I agree with Raul's recommendation. Having said that, I can tell you that I have owned a VDH MC1S for many years and still occasionally use it. Also, while I cannot say with authority that this is true, I have seen it mentioned several times that the ZYX R100 is the same (OEM) as the Monster Cable Alpha 2 that I also owned several years ago. Perhaps my comments will be helpful.
First thing to consider is that the VDH has considerably higher output than the ZYX; more than twice the output of the ZYX (.65 mv+ vs .25mv; although the different tolerances used bring the output levels a little closer to each other). Compliance is higher with the VDH. The VDH is a bold sounding cartridge with excellent dynamics and speed. Tonality is very neutral with the VDH; perhaps too much to the grey/white side of things. Soundstage presentation is very different. The VDH is more up-front with considerably larger images. The Monster presented smaller individual images further back in the soundstage, but with excellent specificity and stability. This created a sense of the soundstage being larger than that of the VDH, but that is only a result of the VDH's images being larger and seeming to "crowd" the same volume of space. Overall, while the Monster could seem to be a little more refined, to me the VDH sounds more like what live music sounds like; sometimes very aggressive and even ugly. Of course those results were with the two arms that I used at the time; Syrinx PU3 and ET2 linear arm. In spite of the two arms being very different (pivot/linear) the differences were consistent. Good luck.
First thing to consider is that the VDH has considerably higher output than the ZYX; more than twice the output of the ZYX (.65 mv+ vs .25mv; although the different tolerances used bring the output levels a little closer to each other). Compliance is higher with the VDH. The VDH is a bold sounding cartridge with excellent dynamics and speed. Tonality is very neutral with the VDH; perhaps too much to the grey/white side of things. Soundstage presentation is very different. The VDH is more up-front with considerably larger images. The Monster presented smaller individual images further back in the soundstage, but with excellent specificity and stability. This created a sense of the soundstage being larger than that of the VDH, but that is only a result of the VDH's images being larger and seeming to "crowd" the same volume of space. Overall, while the Monster could seem to be a little more refined, to me the VDH sounds more like what live music sounds like; sometimes very aggressive and even ugly. Of course those results were with the two arms that I used at the time; Syrinx PU3 and ET2 linear arm. In spite of the two arms being very different (pivot/linear) the differences were consistent. Good luck.