NOS Grace F9E question

Dear @knollbrent : The F9 is a winner.

R.

Dear @tzh21y : I hope you are enjoying your F9, certainly it's not often that we receive that kind of very good gift.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @mofimadness : Yes, any F9 ( in good operation condition. ) owner knows that. I think that in any internet audio forum any one posted that is nothing but a good cartridge: a winner.


R.

Dear @knollbrent @tzh21y : """ the decisions I’m making so far are in the winning category, not the losing category. """

Yes.

Btw, not the OP and certainly you are not asking for something better and yes the F9 is a winner tells other thing makes no-sense and bortding to the stupidity.

I know the Lyra Kleos is a winner ( I own it and listen it in other systems as the top Lyra’s. ) but in that Lyra cartridge series exist four other models that are better: Etna, Etna SL, Atlas and Atlas SL but this in no way means that the Kleos is not a winner because it’s ! !

In those all times when existed a huge competition for the MM market with several manufacturers and even " hundreds " of cartridge model the F9 was the " horse warrior " for Grace over the world. Yes, exist other Grace models that are better or other vintage cartridges that could be better as Acutex but you or the OP are not asking for.
Your F9 can competes easily with the 2MBlack by Ortofon.

Now, this winner you can up grade in significant way through SoundSmith whom developed a stylus replacement for this cartridge and the options there are more than one because you can go from the F9 to the very well regarded Grace Ruby as @lewm mentioned.

Btw, against whom competed Grace in the 80’s: Audio Technica, Technics, Sony, Nagaoka, Acutex, Azden, Elac, ADC, Empire, B&O, Micro Acoustics, Stanton, Signet, Pickering, Nagatron, Pioneer, Sonus, Micro Seiki, Philips, Garrot, Goldring, Grado Astatic, Glanz, Ortofon, JVC, AKG, Sumiko, Fidelity Research, Exel, VDH, etc. etc.

So as you can imagine was a hard/fierce competition and was the F9 the one that grace choosed to be its " horse warrior " not the other Grace models.

R.

I forgot to mention the USA Icon: SHURE  ! !

R.

Dear @tzh21y @knollbrent : The F9E will perform with better quality performance levels if is loaded at 100kohm and remember that capacitance load has " something to say " with MM cartridges.

R.

Dear @lewm : """  is that the proof of the pudding is in the listening. """

could be but this depends of the quality level performance of your room/audio system and your main music/sounds priorities. What for you can sounds great for me or other person can sounds " terrible ".

R.

Dear @lewm : ""  Grace Ruby with SS OCL retip? ........ Only that it is very good in its own right. """

I never heard it but I can tell you that each one of my cartridges that send for a " refresh " or or changes in cantilever/stylus tip all of them improved  by a wide margin over the stock designs.

Today boron/jewel cantilevers and different type of stylus shapes ( line contact. ) as Micro Ridge or VDH and the like always change for the better those vintage very good cartridge " motors ".

Only to remember that mine cutex or Technics when return from VDH its performance grow-up lmost " orders of magnitud ".

I just can't imagine how good the Grace 9 " motor "  could be with the VDH chnages.

R.

@lewm , everything is important when you send a cartridge to a re-tipper ( I mean the re-tipper task. ) and the suspension fine tunning and new suspension dampers makes a lot of differences for the better and I said it because the " refresh " in my cartridges was only that and always returned the cartridge as it was a " new " performer at least the experiences listen was it.


@knollbrent , very good move you will be happy about.

R.

Dear @lewm: First than all and when speak of Grace ( in this case the F9 that runs Discrete-4 too. ) we are speaking of vintage cartridges and it does not matters if it’s Grace, AT, Acutex, Technics or what ever key word is vintage.

Even if the vintage cartridge is NOS the problem belongs always ( it does not matters if you or me can be aware of it, that we can’t detect it. ) at the cartridge suspension because all those years pass-on. Cantilevers and stylus tips suffer a lot less over the time because were not deteriorate as the cartridge suspension.

In the years I started the MM thread I never wanted to change anything in the stock vintage cartridges even I was against the swift between some models in a manufacturer series ( Frankstein cartridges. ) and was precisely with the Acutec 315LPM that I learned about. The cartridge was " refreshed " by VDH, same cantilever/stylus and the imp´rovement was a huge one. When I did it the same with the Technics EPC 100CMK4 the cartridge return and its performance was improved.

Other than fine tunning cartridge suspension the change in catilever/stylus always will be makes a higher quality performance levels.

