What you say David it exactly what I have discovered. While waiting for the Z1-S to arrive from my comrade Nikola (Nandric), I saw a listing on the Japanese Auction site (Jauce), which contained 3 of the Z1-s. All without stylus's. I considered bidding on them but at the time I did not Know anything about the Z1. I was only familiar with the X1. I can kick myself now because they sold for 6800 Yen ($56). This is for all 3 of them! Because they are unknown, they are considered to have no value. No one notices them because no one has been looking for them! Regards, |
Hi David,
Nikola (Nandric), is quite fluent in German. Perhaps you could send a copy of it to him for translation. I also would like to hear what is said. You make a very good point about being able to hand pick the best of the bunch by buying multiple bodies. I wish now that I had bought those 3 just to do this hand picking! I have seen more of the MK2 versions on various sites than I have of the original. I have yet to see an X1 or a Z1 on a US auction site. Nandric found my X1 on the European market. All of the X1 MK2 versions that I run across, are on the Japanese auction markets. This fact does make sense because the 4 channel music market really took hold in Japan. Quad records and equipment still can be found and bought there (Used of course). The Japan auction site is where I bought both of my X1 MK2's. This is also where Nandric got his 'NOS' JVC X1 MK2. The "Lucky Bastard"! (grin) I have found that the Z1-S with the SAS stylus is every bid as good as the original X1(or X1 MK2). I'm not saying identical. There are ever so slight differences but I am not anal retentive so the enjoyment I receive from either of them is equal! This really is good news, because this Z1-S body can be found on any auction site around the World. For general information purpose. Their are 3 versions of the X1 or Z1. The X1 or Z1 are Beryllium cantilevers with a Shibata tip. The 'E" version or MK2'E' is elliptical, and the 'S' version in spherical (conical). The JICO SAS stylus is a must if you expect the Z1-S to perform at the same level as the X1. I hope you have kept those Z1-S bodies with the better measurements David. You could be in for quite a surprise. BTW: It needs to be stated that the X1 and Z1 stylus's are not interchangeable. The brass round tube that inserts into the cartridge bodies are of different diameters. One thing that puzzles me is the fact that JICO has chosen to provide the SAS only for the Z1. As David has stated, the X1 is suppose to be the top of the line with the Z1 being #2. The best replacement stylus that JICO sells for the X1 is the Nivico DT X1 MK2. I have one of these and consider it as good as the X1 original. JICO also has a Shibata replacement for the Z1. It is the DT-Z1. But for only $33 more, you can buy the SAS with the Boron cantilever and the Super MicroRidge stylus. Doesn't make much of a business sense to me for them to have both? |
David,
Have you been able to determine in your research, what the bodies on the Z1's are made of? I ask because what slight differences I am hearing between the Z1 and X1 resembles to me to be of the resonance kind. A very slight,perhaps some type of 'phase' abnormality. Not sure, but it is very slight and only noticeable in a direct A/B comparison. I have some of those carbon fiber shims and I am thinking about inserting one of them between the Z1 and the head shell to see if I can eliminate the slight differences that I hear between the Z1 and the X1. Before anyone goes off thinking that there is a problem here, there's not. I'm just curious as to what possible differences there must be for JVC to designate a new cartridge and designating it the Z1. Regards, |
Fleib,
I have a SDS in use on my VPI turntable. Used as a speed control. What purpose would it serve with a Shure V15? (grin)
Regards, |
Dialoum
Quote: "Still if even the prosaic MC1 can achieve 65um - why would one accept a cartridge that barely makes 50um?"
