Teres 265 or 320 vs. Sota Cosmos

Raul,

I do remember your complimenting the Airy 2/3 review and thank you for that. Unfortunately, you still haven't answered the one question that matters to Nrchy:

Which current ZYX models have you heard on a TriPlanar VII?

That is what Nrchy is thinking of buying. Your opinions are relevant if you've heard this combo, but irrelevant if you have not.

A simple, "I don't know, I haven't heard that.", is quite acceptable. Saying so would even enhance your credibility.

Regards,
Doug

Raul,I would like to make two points,to you.Firstly,with all of the arms,and cartridges you own do you really feel that confident that you have hit on ALL the "Exact" parameters of the "infinitesimal" combination variations,that yield "spot on" performance?I can't believe anyone, with that collection, can "dial in" perfect parameters,and then make "EXACTING" claims towards the vast combinations available to them all!!I mean this with total respect.I have friends that have been at the cusp of audio journalism (one active reviewer,one semi-active,and one retired(the retired one,a GURU to me),who was there at the beginning),and they take "light years" to get their one arm/cartridge set-up to operate at a perfect state(a perfect state to them,really HAS to be PERFECT,or they're miserable)!!Even HP needs a set-up man,and how many times have we read that he didn't realize something was amiss,months later.When I say light years,I mean that 6-12 months down the road,they may find a better voicing option.Multiply all this by your numerous collection(that I think is wonderful,BTW)and you can see why I ask this of you.There just doesn't seem to be enough time,in a lifetime,to get it all "definitively right"!!There's a huge difference between "good enough"(most people,and I have some friends that fall into this category),and "SPOT ON"(VERY TIME CONSUMING).I,also, like to leave time for actual listening!!How much fotzing around does one really want to do.Also,there's family,work,movies,exercise,socializing,rest etc.,etc!!One arm/cartridge combo(with the fanatical level I actually hold myself to)is enough for me,and takes me a "dog's" lifetime to feel that I got it right!!Actually,my friends have "forced" me into being this critical.To get any enthusiasm from them usually requirs a payoff!!Just kidding,but,you get the point.

This leads me to my next question,Raul.Why don't you start a dedicated audio magazine.I'm serious here!!I'm not trying to be disrespectful,at all!You obviously love all of this,so why not enlarge your hobby's perspective and maybe start a "dedicated to analog" print journal.The magazines I read(TAS,Stereophile,Hi-Fi plus)are not nearly as good as years ago,so why not fill the void.You seem to have the enthusiasm.Why not try to make a few dollars along the way?Best of luck!!

Hi Doug: +++++ " When caught bluffing about cartridges ... " +++++

This is what an Zyx airy3 owner ( Amazon,Tri`planar, etc ) post about this cartridge against the 90X, that confirm what I already post about ( it is not the only one that share my point of view ):

+++++ " I thought the Shelter did a slightly better job of handling the bass frequencies in terms of overall weight. " +++++

Doug, with all respect, I don't need your approval/satisfaccion for " enhance my credibility ", at least for now, but stay tunned.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

.
Raul,
.
It seems that you only provided us with part of the quote from someone that compared ZYX Airy3 and a Shelter 90X.
.
Your extraction of the quote from the thread was:
+++++ " I thought the Shelter did a slightly better job of handling the bass frequencies in terms of overall weight. " +++++
.
The entire quote about bass on the two cartridges in total was actually
++++ " I thought the Shelter did a slightly better job of handling the bass frequencies in terms of overall weight. On the other hand, I felt the Airy was slightly more resolving in this area".++++
.
Raul, Try to be a little more even handed when trying to prove your points. The Audiogon member did not say one cartridge did a better job of handling Bass; they both did different aspects of Bass better. He also did not say that the Shelter 90X goes lower than the Airy3.
.
For those that are interested, here is the URL to the thread from which Raul's quote comes from as well as Audiogon member "Wrp"'s posting to that thread that Raul quoted:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1119798883&read&3&4&

06-26-05:
Wrp
Dmailer,

I had an opportunity to audition both cartridges in my system (Avid Diva TT/Origin Illustrious arm) before buying. I chose to go with the Airy 3, which I subsequently upgraded to a UNIverse when I upgraded my turntable (Amazon Model 1/TriPlanar arm). Here are my comments from the audition (LONG), as told to the two gentlemen who let me borrow these cartridges:

>>Well the long weekend is over, and I’ve had a chance to evaluate the Shelter 90X and the ZYX Airy 3, also know as “A Tale of Two Cartridges”, also known as “Godzilla vs. Mothra”!

First, these are both world class cartridges. I am amazed at the level of information retrieval, resolution at the frequency extremes and dynamics, to mention a few of the characteristics that immediately presented themselves. That said, I’ve decided to go with the Airy 3. Here are some overall impressions of what I heard over the course of the weekend.

