Glanz moving magnet cartridges


Hi,

I have just acquired an old Glanz G5 moving magnet cartridge. However, I cannot find out any details about this or the Glanz range or, even the company and its history.

Can anyone out there assist me in starting to piece together a full picture?

Any experiences with this or other Glanz's; web links; set up information etc would be warmly received. Surely someone knows something!

Thanks in hope
dgob
Addendum, My assumption about possible connection between
the Astatic and the Glanz is even more strenghtened by
the folowing consideratios. I compared (visualy) my own
Astatic MF 200 with the pictures of the Glanz 51.They look to me like a twin. Besides both have the marking 'MF' on the corpus. Then 'Glanz' (shine) is an German word so probable the Japanese producer made this 'brand' for some German importer. I am not sure if 'Astatic' is a similar American 'brand' but on my cart there is this inscription: Conneaut, Ohio. Made in Japan for Astatic.
Well Raul is very 'astatic' about his Astatic MF 100 and (even more so?)about his MF 200. He also mentioned to me to have posted his MF 300 to Axel with some 'exotic' intentions. Ie : beryllium cantilever with the Gyger II stylus.
My own Astatic MF 200 has an Shibata stylus while the 300
has, according to the seller, an elliptical stylus. I have no idea what kind of cantilever/stylus combo the MF 100 has.
My wild quess is that Glanz 7 is the same cart as the Astatic MF 100 while Glanz 5 should be the same as Glanz 5.
If this is actually the case than it logicaly follows that Raul and Dgob have, uh, the same 'teste'. The 'mystery' solved by Nandric?

Regards,
Addendum 2, Well according to the logic of identity 'everything is identical with it self'. According to some logician :' Glanz 5 = Glanz 5' is true because of the meaning. Aka 'analytic truth'. However I made an error. My intention was to state that Glanz 5 is the same as the Astatic FM 200.

Regards,


Wait, Nicola, didn't you start out by saying that the Glanz MF51 appeared identical to the MF (FM?) 200?

If so, then Glanz MF51 = Astatic MF200 = Glanz 5. Clearly, something is rotten in Denmark.
Dear nandric: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1252605722&openflup&2&4#2

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/glanz/cartridge-data.shtml

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1252605722&openflup&12&4#12

Nothing to comment on Glanz/Astatic other that the MF-200 is an stellar performer. On the MM/MI thread are my experiences with Glanz, nothing that the MF-200 can't do it, even I don't have any more the Glanz.

I know that for Dgob Glanz is his star but not for me, period.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Raul,

I have documented comment from yourself that you have NEVER heard a Glanz, but that you decided not to listen to any of their "G" range because of some prejudice you have about integrated cartridges. Has this position changed recently? If it has I would love to know the persons from whom you bought and to whom you sold it/them - as well as the experience you had and with which Glanz!

The links you reposted are clearly answered and developed on within the course of this thread but that might demand a closer reading. For example, I thought you were aware that I have fully assessed the Astatic/Glanz relationship and can confirm that the performance differences are as marked as the noted construction similarities. All of this is set out in this thread.

Of course, if prejudice is allowed to govern your experience, you can reject anything you like. I would like to think that you would not spread such blind prejudice and ignorance but we are obviously very different people.

As always...