I don't know of anyone who is using a cartridge that barely makes this 50um? It has been agreed that to track today's vinyl productions, you need to be able to track a 50 microns test signal 'without distortion'. I think this is what Nandric was eluding to. This is not a 'barely acceptable, but a pure test signal. I use a test record and use the 60 micron pure test tone thrush-hold to set up my VTF. I view this in the following way. Why track my records at 2 grams VTF (or more), when I can get this 60 microns pure at 1.2 grams. If a pure test tone can be arrived at with this setting, why punish 99.9% of my records with it set at 2 grams just to track cannons? Perhaps you do not feel that an increase of 40% VTF makes a difference in record wear? BTW: I haven't played that cannon track in 10 years nor do I intend to! |
Does anyone know if Satin was the manufacture of some of the Sony cartridges. Perhaps it is the other way around. Sony manufactured for Satin? Curious minds want to know! (grin) Regards, |
I own both the 981 LZS and the HZS. Much to Raul's surprise, I preferred the LZS. There was some discussion way back in this thread somewhere. I wish I could say 'why' but I can not. David, I find your comments in this regard, quite interesting because it is in this very frequency range that you discuss, is where I find my preference of one cartridge over the other. To me, I felt the LO version more lent its presentation towards the M/C spectrum of sound. Not that I found anything to dislike with the HO version. But if forced to choose one over the other, I would have picked the LZS. The whole idea of this cartridge design was to replicate a M/C. I feel it accomplished this idea better in the LZS. Why? I don't know but you David, may have discovered it! Regards |
Fleib,
A Quote from :"The Handbook for Stanton and Pickering Phonograph Cartridges and Styli" by Richard Steinfeld This is from page 20. Low-Impedance (Low Z) Cartridges
Quote" The concept for these cartridges was contributed by Walter Stanton himself. Walter Stanton did not like the moving coil principal that's been so dear to many audiophiles. Stanton reasoned that the performance of the best moving coil cartridges was due, not to special physical properties, but to their electrical characteristics. Why not turn the moving coil concept, in essence, "'inside-out?" In other words, make a moving magnet cartridge that shared the electrical qualities of the best moving coil cartridges." End of Quote"! Neo, I hope this answers your question, "What gives you that idea, the low output? Did Stanton say that was a design goal? There is much more said in this regards Neo but I don't intent to quote the entire chapter due to the possible copy right infringements! BTW: If you, or anyone reading this post doesn't have this have handbook, you should contact Richard for the purchase of one. A factual read of one of our greatest cartridge designers. Regards, |
Neo,
The product catalog you state is rather dated! Stanton had an entire line of even higher (TOTL), cartridges after the 981's. They were called the Epoch. I also own one of those. The Epoch II LZ8S. The last Epoch produced and the 'actual' Stanton TOTL cartridge was the Epoch II LZ9S.
Regards, |
David,
The more time I spend with this JVC X1, the more I am convinced it is the best M/M I have ever heard. They'er times, during certain passages, that I just can not stop smiling. It is so smooth and dynamic that it just begs to be listened to. You are in for quite a treat when yours arrives. I packed it quite well so unless some UPS trucks runs over it, you should receive it in great condition. I am currently using the original stylus which is the same one you have. I must say that I heard no difference between it and the JICO replacement. I am not referring to the JICO SAS because that stylus is for the Z1 version only. That one is 'as good' if not better and even cheaper to construct (find)!
Regards, |
|
Neo,
You stated that Stanton made 3 different LZ models. See your own statement. I Quote: "Stanton made 3 different LZ models".
In fact, Stanton made 4 models of just the Epoch. The LZ6, LZ7, LZ8 and the LZ9. If we include the 3 your post eludes to, that would make 7 in total, not your stated 3. Neo, I am not sure I understand what you are referring to with your statement "mater of lauguage"? I never said these were copies of M/C's or that Stanton was trying to 'Copy' M/C's. Only that he was trying to replicate what a M/C does to the signal it receives. I do understand the it is physically impossible to make a M/M cartridge suddenly become a M/C. It is either one or the other. That is unless it's a Micro Acoustic! (grin) Regards, |
Fleib,
There are many forms of a signal. The signal that a M/C generates is an 'electrical' signal. The signal that a M/C receives are in the form of undulations of the record groove. It's still a signal. A stop sign is a signal to stop. Rain is a signal to open your umbrella. If a cop is following you and is flashing his red lights, it's a signal to pull over. A signal doesn't 'have' to be electrical. Regards, |
Hi Fleib and David,
I would like to readdress the Sony/Satin discussion. Was their, or is their a cross reference guide that would identify which Sony is what Satin? I understand there are several Satin cartridges that are sought after I wonder if it would be perhaps easier to find then under the Sony ID. All this just might be wishful thinking. I am hoping that either of you or anyone else for that matter, might be able to shine some light on this issue. There was very little (if any), discussions about either Satin or the Sony's on this forum. The Satin's have been kind of a best kept secret and has remained rather an unknown. Considering the money that Sony had available, and to have them pick Satin to produce their cartridges, tells me that their has to be some mighty fine cartridges out there waiting to be discovered. Regards, |
Yes Neo,
I have been writing (and thinking), in terms of sound quality of the LZ. You have been writing (and thinking), in terms of design. My statement 'replicate a M/C' was referring to 'its sound'. Not its design. The 'nonsense' that I'm writing is a discussion in that context. His intent Neo. Not his design! I used the word 'replicate' because his intent wasn't to 'duplicate exact'. He was trying to capture the 'sound' of the M/C in his M/M cartridge. Replicate it! Neo, some see the world in black and white, and there's nothing wrong with that. But others sees the world in color. Sorry to discover your world is so narrow!
