Telarc 1812 revisited


I've posted several threads about the trackability of this record and have received many scholarly answers, with emphasis on physics, geometry, compliance, weight, angles,price and all sorts of scientific explanations about tonearms, cartridges, VTA, etc, etc. Let's cut to the chase: I have a 1970's Pioneer 540 in the garage I bought for $5 at a thrift store plus an Audio Technica cartridge for which I paid $30 This combo. tracks the Telarc 1812 perfectly without problems while my $4000 Rega and $1200 Project bounce out of the grooves.. I'd really finally like to get some explanation and resolution as to this discrepanccy
boofer
Dear Dougdeacon: Oh that " short " memory!!!

Yes I think is the best you can do.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friendsds: The Kleos arrived and is mounted in my system.

Yes, is better than the Skala or Helikon and even Titan but can't compete with the Akiva ( JC design for Linn. ).

The Kleos has clear and transparent highs where the Akiva is close but not at the same level and it's only in this characteristic where the Kleos is above the Akiva.

The Akiva has a tremendous natural rhythm where the Kleos is just lifeless. Everything on sound characteristics are there ( in the Kleos ) but can't transmit the MUSIC emotions, it does not has the glorious easy MUSIC flow reproduction of the Akiva, the Kleos feels as the music has no " continuity " as if it's " fighting " to reproduce the grooves information. I can't explain in other way.

About its tracking abilities the Kleos is the worst one of the " bunch " and maybe that's why I said: " fighting to reproduce grooves... ", instead to feel happy as the Akiva one.

I know ( because JC posted is not his priority. ) that the Akiva JC design is a " faulty " builded cartridge because its truly great ( today unbeatable. ) tracking abilities that was not in the " program ", welcomed " fault " that made this cartridge so good quality performer.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Seems as it time decay in the low part of the high frequencies and midrange is to fast, this I don't detected in the other part of the high frequencies where is very good and extended.

I tested in 3 tonearms and with different impedance loads direct through my active PS and through SUT but the behavior is almost the same.

I have to say that as all Lyras its build quality shines ( beautiful made. ), first rate.

R.
Raul, Have you given the Kleos any time to break in? Does this even make a difference, in your opinion?

Perhaps you can start a Kleos vs. Akiva thread and have more people respond to this topic as they might not find it in this thread which about the 1812 recording and tracking ability.
Dear Peter Ayer: My Kleos is already broken, take almost " nothing " for the cartridge been brock.

In the other side, start a thread on Kleos vs Akiva could be interesting but I see a " trouble " , please ask you how many of your audio friends own the Akiva cartridge? and how many Agon threads did you read it about Akiva owners and how many?

Linn Akiva is designed mainly for Linn analog rigs: especially the Ekos tonearm. The cartridge comes with three mounted holes that's a characteristic of Linn tonearm headshell.

Other characteristic is that the Akiva comes with dedicated
wires to be connected directly to the tonearm headsell male connectors and not all tonearms accept it.
To connect my Akiva in my system I have to make a modification changing the Akiva wires female connectors/pins for male ones.

Today the owners of cartridges as Atlas, Ana, LP-S, XV 1t, Goldfinger Statement ad the like I can tell you that even they do not know of the Akiva existence and less heard it.

That's a pity issue because IMHO the Akiva can compete at that so high level quality performance for " penauts " in comparison wiht all those really high cartridge prices$$$$$.

Btw, I don't finish yet with the Kleos, I will try harder trying to achieve better quality performance, I need that the Kleos be more " human ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.