In response to Theo "What does Lyra do with the trade-ins?", I've pondered over this question in the past, but so far I've not been able to arrive at a good answer. There are a couple of major reasons for this. One is that our primary limit is our production capacity. One craftsman (with some help from an assistant) can only make a certain number of cartridges with a fixed time period, and when demand for new models is high, preciously little production capacity remains to make anything else. Even if I designed a new model around a Lydian B (for example), I'd need to find someone other than Mishima to build it (because his production capacity is already back-ordered with Delos, Kleos, Skala and Titans, not to mention rebuilds of Helikons, Titans etc.). Yes, I can design more new models (or modified models) than Mishima can deal with, but doing so isn't of any use unless we can increase our production capacity by training new cartridge builders. Admittedly, we've been working on this for some years now, but the people that we are training as Mishima's apprentices need to make much more progress before they can be trusted to build (or rebuild) complete cartridges.
Two is that our older cartridge models get phased out of production not because we want to give the appearance of a fresh new product lineup every year so as to boost sales with a minimum of effort, but because I've figured out a better (and hopefully more interesting) way to build cartridges. The Lydian B was discontinued because it wasn't a good enough performer as compared to the "DC" generation (Clavis DC, Parnassus DCt, Helikon, Argo), and no longer justified its manufacturing time or costs.
If the areas of deficiency in a given design are are focused around the cantilever, stylus, coils, suspension, dampers, or even the magnets, the design can be brought up to date by changing the pertinent areas, and without too much difficulty. This was the case with the Argo i, Titan i, also the Helikon (although we never advertised that fact). By incorporating new technologies such as the Helikon Mono-derived 70x3um stylus, or the Dorian-inspired "i" suspension into existing cartridge models, we were able to add years to the product lives of the Argo, Titan and Helikon.
But when the areas of deficiency are mechanical or relate to the basic physical structure of the cartridge, it becomes far more difficult to update the design effectively. The problem with the Lydian B is that the physical structure is designed for a single large magnet and two iron polepieces, while all of our newer cartridges have two small magnets and a single non-conductive "magnet carrier" which has no magnetic properties at all. I don't think that it is possible to remake the Lydian B bodies into something that can accept the two small magnets and single magnet carrier that are the cornerstone of all "DC" designs (which include the Delos and Kleos).
The only time that I actually re-designed the mechanical structure of a prior-generation cartridge was with the Olympos, which was in essence a completely new cartridge designed around the platinum magnet and polepieces from the original blue Panassus. But that was done for a cartridge model that wasn't made in large quantities to begin with (blue Parnassus), it was done in a complex and labor-intensive manner (the body structure is machined titanium and exceeds the Titan's body in complexity), and we only made a handful of replacement bodies at a time. All of these factors resulted in quite high cost, which isn't what I believe Theo has in mind (grin).
If what is required is an update to the mechanical structure of the cartridge but doing so isn't practical, the possibilities of designing and implementing a realistic and convincing update are limited. At best, we could try to update the cantilever, coil core and windings, suspension and dampers, but although the resulting cartridge would likely sound better than the original, there is a good possibility that it still wouldn't measure up to the Dorian, let alone the Delos.
Is that amount of performance sufficient when Lyra's entry-level performance is defined by cartridges like the Delos? I'd say not, but OTOH my training as a designer is always to look for ways to improve things, and not be satisfied with a performance level that I've already reached in the past. Maybe I'm not the right person to answer the question (smile).
A third issue is how many returned cartridges we have in stock (to serve as the basis for the modified or rebuilt cartridge). It wouldn't make sense to do such a project for only 50 cartridge bodies (for example).
A fourth issue is the visual condition of the old cartridge bodies; what the new owners would be willing to accept vs. how much effort it would take to get the bodies into good condition (some cartridge bodies would be hopeless).
In any case, the dominant issue of how to increase our production capacity needs to be answered first, so I don't expect for us to be able to convert traded-in cartridges into factory-authorized pre-owned cartridges in the near future. Still, it is an interesting angle, and one that is very much worth keeping in mind for the future. I know that I sometimes look at boxes of trade-in bodies, or trays of unbuilt bodies of cartridge models that were phased out of production, or some of the cartridge prototypes that we've built over the years, and wonder if there aren't effective ways to rejuvenate them and put them back into service.
best, jonathan carr