Regards, |
Dlaloum,
Your information is quite helpful. I see many Sony's for sale on the Japanese sites. Seldom do I see anything that even slightly resembles something that was built by Satin. Actually most of them (the Sony's), look more like Ortofons or the Sumiko Talisman's which both BTW are Japan manufactured. Yet I keep hearing or reading (speculations) with references to Satin when early Sony cartridges are mentioned. This is why I inquired about if there ever was some kind of cross-reference chart available. Thanks again. Regards |
David,
The Japanese sites are no secret. But much understanding is required to operate within its system. Then you have the exchange rates to deal with because all bidding is done in Yen. Many fees are also involved but the good part is that you can find many rare cartridges that do not turn up on other markets. At the moment there is a Sony XL-MC9 available that I am going to bid on. Seldom seen anywhere else! Regards, |
David,
I do not know why I didn't think of you before with this but I guess 'better late than never'. There is a cartridge available on the Japanese auction site that is a creation of the Garrott Bros. I have no idea that they were producing these. It is called the Garrott Bros. Slimline. It is one of those light brown or tan Grado's. I had never even heard of this Slimline Garrott Bros. Its has a starting price is 20000 Yen ($168). Being from Austrilia, you might have some information in regards to this. Maybe not, but no harm in asking! Regards, |
Fleib,
Thanks for the reply. I own a couple of Grado's. A Signature 8 and a G+1/8MZ. I wonder if The Garrott Bros. (Slimline), version would be the same type of rebuild as what they did for the A&R Cambridge P77. In other words, internal tweaking, potting, etc. This might be an interesting one to hear! The upper end Grado's do have a rather magical mid-range. Regards, |
Hello Tom,
Last month I bought a NOS Z-1 stylus assembly. Yes, a Beryllium cantilever with a Shibata tip still in the box and sealed. I paid 2800 Yen. Yes, $24 for a NOS Beryllium cantilever/Shibata combo. These cartridges and styli turn up quite often on the Jauce auction site in Japan. It seemed to be quite a popular cartridge in Japan. Our Comrade Nandric has seen and bought a few on the Europeen sites as well. The do appear to be quite rare on the US site though. But as Halcro has stated, a Z-1 with a SAS stylus assembly is quite amazing. When you consider its cost, it becomes an absolute bargain! I consider it the best when compared to both the X-1 and the Z-1 originals. This is by no way a day and night improvement with the SAS. Subtle but meaningful differences if your system is up to it. Your question in regards to a Beryllium/elliptical version also had me going after that one to see how it would compare. I passed up one that sold for $59, including the body! The reason I passed is because I saw the 'buy it now' Z-1 ($24) stylus. Yes, I was shocked! Regards, |
Hello Timeltel,
Tom, did you locate a Z-1 body. I think the guys over on the Audio Circle were working on providing you with one. All you will need is the SAS from Jico to literally rock your boat! (grin)
Best regard, |
|
Tom,
I have bought a NOS Z-1E. It's a complete cartridge with stylus and a Victor head shell. All this for $34 on the Jauce auction site. When it arrives (probably 10 days), if it is as described, I will offer you my current Z-1S body (that is if interested). As you might know, all Z-1's are the same. They just came with different stylus assemblies. Best regards, |
Jmowbray,
Peter doesn't do suspension work, only cantilever/stylus replacements. Sent it to either Andy or Axel. Andy's in the state of Washington (Needleclinic), and Axel is in Germany at http://www.schallplattennadeln.de I've use the both and can recommend either to do the work you require. Regards, |
Hi Pryso,
I just received back a Sony XL-55 in need of suspension tweaking. It was returned stating he didn't do suspension work unless it was something related to cantilever replacement adjustments. I felt that his reply made it pretty clear! Regards, |
Fleib,
The Professor has returned my Z-1/SAS and I will package it up today. I will have it in the mail on Monday for you listening pleasure! (grin)
Best regards, |
