Theory about Fidelity Research MC & PMC Carts

@ateal
ok, i will leave you alone with your thread, good luck

seems like you have no information and you’d better look for english manuals for the carts that you call "japanese only", i believe japanese can’t read in english and vice versa.

As promised I thought I would update this thread with my findings on the FR 202 cartridge and I have to say without ANY reservations that this is the most perfect cartridge I have ever owned, it now beats out my Spectral Reference LOMC cartridge.

Like every Fidelity Research cartridge the tone of instruments is amazing and lifelike and this cart takes that way beyond what I have experienced before.

As for frequency range the cartridge goes down very low indeed and is very solid. Bass notes slam you in the chest. Nothing flabby or bloated at all. The upper frequency range is more prominent than other Fidelity Research cartridges I have owned, but it is very smooth and not at all harsh. It was a little harsh at first but now the cartridge has been broken in it is not harsh at all.

Soundstage and imaging is phenominal to the point it is holographic.

Best of all it is musical and engaging and allows you to get lost in the music without analyzing everything.

I absolutely love this cartridge and I’m so glad curiosity got the better of me and I bought it. 

I have two MC-201s. One is used — no idea of hours but stylus looks quite good at 150X to my highly inexpert eye. The other is NOS; I played it once, to confirm it works. It does and sounded lovely, but it was not really critical listening, and it hasn’t broken-in — or whatever a 40-year old suspension does.

I also found a NOS 202 and I was happy to get it, until I opened the box: the cantilever was bent 90° to the right. Even so, he wouldn’t reduce the price — odd for a retailer, maybe he thought someone would come along and buy it without looking.

The 201, though mentioned at the outset, is not discussed thereafter. Of course I’m intrigued when Ateal says the 202 is "the most perfect cartridge I have ever owned...now the cartridge has been broken in...."

The styli differ slightly in the minor radius: a slight reduction of detail? Are there other significant differences between the two?

Can someone give me an idea of what my 201 will be like, broken in? Anything like what Ateal so greatly enjoys in his 202?

One other observation of the MC-202 is that it has similarities to the Ortofon SPU’s I have owned in the past. Especially as it relates to PRaT and midrange musical slam.

It exhibits all of the documented qualities of an SPU but does it much better than the SPU’s I have previously owned. 

For this reason I would guess that it is more similar to the FR7 series than some people would like to give it credit for. 

I guess I will have to wait until I can pick up an FR7 before I can prove that theory out.