copyright.

Copyright laws do not protect names, titles, or short phrases. Trademark law, by contrast, protects distinctive words, phrases, logos, symbols, slogans, and any other devices used to identify and distinguish products or services in the marketplace

Maybe they lapsed the trademark and are still trying to scare people away from using the name????

I could give you the address of a retipper who installs Gyger diamonds, but that would constitute self-advertising here on Audiogon. I don’t think that’s allowed. You’ll just have to find me on your own.

There is more to the story of the Decca diamond that makes it unique. It’s 0.25mm square. Most manufacturers only go up to 0.20 mm square. The only manufacturer who makes a diamond that large is: you guessed it, Expert Stylus. That’s proof enough for me that Expert makes it. However, I have old FFSS from which I have removed round shank diamonds. So, even though the receiver is a certain size, Decca clearly used smaller diamonds and made up the difference with cement. John Wright prefers to use the largest size diamond he can fit into the receiver but I have retipped Decca with 0.20 mm square diamonds without any problem.

needlestein, thanks to keep my thread alive. Your contribution to

intellectual property is less interesting than to Decca's dimensions.

 I own Ikeda's 9 series REX which is MC ''opposite'' to Decca. 

Its diamond also looks larger than ''usual exotic kinds''. Except

of course ''micro ridge'' which ''explains itself'' , so to speak.

What I am wondering about based on my own experience with

''Expert stylus'' is : ''how such small company'' can produce

Gyger kinds of styli + retip works? My only guess is that exclusive

contracts make this possible. My correspondence was either with

Julia or Mr. Hodgson. 

i