Abrew19, You obviously have not read the 235 pages because in doing so, you would understand just how much information is 'in' those 235 pages. Think of it as an Encyclopedia of knowledge. Should we discard the Encyclopedia because there are 'to many pages'? Maybe what you really need is 'pictures'! Regards, |
Abrew19
Do 'not' ignore it. Read it! You will find far more valuable information that you would ever think possible. You might even learn something in the process. Why go through life waiting for someone else to tell you what to do or what to buy. To make good buying decisions, you could not find a better place to make that decision than from what you could learn from this forum. BTW: There are many of us who are 'in their right mind' who have read all 200+ pages. I have done it twice! Regards, |
Sarcher30
Congratulations! For about $170 + shipping, you are going to wind up with a cartridge that is damn tough to beat! I look at some of my multi-thousand dollar M/C's and wonder if I should just go ahead and sell them. This is because the Z-1 SAS takes up all my listening time. I no sooner rotate it out, only to start thinking when am I going to rotate it back in! Hell of a bargain combination! Regards, |
Lewm,
There are a few M/C's that I 'also' would not sell. That Ortofon being one of them. It's so good that I own two of them. The only cartridge that I feel might out shine the Ortofon is my ART 9. My Einstein Barco TU-3 would also have to be counted in that mix. But when you think about what those cartridges cost compared to the Z-1 SAS, it embarrasses me to think of all that money I spent for subjective marginal differences. When you throw in the cost of SUT's or Head Amps that must be included to drive these expensive M/C's, I just have to hang my head in shame! (grin)
Regards, |
Sarcher30,
It appears that you also have caught the SAS bug! (grin) Next you need to get one of those cheap A&R Cambridge P77 bodies and place upon it the SAS Stylus 1. Better yet, if you own a Garrott Bros. P77, this same SAS Stylus 1 will also mount on it. Now your talking World class contender! Regards, |
Fleib,
This comment about line stage, or pre-amp 'gain' is something most people do not think about. I have for years, been using a 'passive' pre-amp. These lack in the gain department. I never paid much attention to what the amount of gain that this section of a system provided until I got heavy into low and 'ultra' low M/C cartridges like the Ortofon MC-2000. Output of 0.05mV. Gain is the name of the game if you want to hear this jewel at anything above a whisper! We tend to only focus on what 'gain' is provided with the phono stage but one must also consider line stage gain as well. I had to go to a Head Amp (Denon HA-500), to boost the signal to a high enough level without hum for the time I spend with the Ortofon. I have 92 db's of gain coming into my passive pre-amp. My BAT VK-10SE would only provide 80db's. Not enough to boost the Ortofon to acceptable levels. All because of 'lack' of sufficient gain in the line stage. I learned this lesson the hard way! |
|
Fleib,
No, I am only using the M/M portion of the BAT. There are several gain stages in the BAT. You have to ingage the Lundahl's SUT through the use of dip switches. I have max. 60 db's of gain from the BAT if I stay only in the M/M portion of the phono stage. From it, I add the 32 db's of gain from the Head Amp. I did try it as you mentioned above but got far to much distortion. Regards, |
Dgarretson,
My VK-10SE started out as the VK-10. I've had it a long time. I agree with you that I also did not care for the original SUT's in the VK-10. The last trip to BAT for upgrades, replace them with the Lundahl SUT's. They are using the the LL9226 chips. Much improved I must admit. A friend of mine (Nandric on this forum), uses the Jasmine phono stage. It has 70 db's of gain and has no problem running his MC-2000 to very loud levels. But he is using a Marantz per-amp that must have phenomenal gain. His volume knob doesn't even reach the 'noon' position before you reach maximum listening levels. I am somewhat crippled with what is available with a 'passive' pre. as far as gain assistance! With the gain added by your pre-amp, you are probably a little under the gain levels that I'm at. There is 'some' gain BTW in a passive pre. But far from what would be considered average. Regards, |