In other thread some ( I think in the MM one. I can’t remember for sure. ) of us discussed the best material for cantilevers and that was solid Boron, its characteristics are way superior to aluminum, titanium, berilyum and the like. Why solid over the pipe type? well the hollow in a cantilever produces/increment resonances against the solid material. Even when the LOMC manufacturers still can found out boron pipe always choosed solid boron .
In some of my cartridges I did it and solid boron is way less resonant.
Same pass with berilyum that even when still existed manufacturers gone for boron. Technics did it with one of its tonearm when choosed boron over berilyum but in its top cartridge was the same.
We can take any vintage MM cartridge and retip it with boron cantilever and no matter what always will performs with way higer quality levels, always.

Where belongs/resides the truw /real value with the vintage MM cartridges: to its cartridge " motors " and design quality excecution. Not to the cantilever or the Stereohedron stylus shape. If you take your 981LZ and send to retip with boron and MR or Ogura like stylus shape you will have an outstanding performer, same for any vintage MM cartridge.

I don’t know you but I’m always looking how to improve the quality performance levels of what I own and latter the option to add/change something new in my room audio system

As always in audio all depends on ignorance/knoledge level and each one priorities and mine is to stay truer to the recording no matter what. This is my main target.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear lewm, if I remember you was in that cantilever build materiasl . Anyway, solid boron is the way to go.

In those old times the berilyum was the " fashion " or the boron pipe because almost all before that cartridge designs came with aluminum cantilevers and the very top/exoctic designs with ruby/diamond materials.

In those times Dynavector choosed for diamond/ruby instead berilyum but latter on switched to solid boron not pipe one and is not the only example.Satin was another that gone for solid boron and not berilyum or boron pipe.

lewm why do you think that even that the Technics EPA100MK2 tonearm were builded as main material boron they choosed to use additional damping in that tonearm? the tonearm wand is a pipe and way resonant that's why almost all tonearm manufacturers choose to damp its designs. 

But in those old times were learning times for the industry and that's why we can seen so many different stylus " new " shapes but several cantilever build materials as the ones we named but titanium, ceramic, carbon fiber and the like. Everything was a learning way to can offer to the customers something " new " due that fierce competition and if for the manufacturers was a learning time for the audiophiles that has  higher ignorance levels was a learning time too.

If we take almost any MM vintage top manufacturer almost everyone had its " very special stylus shape " that as a fact where only a variations in between tryiying to " impress " the customers.  A true/real invent on stylus shape in those times was the Shibata one followed by variations till today but in those times you can listen the manufacturers speaking of: parabolic, extended elliptical, analog 6, superelliptical and the like.

Repeat, the real/true value on those vintage cartridges resides in its motors.

R.

Der @lewm : Between other ADC used titanium too. Btw, when I talk about MM I'm reffering to all: induced magnet, moving iron, moving flux, electrect, etc. etc. I'm refering to non MC cartridges.

Koetsu are solid boron. Even that hollow boron could lower the moving mass the trade-offs against it are to high.

Now, what makes  the greatness of any cartridge is the sum of the parts and its quality excecution. In that sum of the parts the motor is the must important issue: it's " the design ". Cantilever and stylus shapes are only variations but what live on/trhive is the cartridge motor.

R.

Dear @lewm : Ceramic is even more resonant and very bad for cantilevers. Other than in cartridges some manufacturers used in headshells and tonearms and all sounds really bad. Ceramic is not for the analog rig, at least not in the condition the manufacturers used it.

@jollytinker here you can read on all the F9 line:

https://www.vinylengine.com/library/grace/f9.shtml 

and the F8 line has 5mv.

R.

Dear @lewm : That's transient response and speed where LOMC are way better but to each his own.

@tzh21y , thank's to confirm you are satisfied with your F9 gift and if what you said is new then still will improves a little with more hours playing. Good !

R.

Dear @jollytinker : Maybe could be better to you to look for a different cartridge " taste " that could be the excelent Acutex M320 or Acutex 315/320LPM, B?O MMC1 or MMC2 or even the Astatic MF200 or MF100.

All those are MI type not MM and with enough output level for you.

If you want MM there are many very good contenders in the AT, Empire, Pickering/Stanton Azden, Shure, Nagaoka, etc, etc

First enjoy and lear what you can learn with what you own, give you some time before switch to other cartridges.

Yes, the temptation is big .

R.

Dear @lewm : Agree that no one can change the speed of what the TT has. Maybe I explasin me in wrong way.

