2. analog
  3. 1173550723

Dyscoveries on Dyna, Denon, Supex, Technics,FR,Ik

Dear friends: Over the time and testing/trying different cartridges ( " old " and new ones ) with different tonearms to find the " best " performance on each cartridge I find some interesting subjects that I want to share with all of you:

Denon 103: this is one of my oldest cartridges that I own and I use it for a while many years ago. In the last three years every time that I mounted and hear it I can't heard it for more than half hour, that's why I always treat it like a " rubbish cartridge " in my posts about. I try it with almost every single tonearm that I own and the result was always the same.
Then, I take in count that in all the tonearms ( removable and fixed headshell ) I can't tighten to much the headshell screws because the 103 is " open " ( input to output ) all the way where the screw goes and if I try to really tighten then the screw goes out of the cartridge body ( it is dificult to me this explanation because my English problems, I hope you can understand ).
I don't like to tailored the cartridge sound through tight ( more or less pressure ) the headshell screws, I always tighten the screws at " its limits " where IMHO and experiences there are less resonances/vibrations on it with better overall performances.
So, what to do?, it happen that I have an Audio Technica AT-LH18/OCC headshell ( headshell weight: 18grs. ) that has screwed holes underneath the headshell ( these holes are 2mm in deep, don't cross/pass the headshell ) in this manner I can tight the screws at maximum with out any trouble, well this was a great solution ( along with the weight of the headshell ) because I mounted the 103 in the Dynavector 505 ( similar to 507 ) and the performance change for the better like night and day, now I can hear the 103 for more than half an hour: very good improvement, this not means that now the 103 is at the XV-1/Myabi/etc performance level: no, but now the 103 has a decent performance that for its price is very good.

Dynavector XV-1: this one is one of my favorite cartridges, I really like it. It is a cartridge that almost always perform very good in almost any tonearm. Well I never be satisfied with " very good " performance I always look for excellent/exemplary performance.
I read some posts where XV-1 owners posted that this cartridge is a very good match with the Dynavector 505/507 tonearms and this was not my own experience about, it sounds good but nothing more.
I decide to try a little hard on the subject with: VTA/VTF/load impedance/etc,/etc with out any " great " results.
Then I decide to try with different headshells ( other than the original 507/505 ones ) till I find that with a light weight headshell ( Denon 100% magnesium, 6gr. The Dyna headshells weight: around 14-15 grs. ) the performance was/is glorious for say the least: I never heard ( any where ) better XV-1 performance that in this set-up.

Fidelity Research MC 702: this is a very " old " MC cartridge design. It is an integral headshell design, bulky one ( " ugly " ? ) at 30-32 grs, low compliance 6-7 Cu, low output 0.2mv and likes VTF 2-3grs.

I own this cartridge for at least 20 years and I buy it second hand in almost new/pristine condition. After many years I set up ( last December ) in my Micro Seiki MAX 282 tonearm ( it likes tonearms like: Ikeda, Dynavector, Audiocraft, SAEC, etc, etc ) and for the very first musical note I knew that this cartridge was something very special.
After 20 hours the sound performance was/is formidable/marvelous, I don't have words to describe my " surprise ", the best I can tell is that the music flow easily through this cartridge like in almost any other ( any where ) cartridge I heard.
If you " see " it ( second hand ) and if you have the right tonearm and phonolinepreamp then buy it!!!!!

Supex SDX 2200R: Another " old " MC design with screw open body type design ( like the 103 you need the right headshell ), ruby cantilever and low output 0.2mv. Man

I make the set-up on the Lustre GST 801 tonearm and sound was terrible at the begin, I have to wait 30 hours for the suspension settle down.
This was/is a great cartridge too, IMHO it competes with cartridges like the Universe ( are very similar in quality performance ) or any other today ones. Many people look for the Supex 900 series ( that I owned ) well the Supex Ruby beats easily those ones.

Audio Technica ATML 180 OCC: One of the greatest MM cartridges ever made.
This model ( I understand ) never sale in USA, the one that was on sale was the ATML 170 and 160 ( still very good ).

Till you hear a MM cartridge with the right phonolinepreamp you can't understand how good/great are the MM cartridges. During my last trip I was in San Diego and Norm heard in his system ( I think for the first time ) a MM cartridge the Empire EDR.9: he was happily surprised, he really likes the quality sound performance of this 100.00 dls MM cartridge.

Some MM cartridges like this one not only compete with any top MC cartridge out there but in some ways beat them, yes ( IMHO ) is better that any single Koetsu I heard it, that any ZYX or Lyra.
It is incredible that a 500.00 MM cartridge could be better performer than a 6-8K MC one.
This cartridge I mated with the Technics EPA 100MK2.

Technics 205CMK4: A marvelous MM cartridge. As good the Audio Technica is this one is better!!!!
What can I say about?, almost nothing but: Magic Diamond, Allaerts, Dynavector, Transfiguration, you named: the Technics is at least at the same level in any single sound performance parameter and beat almost all those MC cartridges for neutrality/natural tone balance, like I already say: marvelous cartridge!!!!!, if you have the tonearm and right phonolinepreamp then buy it!!!!
Mine is matched with the Micro Seiki MAX 282.