That's good to hear Sarcher30. I have seen those 207C's. I did not know that the 205C SAS or for that matter, the regular 205C stylus would work in one of them. |
Dgarretson,
I hear ya, but when you can have the best of both worlds, volume and no hum, sure does make life worth living! (grin) Regards, |
Lewm,
To address your question, The order of preference is as you stated. I own the MF-100 and the MF-300. The MF-100 reminds me of the ADC ZLM in regards to its performance attributes. I've not done the comparison but it is said the the MF-200 could be the preferred cartridge, over the MF-100 in some systems! There were models by Glantz that were the same as the Astatic's. I do not recall what those model numbers were but I am sure there are people (Nandric), who would know. I recall there being a Glantz thread which covered alot of information about the cross referencing. Regards, |
Sarcher30,
I think it is from 'over' hype! They are a good cartridge. So are the Grado's. But due to their rivalry and hype, both have suffered. There are followers of both and you would not go wrong to own either brand, especially the models that you have already mentioned. As for the Grado's. Put an 8MZ stylus on one (find a G1+ body), and you will understand what I have just stated. I'm not stating that they will somehow magically transform your system, but only that they diffidently will compete with what is available! Regards, |
Travbrow,
Yes, he is still around. He has just returned from a vacation. Answering emails is not one of his specialties. His turn around time has gotten even slower than what Sound Smith's was when it was at its worst. Andy at 'The Needle Clinic' has been turning them around in a couple of weeks. Regards, |
Chakster,
To answer you question in regards the the ADC Astrion. It is better than the TRX I. I prefer the TRX II over the Astrion but we are splitting hairs here. It could be nothing more that production variations because they are quite close. As far the the TRX III. Never found one to buy so I can not say. Regards, |
Chakster,
Interesting comments in regards to the SAS and your comparison with the Technics MK 4. I find just the opposite. I even have a MK 4 with good suspension but in need of a new tip in which I refuse to have repaired. The reason being is why pay $400 to re-tip something that will not sound as good as a SAS which can be bought for $133. It just sits in the original box wasting away! |
Chakster,
I bought a NOS (new old stock), Technics 205C MK IV stylus from Foxtan about 5 years ago. I now own 2 of these MK IV stylus's. They both can be outperformed by the SAS. Perhaps it is the SAS that is the 'ONE' that is a cut above the rest? Regards |
|
Chakster,
Your first mate and I would agree. My MK IV (original) also preforms better than the XL-55. That was why I sold the XL-55 and bought the XL-88. Just so anyone who reads this thread understands. There is not doubt that an original Technics, weather it be the 205C or the 100C are great cartridges. But its styli profile is only an elliptical. Only so much information can be removed from the record grooves with this profile design. This is why the conical got replace by the elliptical, and why the elliptical has been replaced by several generations of profiles since. Regards, |
Chakser,
I own everyone of the cartridges you mention except the ART 2000. The ART that I own is the new 9. It is 'by far' the best cartridge when compared to everything that we have discussed. It is also better than many that we have not! Regards, |
I have had many cartridges re-tipped. But I am using this word in a very broad sense. Actually a new cantilever also came with this 're-tip'. Never have I stayed with the original profile if it was a M/M. I have always 'upgraded' the profile. Sometimes with a Shibata. Sometimes with something more exotic. All depends on what I wanted as its end results. Personally I think the cantilever makes the biggest change overall. I also prefer the Shibata profile. It adds a bit or romance to the presentation. (grin) I don't believe there has been a 10, 20, 30+ fold improvement in cartridges over the last couple of decades yet the prices have increase that much and more. Yes, I understand that if you sell less, you have to charge more but this spiraling upwards of prices began way before the market