"""  my interpretation is that MC cartridges may lose the trailing edge of notes more quickly than do the other types, which makes them seem to emphasize the attack.... """

The decay time through a LOMC cartridge is faster and sound faster than with MM one. First because lower rounds of wire at the coils and second because are truer to the recording and you can attest this when you attend to an acoustic lmusic live event and are seated at near field: a few meters. Here you can listen how fast is the decay time of the different instruments that when you are seated at 30m. that decay time is longer because the " reberberation " effect of the venue. 
We have to remember that normally in good recordings the recording microphones are at near field position and from this point of view the LOMC are truer to the recording.

In a MM/MI performance the bass range almost always is floating/larger decay time that the tigthness / no overhang/low distortions in a LOMC ones.

Obviously that all depends of the quality level of each one room/audio system.

Your point seems valid.

R.

Dear @halcro : I was thinking as you and as a fact I was whom brougth to Agon that link. Unfortunatelly we never had the opportunity to ask them directly about and today two of them pass away.

But in other forum with several recording engineers I had that opportunity because they posted there and were gentlemans that made it their work through the best regarded quality recording labels.

Well, rigth there and after different discussions overtime I learned that the main priorities of all of them were different ( many reasons about. ) of the normal audiophile room/audio system priorities because in reality are way different what they are looking for and how each one of them is biased and what system use to monitoring and the like.
There are great recordings and a lot more really bad.

A room audio system LP recording reproduction is a total different " animale " than a recording studio/mastering and each one of us music/sound priorities are different too. Yes, you can think that they and us want it the same: extreme/perfect quality performance levels but that happens only a few times.
. Two different worlds.

If we follow them we just can’t grow up and can’t achieve the real qualituy our system can shows.

I’m not diminish in any way their job that’s a main important subject only that is a different world and not the audiophile world.

Do you think that those ( any ) recording professionals own top audiophile electronics or speakers as the top Magico/Wilson or the like and TTs as the Exclusive P3 or SP10MK3 or top Clearaudio statement TT or top cables and everything we audiiophiles own. Top highgain phonolinepreamps, Cobra tonearms.? Do you think that their system outperforms the M.Lavigne system?   No they own nothing of that level not even what I have in my humble/modest system. ! !

Obviously that each one of us have the privilege to make a choice. As you I did it many years ago but I always say that each day is a learning one and through the time I learned about. Sooner or latter you will learn or maybe not is up to you.

Anyway only a point of view. My main room/audio system music/sound priority/target is stay truer to the recording and I don’t care of other matters. It’s me not what the engineers did it, they already did their job and now I must do mine at home. This is my task no mater what.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


Btw, I remember when I started in audio: what I wanted is to have the electronics/speakers that the recording engineers/professionals uses, go figure !.

As I said every day is a learning day and time to analize some great sounding LP recording labels where engineers used audiophile systems. This is an exception because normally it’s not this way.

Examples: Wilson Audio where D.Wilson was a recording engineer before started Wilson Specialities. I own some of his old recordings where we can note that he always used subwoofers to monitoring/evaluated his recordings.
Well, we can take any of newer of his recordings under Wilson Audio label ( Center Stage for example. ). He created/designed a dedicated speaker monitor for his self and that was the Watt and latter on added lower bass range and converted in the Watt Puppies. You can read in those recording information that for the final evaluation he used his WAMM 4 towers Wilson 3/4 ton. design nd SS electronics with top ll around gear.

Other is Telarc that has some great recordings quality sound where the engineers choosed big Threshold electronics and biamp speakers made it expressely for Telarc by ADS and latter used the speaker monitors by ADS model L2030 and L1530. Always biamp. Stand alone bass range is a must for top quality recording sound.

Reference Recordings is other very good example where the engineer Proff. Johnson used his full SS Spectral great electronics, with the big Duntech Sorvegein speakers, mated with the Versa Dynamics top TT and using Lyra cartridges. Nothing less !!

But all those are the exception, normally recording engineers has no specific idea of what we audiophile are looking for, that's the way the audio industry educated almost all. Sheffield Labs recordings is a little different because are D2D.

All these gentlemans priorities coincide with audiophiles priorities because they are audiophiles and knows what audiophiles are looking for and that's why their recordings have that astonishing quality levels.

If you compare Water Lily that came from KA is a little inferior to ll those and others like the Rega recordings.

MM/MI are good but the reference is LOMC units.

Again, I’m talking of quality of the sound.

R.