I think the Shelter 90X combines the best qualities of the 501 and the 901 cartridges. The 90X has that great midrange quality of the 501. It also has the frequency extension and bass control of the 901, as well as incredible transient response, which makes for an exciting and dynamic presentation. You were right in that it’s very easy to get this cartridge to sound good without much effort. Initial setup was easy (less than 15 minutes) and very forgiving in light of the fact that I have a suspended turntable and Origin arm, which means no precise method of dialing in setup parameters! I spent approximately 90 minutes fully setting up the cartridge and dialing in VTA, VTF, cartridge alignment, etc. before listening critically. I tried setting the VTF to 1.85, 1.9, 1.95 and 2 grams. I got the best results in my setup at 1.9 grams. Overall, the soundstage was wide, deep and vivid. I noticed a bit more surface noise using the 90X as compared to the Airy3. In terms of overall presentation, I felt as though I were in the 2nd or 3rd row; a very good seat indeed! Imaging was locked and very well defined. To my ears, the imaging was slightly more delineated than I’m accustomed to; not a bad thing, just different. I’m sure this contributes to the overall sense of excitement this cartridge brings to the music.

The Airy3 is also very forgiving in terms of setup. I was able to get a good sound after 15 minutes as well. My initial impression was one of seamlessness. Nothing about the overall sound really called attention to itself. I thought the Shelter did a slightly better job of handling the bass frequencies in terms of overall weight. On the other hand, I felt the Airy was slightly more resolving in this area. In particular, it was easier to hear both the fundamental tone and the acoustic body of an upright bass on a number of my jazz LPs. I was also able to better discern the timbre of kick drums and the differences in recording techniques. I spent about 90 minutes fine tuning the key setup parameters of the Airy3 for critical listening. I got my best results with VTF set to 1.95 grams. Again, soundstage was wide, deep and slightly more “palpable” than the Shelter. I also detected a slight increase in the height of the soundstage. In terms of presentation, I would say that the Airy3 gave me a front row seat to the musical event. As with the Shelter, there was an incredible amount of information retrieval. While playing a selection from the LP version of Cassandra Wilson’s latest album, Glamoured, I noticed a very low pitched growling sound that I had never heard before with my old cartridge or on the CD version. When I read the credits, I realized that what I was hearing was a close-miked washboard that had been mixed in with the rest of the percussion! I particularly like using this album to test low frequency resolution. Eastern and western percussion instruments are used extensively in lieu of a traditional drum kit. Imaging was locked, well defined and seamless. This sense of seamlessness is one of two differentiators for me. I tend to prefer imaging that closely resembles a live performance as opposed to imaging that resembles the typical recording studio process of acoustically isolating the performers during the session and assembling the presentation during mix down and mastering. The Airy3 did a better job than the Shelter at approximating “live performance” imaging in my system. The other differentiating factor, for me, was resolution of surface noise. The Airy3 was quieter in my system than the Shelter was. I think the main factor here is the difference in stylus design. This is important to me since I have a number of original Jazz LPs from the 40s, 50s and 60s that belonged to my Dad. These records hold great sentimental value for me, and as you can imagine, are not in the best shape. Getting maximum musical information with minimal surface noise from these LPS is very important to me.

Either one of these cartridges would be an outstanding choice for any high end analog rig. As far as I’m concerned there is no “best” cartridge. It’s merely a matter of taste, and for my ears, my system and my media, the Airy3 is a better fit.<<

System components included Thor Audio preamp (approx. 79db gain thru MC stage), ASL Hurricane Monos, Vandersteen Fives. There was a 3-5db decrease in gain comparing my vinyl to digital sources due to the low output of the ZYX, but that was never a problem in my system.

Hope this helps you in making your decision
Wrp (System | Answers)
.

Raul, One final point; Doug was trying to be constructive in helping your posts be better received on this forum. You might want to think about your approach to people and see how it might be improved. It would make for more pleasant interactions on Audiogon for all of us.
.
Rgds,
Larry

Dear Larry: +++++ " to be a little more even handed when trying to prove your points.. " +++++

For the last few months my statement about the low bass performance of the ZYX cartridges is the same: good performance only not excellent one, and the Dmailer post confirm it.

There is nothing that you or Doug can do about, only the manufacturer can do something about. Don't try to defend the indefensible, you can't do nothing against: facts.

I understand your feelings about because you and Doug are ZYX owners ( like many other people ). Now, don't believe me: try to borrowed a Dynavector XV-1, a Colibri or a Transfiguration and you can check easyly how any of these cartridges beats your ZYX. As I already told: the ZYX are only good cartridges but not an excellent one.

I think that the ZYX design is going in the right way and only needs more time-experience for approach the excellence: do you think that the XV-1 or the Colibri is the result of a " lucky strike " ?, no is the result of many many years of research/design/test/build ( in the Dynavector case: till dead. ) and these cartridges are not perfect ones but certainly a step higher than the ZYX cartridges, sorry. The problem for you and Doug ( and many other people ) is that " rush into " ZYX like a " child with a new toy ", with blind " eyes ", with out " seen " many other superlative alternatives out there: that's was your choice.

Now, like Sirspeedy told us, if you are satisfied with your ZYX: great for you, this is the important issue.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.