reduction of sales which was due to the CD. I think the word 'greed' fits in here quite nicely. The SAS from Jico is a very good example of what is wrong with the cartridge pricing. They Sell the Technics 205C SAS for $133. Try to find a re-tipper willing to mount a Boron cantilever with a Micro-Ridge tip for that amount of money. A cartridge dealer usually wants at least 50% of the original selling price to get a repair. Why such a difference between Jico and the rest of the industry? Surely Jico is making a profit at $133. Clear Audio has a cartridge. The Virtuoso. Sold for $900+. It turned out to be a Audio Technica AT 95E. The AT can be bought for $30! Yes, Clear Audio made a few changes to the AT 95E, but to charge 30 times the price of the original AT is just 'GREED'. We buy these old M/M cartridge due to value. There has been very little improvement and what improvements have been discovered can be applied through a new cantilever/stylus. Weather it be through Jico, an original off of ebay, or re-tipping, it is as good if not better that what can be bought today and done so for far less money. |
Chakster,
Quoate: ''I'd like to check top Glanz/Astatic, Garrott, Signet/AT line people advised on here, but do you think they really can compete with top of the line MCs ? It's hard to believe.''
I own examples of each of these. The simple answer to your question is "YES".
I have not discovered a M/M cartridge that is better than my 'best' M/C. But that is not the question. You aske if they can compete. If I had to say where in the ranking would the better M/M cartridges get placed if the were to be combined with the ratings of the better M/C's, I would place the M/M's in the upper middle of the entire list. A few, like the AT 180ML or the Signet TK 10 MKII (as examples), even a little higher. Regards, |
Chakster,
I have forgotten to mention a cartridge (M/M), that I own that does compete with my "best" M/C. Let me be clear here. I am saying competes! This M/M is the London Decca Jubilee. In some regards it does better my best M/C's but there is no perfect cartridge. That is why some of us own so many! (grin) BTW: The Jubilee is #2 in London's lineup. I have only had the opportunity to hear London Decca's best. That is the "London Decca Reference". I intend to buy one when I can find one at the right price. Hum can be an issue with these so be prepared to try various grounding methods if you ever decide to buy one. It will put a smile on your face that is damn near impossible to remove! Regards, |
Flieb,
I believe I have read that interview that Charster refers to. I do get your humor! What is said in that review was the belief at 'that time'. Sort of like reading a report from some scholar back when the belief was that the World was flat! (grin) Just because some authority said it then, doesn't make it so today! |
Chakster,
Yes, I also have a few of those 45's. I own them but seldom play them. The getting up to turn them over or change them every 2 to 3 minutes (sometimes less than 2 minutes get a bit annoying. I thought about burning them to CD's but it is easier to just buy those old songs that are already recorded on a CD. Perhaps with this analog revival, someone will get the bright idea to do this type of reissue. |
Chakster,
I own a couple of those 'direct to disc'. They are a step above standard analog but if you really want to hear the best there is in the analog format, try to spend some time with reel to reel master tapes. It honestly is hard for me to admit this, but it does put the sound of our records back into the dark ages. |
Hello Chakster,
I recognize you moniker. Welcome back! I own the Sonus Dimension 5, the ADC Astrion, The ADC ZLM, and the ADC TRX 2. The TRX has a new Level 3 cantilever and stylus from Sound Smith. I woud rate then in this order. 1)TRX 2)Sonus Dimension 5 3) Both the ZLM and the Astrion. In some other system, the results could be different between 2 and 3 but not with #1 Hell of a cartridge with the Level 3 from S/S. Regards, |
Hello Chakster,
I run two turntables and with different tone arms. The VPI Aires has the Graham 2.2. The JVC TT-81 has the JVC 7045. No preference regarding either one sonic wise. But I much prefer the JVC due to the cost of and ease of head shell changing. I only use the Sumiko/Jelco Magnesium head shells. Regards, |