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
I don't own a Dyna, but Raul provides a plausible explanation for some reviewers' preference for higher than recommended VTF's. Reviewers listen to new cartridges. New elastomers contain molecular bonds which prevent a smoothly linear compression. Once the elastomer "relaxes" a bit, from use, the cantilever can accelerate smoother, faster and reach fuller extensions. Design range VTFs now allow the cartridge to react more linearly to groove modulations - especially small, HF ones. This is why the last sonic change during cartridge break in is typically a reduction in HF "grain". The elastomer is finally allowing a smooth response for even the smallest movements.

Thom's observations are spot on, though I think he gives me too much credit. Anyone who lives with high performance cartridges learns how sensitive they are to small adjustments. With our best cartridge, the VTF window for acceptable performance is never more than .04g wide. The window for prime performance is about .01g wide. Larger adjustments bounce us right out of the zone.

As Thom said, these subtle changes have little to do with tracking/mistracking or keeping the cantilever centered in the magnetic fields. VTF has to be badly off before you have those problems. The ideal VTF is one that maintains constant stylus-groove contact while putting the LEAST external pressure on the suspension. The more pre-compressed the elastomer is, the less it can can compress when the cantilever tries to move.

In a sense the "ideal" VTF is a lot like the "ideal" antiskate setting: you want the minimum force necessary for the job. This allows the cantilever/elastomer the greatest freedom to respond quickly and fully to groove modulations. External pressures, whether downforce or sideforce, inhibit this freedom and muffle the sound. Lateral fluid damping of the arm has the same effect and for the same reason - at least on a TriPlanar with any cartridge we've used. That feature may have been a useful bandaid with the peaky MC's that were prevalent when Herb Papier first offered it, but it is not needed with modern MC cartridges.
Raul,I'm glad you have decided to give your superb cartridge/arm collection another "go round"!The business of tracking on the high side,to me,represents a potential mismatch somewhere.Not always,but I have found that there is more gained,by trying to voice a set-up by trying almost all combinations,and settling on the one that appeals best to me.That is until my "predatory" audio pals come over.Then it's time to bring in the "defensive squad"!
I always strive to set downforce closer to the lower setting,as this gives the most "air",and inner textures.Yet you can lose bass power if not careful.
One advantage I have with my Graham 2.2 is that the actual damping fluid can,also,come into "good service",when used to aid with tracking on the lighter side of the mfgrs recommendation.You must REALLY be careful here,but believe me,experimentation will prove very worthwhile.
I don't know if the XV-1 is a particularly good match with your 2.2(I assume you have this arm),but if the cartridge weight is not problematic you can use the fluid(in a good way,finally)to voice for a bit lower tracking force.
Also,I have now heard the newest Titan-i with a unipivot arm.Not the 2.2!I have,also heard it on an Air Tangent,both in the same system,that I am intimately familiar with.Though the newer unipivot is going through some voicing,I must admit that,taken as a whole,my suspicians about it was correct.At least to me.The air bearing design is clearly superior in bringing about a sense of "body" with better timbres.I doubt if any amount of voicing can match what that great arm was able to do.I can only imagine how fabulous the Kuzma Airline must be.Providing the "rap on the street" is correct.
Also,based on my rather limited experience,but enough to feel confident in this,the new Titan-i is the best sounding cartridge I have ever heard!It is superior to the ZYX Universe,that we discuss so much.From my recollection of the Univ,the Titan simply has more "body" and ambient feel.The Univ,though superb,was a bit better in high freq extention and quickness of transient attack,but the Titan-i is really close here,and clobbers the Univ in the area of overall believability.
Like your comparison of my Transfiguration Temper-v(which I have no intention of moving away from,btw)to the Colibri,the Titan-i is the more real,with the Univ letting you know it is more "there".
Hope you get to hear all these great,fun,toys!Who knows?Maybe next year I'll have an Orpheus!

Best!
Dear Sirspeedy: I don't own the 2.2, the nearest to this 2.2 is my Audiocraft AC 3300, anyway my XV-1 is running on my Lustre tonearm.

++++ " I always strive to set downforce closer to the lower setting,as this gives the most "air",and inner textures. " +++++

I do exactly contrary to, I start at the top and go down from here step by step till I achieve the best VTF.

Nice to heard that finally you find a cartridge sound that is better than the ZYX one, I knew this was only a matter of time. Good for the Titan i and good for the music.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Raul,regarding the Titan-I,you still have to take the overall set-up,and room into consideration.The Titan that I have access to,is in the INCREDIBLE,and "fully" voiced system of my "great" pal Sid!The Univ was in a set-up that was still going thropugh some changes,so to be fair,my comments are ONLY based upon that set of parameters.

Best!