Ikeda 9REX: This one is a today MC cartridge with a unique design characteristic for a MC cartridge: it does not use cantilever ( like the cutter lhate/heads on the recording ), the design is with out cantilever. It is a very low output 0.16mv, weighty: 17grs, low compliance: 6CU and like VTF 2.8grs.

It is obvious that this cartridge is not for everyone, not only need the right tonearm and the very best phonolinepreamp out there but a lot of patience to obtain the best performance.
When you achieve this " best performance " you knowed because you will be in heaven.
The sound performance of this cartridge is a " little " different for all we know: the inmediacy of the sound and transients are second to none, the pitch/texture/no overhang/tight/fast bass is second to none, the high frequencies extension and speed are second to none, etc, etc.
You can't be near the live music like with this Ikeda cartridge: this one really is truer to the recording audio device!!!
You have to be a experienced music lover who attend very often to live events to understand what you are hearing through the Ikeda cartridge, you can't compare its sound performance with the sound performance of any other cartridge: it is not only the subject if it is better or not but the subject is that is different/near the live event.
It is an infamous bad traker: it does not like any single dust in the LP or in the stylus, we have to have everything in pristine condition. It takes more than 200 hours to hear it at its best. Like I told you: we need patience and know how.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas
dgad
782 posts
 
Raul, Sirspeedy,

Forgive me for getting involved. But as a former owner of the PC-1,XV-1s, and having owned the My Sonic Labs Eminent (PC-1 equivalent almost) Raul is correct in his description of the sound. I think his description is a bit "strong" but he is spot on. The PC-1 is a bit hot in the treble. Having owned one, and most of the cartridges discussed hear, I feel confident in that statement. It also does have a bit of a bloat in the midbass area. I have tried the PC-1 in quite a few arms, w. quite a few phono stages. It faired best w. a solid state phono stage and can help in a lean system. In some systems it should balance in very well. It should be described as such.

Albert,

I wonder about the PC-1 Supreme. Time will answer. I know I told you I was very HOT about the PC-1 initially. Especially since I also owned a Jade (I honestly miss it but not for the price). In contrast to the Jade, the PC-1 is more dyanamic and has a little better bass. It doesn't have the same magic as the Jade, but it has its own magic. But to be honest, if you really want magic The Urushi was the best for that (and lacking highs & bass but yes it did have magic)

After living with both the PC-1 and Titan I I can now state that the Titan I for me is one of the most balanced cartridges I have heard to date. The Dynavector might be a touch more natural in sound but a little restricted in dynamics or bass in comparison. The PC-1 is a very good cartridge. When I heard it I wanted it. It has something that entices you on first listen. But after extended listening the PC-1 was found to be not the best match in my system which currently is voiced very close to neutral with all my equipment being very neutral as well. To let you know, I currently have 4 different phono stages in house. Solid State/battery, 2 w. SUTs, and tube w. out SUT. Nothing like hearing the difference between cartridges when you bypass a SUT phono stage and use either a SS or pure tube.

Thomasheisig,

I don't want to disagree with you but the description you give is the opposite of what I heard. Also the opposite of Rauls. I think maybe something wrong w. the PC-1 you had. HP's description is correct only he makes it sound like a good thing, when in fact it is a good thing only for some music. Many reviewers use words in a way to make things sound good, when in fact if you read carefully, they are colorations.

PC-1 was loved for some Jazz, Male Vocal and some music requiring more body. But this ended up being 10% of my collection. The Titan I was so close in sound w. more natural highs, and better bass that the PC-1 was not needed. Mind you, I had the Titan I in the Phantom (Tara Zero phono cables) and the PC-1 in my Schroder. The Titan I now is in the Schroder and it has reached an elevated performance level compared to the Phantom (music is played w. a certain freedom from the speaker that just floats in space and beyond the equipment). So the Titan I is a cut above the PC-1 in more respects now.

My listening tests by the way, are usually done w. some friends who are not audiophiles. BUt they are musicians. We all felt the same way in comparing the PC-1 to the Titan I. (mind you the ZYX Universe was in there as well, but that is a separate post).
sirspeedy
738 posts
 
Well,I must admit these October 4th posts are really interesting!!

Albert....this is "really" funny,because I had the sneaky suspicion it "was" your set-up Raul spoke of.No apparent reason,other than the geography.

Thomas....I'm kina liking your new-found hard edge honesty,even in such a controversial(harmless,in reality)subject.

Dgad...."that" was a great post(from my own perspective).It was thorough and personally I'm in no position to question anyone!

All in all,what "is" consistent and "logical" is each individual hobbyist attempt to listen on their own,and take reviews with a grain of salt....STILL,I have a sneaky suspicion the PC-1 has "much more legs" than some think,and I admit to not being familiar with it.

