Dynavector XV-1s What is the REAL story?


I have read the performance parameters required for best sound in this cartridge, by the great HP,which I found interesting and perplexing.I then read,what seems to be a complete about face of HP's findings,by Mr Fremer,in Stereophile.Mr. Fremer does make a valid argument(we're talking tracking force)for correct alignment in the coils,and claims the mfgr's suggested force is the way to go.Makes sense,to me, NOT to stray from what the original designer has recommended!Yet,what do I know?It also seemed that MR Fremer was intentionally making the point,that HP was a bit clueless regarding downforce.

Well,now we have the "new audio pioneer"(I do like the guy,alot)Arthur Salvatore,on his "really fun to follow" web pages,stating that after much experience,with the XV-1s,he has concluded that MR Pearson was RIGHT,in recommending a downforce considerably higher than even the mfgr states.Obviously Mr Fremer would be incorrect.Even though his argument follows the line of ultimate reliability,as well as performance.All in a product costing about 4500 bucks--????

So,my argument is this---"WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON"???

We have a very expensive product that has gotten a considerable amount of press,where the supposedly top reviewers in the industry cannot seem to agree on a parameter that will DEFINITELY affect both sonic performance,as well as long term reliability!

They claim that "Newbees" are in short supply,and the industry is shrinking.Hmm,I wonder why!

Do we ALL cancel our subscriptions,to these "once hobbyist oriented" journels?Do we rely on forums like this to garnish the "TRUTH",where there STILL are those who "jump" at the opportunity to tout their Favorite possessions,and put in a good word for their favorite designer/manufacturers?

Or do we start to rely on our own sense of perceptions,which(believe me)really begin to "sharpen up",after you have spent your hard earned cash!!

Any thoughts are always welcome!!
sirspeedy70680e509
Dear Vincentkkho: +++++ " you have put the right components together to bring up its synergistic effect. " +++++

I agree with you, the name of the game: synergy, this is a subject that I always support on this forum.

But MrP was wrong on that " contest " on many ways, one of that was: load impedance, he choose 47k ( like always ). This figure makes synergy with some cartridges and makes no synergy with others.

Anyway, it's fun to read TAS/Stereophile and like Sirspeedy told us: " to trust your own intuitive and experienced senses! "

Regards and ebjoy the music.
Raul.
Grooves,

Loved your review of the XV-1s. A friend told me it only takes 60 hours to break in. Mine was sounding congested well beyond the 60 hours. I was ready to sell it. Finally after about 200 hours it opened up. After reading your article I said to myself, if I only read your article earlier I would have had more piece of mind knowing that break in is much longer than I expected. Your description of the cartridge matches mine exactly, but only after it breaks in. Before that it is unlistenable.
Grooves,it would have been "nice" if you had addressed the subject of the "criticality"(hope that's a word)of the dampening fluid,between the Graham 2.2,and the newer Phantom.As I'm sure you know,the 2.2 is a "Devil" to voice,as the fluid is rediculously critical,in ultimate timbre obtained.Makes or breaks the sound,and many will not go to the length needed.How 'bout the Phantom?Is it less so?This IS a critical parameter for those whose diet consists of more than re-issued rock!
Sorry,if it seems I'm trying to bait you!Really I'm not,and you surely must have a tough schedule.I could not do the overall fine,and consistent work you do.Regardless of the "human nature" criticism,you might take.Yet,and yet(sound familiar?)it is something that "would not be a bad thing to bring up in a future column,if you aren't comfortable doing so here.There are a hell of alot of Grahams out there,so it's pretty viable to cover.

Best!