2. analog
  3. 1132299685

ZYX Universe, Dynavector XV-1s, vdH Colibri, ??

Last Sunday i finally took the time to compare three cartridges; my Dynavector XV-1s (.24mv output), a friends ZYX Universe (.24mv output) and my vdH Colibri (.85mv output) with the darTZeel preamp and phono stage in battery power.

Some background. in a post from my system thread i describe the path that brought me to be experimenting with various cartridges. that post also raves about listening to battery power with the darTZeel phono stage. i promised to compare the Dynavector and ZYX to the Colibri on battery power.

so that is what i did.

the darTZeel preamp has plenty of gain (62db in the phono stage and 20 db in the gain stage of the pre itself) so even with the relatively low output of the Dynavector and ZYX there are no gain issues at all, i only needed to go to about 2 o'clock on the volume attenuator for very high volume with the 95db efficient VR9 speakers. in battery mode the darTZeel phono stage is extremely quiet; so the normal advantage the Colibri has over other cartridges with lower gain is considerably reduced.

the darTZeel phono stage is set with 100ohm loading that seemed to work well with all the cartridges but is not ideal. i know that the Colibri likes about 400-500 ohms ideally; and from what i understand the Dynavector and ZYX both are ok (if not ideal) around 100 ohms.

the Dynavector is pretty new and only has maybe 30 hours on it; so it has not yet openned up completely. i am told the ZYX is fully broken in......and my Colibri is most definitly broken in.

i am very familiar with the setup parameters of the Colibri. i run it with the arm slightly down at the back, and track it at 1.45 grams as measured by my ALM-01 Winds Electronic Stylus Pressure Gauge. with the Rockport there is no anti-skate issues.

i ran the Dynavector XV-1s at 2.70 grams and slightly down in the rear of the arm.......and the ZYX Universe at 1.95 grams and the arm level.

i had played around previously with the Dynavector for my 30 hours and had had the Universe in the system for about a week prior to get it dialed in. so i had a reasonably good idea of setup on each cartridge.

the Rockport does make it easy to switch cartridges very quickly as all you need to do is change the counterweight to the proper one for the weight of that particular cartridge. then adjust the arm length for exact stylus position (there is a groove in the platter that you sight the stylus exactly inside for perfect position), rotate the arm for visual azimuth (i can get it very very close to perfect), and set your VTF. in practice about a 20 minute job if you already know the VTF you want.

so i was able to first listen to the Colibri, switch quickly to the Universe, listen again, then switch quickly to the XV-1s, and listen again.

before i get into what i heard on Sunday i want to describe my perceptions of how the Dynavector and ZYX compared when i the Universe first arrived from my friend. for reasons described in the previous post i had purchased the Dynavector as an alternative to my Colibri and it had been in my system for about 6 weeks. i had been using my Lamm LP2 Delux phono stage with the Placette passive RVC and Tenor 300 watt Hybrid monoblocks. i liked the Dynavector; compared to the Colibri it was less exciting, less on the edge, less vivid and immediate and less explosive......OTOH although it had a little color it was fairly neutral, always natural, very involving and had very good detail if not quite like the Colibri. more of my favorite music was enjoyable compared to the Colibri.

when i installed the ZYX Universe my first impression was of slightly less smoothness and naturalness compared to the Dynavector but more of the excitement of the Colibri. i played some of the Lps that had been on the edge with the Colibri and the ZYX was more natural and under control yet considerably more exciting than the Dynavector.

on the Lamm/Placette/Tenor my initial impressions were that these were simply two good cartridges that had different perspectives. as i listened more to the ZYX i could never really get fully involved into the music as i had felt with the Dynavector or especially the Colibri. why? i'm not exactly sure. it was like i wasn't hearing as far into the music as i liked. nothing was missing from the 'checklist' but i wasn't fulfilled.

the Lamm has 57.5 db of gain, has 400 ohm loading, and is extremely quiet. it has a very slight warmth, just to the dark side of neutral; but has a textural richness and refinement that i have not heard from any other phono stage (until dart battery power). it should be an ideal match for the ZYX.

so that was how it was before i tried battery power (as described in my previous post). i hope this makes sense up to this point.

now to the three cartridge comparison.

first the Colibri. the Colibri can be a 'train wreck'. it breaks all the rules. the barrel and canteliver are out of algnment with the cartridge 'body'......so setting asthimuth you ignore the body and just align the cateliver and stylus. i have owned 3 Colibris and they are all different yet all inconsistent. they can have any length canteliver a customer wants, gold windings, copper windings, wood bodies, polycarbonite bodies.......they have such little play in their suspensions that they can 'buzz' on certain edgy types of music. they are the Formula 1 cars of cartridges. the Colibri is so immediate, so explosive, yet so natural and so incisive that if all elsewhere is not about perfect.....you will know it and there will be a problem.

OTOH when all is right the Colibri is magnificent.

long story made short; with the battery powered dart phono stage in my system; the Dynavector and especially the ZYX are not nearly in the class of the Colibri. as the system improves, the lead of the Colibri gets larger.

i used tracks on 7 Lps for this comparison.

