Changing from an XV1-S

Dcarol, what had many of us vibrating and contorting was not that you want to change cartridges. I don't expect everyone to love the XV-1s. There are several great cartridges I could love. However, you seem to have made up your mind on your own thread after one post from Mike and this "newer technology", and "the XV1-S technology is 'getting on'" reasoning as to why you wanted to change doesn't make sense to some of us. To me it is nonsense. Most of us just change because we want to, or because we want/like a different sound. That kind of reasoning we understand. :-)

In the end it doesn't really matter to anyone but you why you want to change. But if you make statements like some of those you have made on this thread be prepared to take some heat. ;-)

As crazy as it sounds, there are dealers who will loan out cartridges for a home trial. I got to try the Orpheus L before making the purchase. I know of a dealer that lent out $12k Allaerte cartridges. But, one has to have a pretty close relationship with a dealer to get that kind of privilege.

Even a home trial is not entirely definitive because it does take some time to acclimate to the new sound, evaluate the result and then make the myriad adjustments (change loading to the cartridge, change VTF, change VTA, change tubes in the phonostage). The adjustments are particularly tricky because they are interactive. For example, changing VTA affects frequency balance as does changes in loading. So, one should do both at the same time to find the right combination -- one cannot optimize just one parameter then go on to another.

Still, one can determine the basic character of a cartridge fairly easily WITH EXPERIENCE.

>>08-03-10: Dcarol
I think I need that audiophile dictionary<<

So you can get one person's definition of etched, musical, organic, sumptuous, detailed, PRaT, detailed, warm, vivid, blah blah blah?

Just go listen for yourself.

Far too many people, including many posting in these threads, hear what they read not what they hear.

IMO

Dan_ed

Heat... not too good with taking it.

I have made up my mind that I want to change the XV1-S as I am looking for something better. I like the rest of the system... is that so bad?

Yes, the VPI Classic costs £2200 and the XV1-S £3300 and it seems the wrong way to do things BUT I know I can get more from this setup.

Eventually I may ditch the Classic but for now it is staying.

Perhaps I am showing my age (53), but I remember a time, not that long ago, when it was generally recognized by most audiophiles (in my circles), and certainly by the audiophile press, that the establishment of a fairly-well agreed-upon descriptive vocabulary was a very important thing. Indeed, one of the greatest contributions of mags and their better reviewers (JGH, HP, JN, MF, and others), was the creation of a descriptive vocabulary. To dismiss the importance of this is, to me, simply way too cynical. Of course we should all go out and listen for ourselves, but then what would be the purpose of a forum like this; or at the very least, of a thread like this, if there can be no way to describe what we are hearing in a way that is meaningful to others? If someone does not have the opportunity to go out and hear for one-self, would it not be very valuable to hear meaningful descriptions of what others are hearing? I know it has sometimes been in-vogue to dismiss a reviewer like HP (to use an example) as a pompous dope, but speaking for myself, I can say that after years of reading his reviews, whenever I made a purchase decision based, in part, by his description of a piece of equipment, I was able to verify his findings. The establishment of a descriptive vocabulary has been invaluable for me. It can work.

IMO, the main reason that there seems to be an abandonment of meaningful descriptive vocabulary is that there has also been abandonment of the use of live, unamplified music as a reference. We can argue this point all over again, but the truth is that live music offers much more to describe. There are simply a lot more layers of information that have not been wiped out by electronics. This forces the use of a more descriptive vocabulary. I am not suggesting that only unamplified music can be used as a reference, just that it is a superior reference.

Let's take this thread as an example. It took forty+ posts to arrive at what we THINK the OP is looking for sound-wise with a cartridge change; and it's still very vague. There's got to be a better way. I think there is.