Albert(just in jest)...I have heard some "word on the street" opinions of your own system voicing.Heh,heh,heh -:)

I'll keep it under my hat,just to be intriguing!!

Seems,one thing is "consistently" clear...The Dynavector XV-1s must be an amazing design,and holds up to time(it's now been around awhile,and holds off competition like Roger Federer did,at the U.S. Open).I heard it,and it was A/B'd to the also fine Myabi.My taste slightly preferred what the Dyna brought to the table.

The Titan i(like the Dyna)has been around for awhile too.This cartridge I've heard about a zillion times,at a dear friend's home.He is an obsessed LP collector(the collection could pay for a small Island Nation,if he sold it,I have NO doubts)with a superb system.

The Titan i,to me,is about as perfect a sounding design(on the Lp's we play)as I'd want.It seems to do about everything incredibly well!...Not "just" well,but "over the top superb"(I don't own it,btw).....Some cartridges seem to be blessed with a higher "Fabulosity Quotient" than others,over a wider range of music "and" system configurations.Regardless of how those set-ups are voiced!!...."That" point alone could support another thread!

I own a Transfiguration Orpheus(just in case anyone is interested).I've owned three previous Trannies,and before that, four different Koetsu "stone body" types(loved them).

My Tranny Temper-V was absolutely "smoked" by the Orpheus.I have set up the Orpheus in a friend's set-up,who has almost identical equip as me.I have a load of listening experience there,too.My own set up is "hopefully" going to be up and running soon(I pray,because I've been down for almost a year,due to really crappy support...ugh).

I only have 12 hours on my Orpheus,but still know it(on a Phantom/Cosmos series IV)like the back of my hand."It" is a great cartridge,but I have to admit to being surprised there is not as much "talk" about it as some others.

Oh well,need to choose which wine to be had with dinner,so I have to retreat to my "ping-pong table" wine rack(hey it works).

Best to all,and I am totally envious of those who are atending RMAF!!
rauliruegas OP
13,129 posts
 
Dear Albert: You already know exactly what I think on what you posted on your system ( I don't want to start anything on it here ) even trying to help I already give my suggestions on the overall subject.

+++++ " Not everyone hears the same as Raul ... " +++++

fortunately don't because it is on the " differences " where we can/could learn.

Albert, I stop to buy new today MC cartridges because I understand/find that there is nothing really " new " that really helps to improve the quality sound reproduction performance in our audio systems, there are some new cartridges that are not better but only different and the PC-1 is a clear example of that fact and I'm sure that the new PC-1 low output will be a little different but not a better one: why? because it is a similar design.
Something that could confirm that the PC-1 is not what the " reviewers " rave is that you can see many people that put on sale the PC-1.

I already posted in other thread that over the years there are almost nothing better on real cartridge grow up quality performance, there are some exceptions and I can name some of them: Titan i, XV-1, Colibri, Allaerts MC2/Formula 1, Transi V, Ruby 2, REX 9, Ortofon 7500, Insider.

We can ( like the audio industry and reviewers want ) to close the eyes to that fact about " nothing really better " on cartridges and we can take for example all those Agon rave posts on the " almost " arcaic " ( I say with respect about ) 103 and 103R cartridges and not only that but some builders are taking the 103 " motor " to build new cartridge designs: ZU and Magic Diamond are only two examples on that.

There are many cartridge options out there and some builders only care about " business " making on the same model other ones differing only in its output level but not a new real design.

I'm waiting and " hungry " to start again buying new MC cartridges I hope that sooner or latter I can/could do it, in the mid time I'm learning and enjoying not only the wonderful MM cartridge designs but MC ones too ( mostly great " old " ones. ) with top quality sound reproduction performance.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas OP
13,129 posts
 
it has to : IMHO we can't.

Raul.
rauliruegas OP
13,129 posts
 
Dear friends: Talking here about MM/MC cartridges ( new and old designs ) it is interesting to " touch " the name TECHNICS and in some ways give this manufacturer a special recognition due to its great cartridges/TT/tonearms " old " designs.

Several of their analog products, IMHO, are unbeatable till today, for example:

the MM cartridges: EPC-205C MK4 ( that I report on it in other thread ) and the memorable EPC-100C MK4.

MC cartridge: EPC-305 MK2 ( that I'm enjoying right now thanks to its great quality performance that compete against any today MC design. )

tonearms: EPA-100 and EPA-100 MK2 and the EPA-500.

turntables: SP-10 MK2 and MK-3.

it is curious that all those " old " TECHNICS products were designed around 1981 and 1983 ( more than 25 years ago ) that seems the " Era Gold " of Technics analog production.

Some of those products have " unique " " thinking and material design.
I'm very proud to own some of them and more of that to enjoy it with my today audio system, in some ways : something and a must to hear!

My hat off to all those TECHNICS people that were committed to quality perfection designs and made possible to achieve that so high quality sound reproduction performance audio analog products in favor of the Music enjoyment!!!

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
More to discover