1.Muddy Waters 'Folk Singer', 'Good Morning School Girl', Classic reissue.

the Colibri here made the guitar plucks real and there. the whole musical sense was vivid and immediate. there was not a sense of the recording chain.....just some guys doing their thing. totally involving. each note dripped with reality. brilliant colors in the vocals and guitar overtones. ALIVE.

with the Universe it sounded great, nothing missing, satisfying. but; the guitar pluck was not as vivid, the colors were less vivid, there was overall a bit of haze that only compared to the Colibri was evidant. maybe no other cartridge would expose that issue. the decay of notes was reduced which reduced the overall involvement. sounded like a different pressing. NOT ALIVE.

on the Dynavector this was more different. less energy, less edge. transients were softened. smoother and warmer. very nice. a great sense of ease but too buttoned down for me. this track should boggie. excellent bloom and note decay.

2. The Royal Ballet, side one, Classic 33rpm reissue.

Colibri; spooky good. i don't want to stop. an 'oh my god' about every 30 seconds. i try to critically listen but it's hard.....i just want to close my eyes and forget about everything. about the best reproduced strings i have ever heard. such a sense of venue, the 'subway' and 'buses' outside seem real. where am i?

ZYX Universe; a different realm......reproduced music. very good.....but less of everything. very, very good. specifically, less separation of instruments, less delicacy
and less clarity. the effortlessness of the Colibri in sorting out the complex textures is missing.

Dynavector; not the detail or energy of the Colibri but very natural. slightly veiled but warm and inviting. not
wholey real but still much beauty. good flow and pulse of the music.

it's getting late; i will continue tomorrow morning or evening as time permits.

the Dynavector and ZYX are excellent cartridges that by themselves are rightly considered SOTA. just because i hear what i hear doesn't invalidate anyone else's perspectives.

so as not to attract too many flames i want to clearly state that i limit my comments to my specific system and setup choices. there are many varibles i have not or cannot address; arms, cartridge loading, breakin, taste, settleing in. i did not do the tiny tweaking of these cartridges that one does over time to dial them in just right. OTOH the differences that i heard are considerable and not subtle.

it just one guys opinion on one particular system on one particular day.

with that said; flame away.
mikelavigne
sirspeedy70680e509
1,064 posts
 
Teres,you have a nice table,btw.--As to set up of the 2.2,it could not possibly have been correct,even discounting the anti skate issue,as I was told that the "critical fluid adjustments" were done "after" the seven man session.Sorry!Besides,the illustrious Mr Deacon's comments,regarding perceived performance clearly tell me it was NOT set-up correctly.Also,I heard it(it was still "fairly" good,btw),and I'm confident Larry knows what he's doing,at this point,yet I'll bet that arm was set up by committee.BTW--I TRULY don't care about these results,but I'm not about to give an inch to what I know to be incorrect input,over the last year.
I assure you the only reason I'm so insistant about all of this is--Larry,himself stated that though he "loved" his 2.2 he was never really all that satisfied with the performance.I want to push him to "play around with it a bit more".There's more "there" there!!For sure!!Though,at this point I'm fairly confident he's given me "the boot",thinking I'm a "kook".Can't say I blame the guy.--Also it seems clear to me that guys like Doug are off base regards the correct performance of the 2.2,pain in the ass,that it is.Of course Doug does like to correspond with Arthur S.He(Arthur),who does not, in the least bit, question "educated perceptions".Right?

Obviously,all involved in the listening session who benefited or were "happy" with the "let's say incomplete" results don't like this,too much.I completely understand,and promise I'm done "spouting" about it anymore.I'm sure everyone's thrilled!

BTW--ALL pictures,as of late look really cool with the nice Shroeder,atop your lovely looking table.
dougdeacon
3,338 posts
 
Raul,
Excellent summary. Thanks for being a good "referee"! :-)

SirSpeedy,
Whoever told you the fluid dampening was not done for our arm comparison last March was mis-remembering.

Paul and I visited Larry in November, 2004. We went for two specific purposes:

1. To let him audition the Airy 2, Airy 3 and UNIverse.

2. To help him adjust the blue fluid, which we did for each cartridge following your excellent instructions.

When we left after four long days of work his Graham's damping was optimized for a UNIverse. That was four months BEFORE the arm comparison.
sirspeedy70680e509
1,064 posts
 
Doug,you mean optimized with your aid?You own a Tri,and you feel confident you can be astute about the fine details of the fluid?I rest my case!!BTW-and I do understand how you can feel you knew what you were up against with the fluid,so I'm really not trying to be smug,but--there's fluid adjustment,and there's fluid adjustment(which MUST be done,in conjunction with vta and downforce,and anyone stating the contrary makes my argument).In your case,you can safely forget about the latter!!Also,it was the "owner" who stated he and Pat(one of the only guys who's opinion I'll take on his word,alone)had done the "super fine detail" of fluid,after my post,which was AFTER your session.Please stop stroking me with the expertise crap,when you simply cannot get around a bogus comparison,which had the victors "coming in their pants".Ain't buying it!!

Also-as I'm cleaning the weaponage,have you made your choice? :-)

Best to all.
nrchy's avatar
nrchy
2,124 posts
 
Speedy, give it a rest, you don't know anything about the set up of Larry's system during the infamous audition, and on many occasions have completely misrepresented what Larry said, about both the Graham arm and the set up.

I can't imagine what you think you need to prove, but you were not there, and don't have enough information to condemn the session, or the results.

The longer you argue from ignorance, the worse it makes you appear. There is no need for this, unless your goal is to take Rauls place as the most _______ audiophile posting here, now.
cello
645 posts
 
.
Well, I guess it would have been quite helpful and saved a lot of people’s time if I had seen this thread sometime in the last couple of weeks. I have been way too busy lately and have not been able to keep up with this thread.
.
Sirspeedy, I will be addressing you with the my post.
.
I need to clarify a few points for you. Your assumptions and points are not valid because you have your facts wrong.
.
1 - I never told you that the arm had not been touched since the listening session. I did in
fact tell you that Pat and I were shocked that when we check the VTF that it was at 2.30
Grams and that we played with it from down to 1.85 up to 2.35 and found that surprisingly, 2.15 was ideal. I was surprised that a 2.15 setting sounded best (after several trials and retrials) since most people have found that a setting between 1.90 – 2.00 on the ZYX Universe produces their best results.

2 - I also told you that the fluid tweaking that Doug, Paul and I did was back in December
of 2004 and our “get together” was in March of this year. I had to re-remind you of
the dates on another post a few months ago when you were making points incorrectly.


3 - In March the 8 of us started out listening to the Graham (after it was checked) with
a Shelter 901, Koetsu Rosewood Signature Platinum, and a ZYX UNIverse and
compared to a Schroder Reference and a TriPlanar 7. Two of the group did the set
ups with few more looking over their shoulders. I have heard both of them do set ups
on a few occasions and I can tell you that they have always been the best at set ups
in any gathering that I have been fortunate enough to be present.

4 - After the group of left in March, one remaining friend re-mounted the Graham on my table with my ZYX Universe (actually I observed) and watched as it was carefully dialed
for twenty minutes by the best person I know at setting up arms and cartridges.

Since reading your posts here, I checked with my friend and he let me know that there
was no way that he left my arm at 2.30 grams which is where I found it long after
March and nor did he leave the Anti-Skating at the extreme that you discovered when you were visiting. With the 2 hurricanes and all my business travel, I had not been listening to my table for almost 3 months. In only conclude that someone must have
played with the VTF dial and the Anti-Skating (remember, my system is in my office here there is a cleaning crew coming through every night.
.
.
I can tell you that there was 100 % consensus from 8 experienced audiophiles that the Graham did not produce results that were close to what we heard from either the Schroder Reference or the TriPlanar on any of the Cartridges.
.
You come across in your posts as a man on a mission to defend the Graham 2.2 (which I think is an excellent arm) and make subjective evaluations about people’s (who you have not met, do not know ) abilities to set up an arm. Both of my friends that did the set up for our Group of 8 have set up Graham 2.2 and are more than adequate to dial in the VTF, VTA and Azimuth.
I feel like you are flailing at any opening to defend your Graham 2.2 and you lose any sense of credibility with your attacks on people. You are way off base with your judgments of their abilities with regard to setting up tables, their ethics and or agendas.
.
If you are wondering why people appear to be defensive with you, you might try re-reading this entire thread with an open and objective mind and see how you think you might have felt if you were the recipient of the barbs that you have tossed out.
.
Go back through your postings on previous threads and see how many times you have apologized for the roughness or aggressiveness of posts that you have made.
.
I get the sense that you are so intent on getting your point across that you don’t listen (or read) what the other person is saying or the point they are trying to make. You might want to make more of an effort to understand what someone is trying to tell you instead of being intent on getting out what you have to say. I once suggested in a previous post that you take the time to compose your posts off line in a word document and re-read them before posting. You might want to think about that.
.
I found you to be a truly nice person with good intent. I don’t think your Audiogon persona reflects who you are.
.
.
.

I will leave you with the following:
.
The Graham 2.2 is a wonderful arm that I am glad that I have owned. Its ability to draw out and present music, detail and all that we chase is not even close to what I have heard produced by the Schroder Reference or TriPlanar. The Graham was so far behind the others arms and the people involved with doing the set ups are so skilled that set up is not any where near the issue here. You are challenging the observations of 8 other people based on their mutual experience that you were not present to witness. That completely flies in the face of logic. You are in no position to have a position in this situation and that is the essence of the strong responses you are getting in this thread.
.
I am more than certain that the set ups on the arms/cartridges back in March when the 8 of us got together were done at an extremely high level. I assure you that it was not an “audio party”. The comparisons of that weekend were done as carefully as possible and with the greatest effort to attention to detail to produce clear and accurate results.
.
The group of 7 other guys who got together are more than just fellow Audiophiles to me. They are good friends. To a person, they are intelligent, honest, humble, and giving and I feel quite fortunate to know them. Your points questioning any of their honesty, ability, motives, agenda are completely off base.
.
.
I hope this clears up some of the mis-conceptions and allows the rancor to die down a bit.
.
Regards to all,
Larry
.
More to discover