Regards, Jbethree: A comparison of the LPM 312 and 412 illustrates the qualities one might expect when describing typical qualities of a moving iron relative to a comparable moving magnet cartridge. In spite of being MM (as are all the 4xx series) the 412 retains the width and depth of soundstage demonstrated by the 3xx tri-pole Acutexes (Acutexi?) but is somewhat brighter.
As Acman3 (hi, Danny!) wrote; "They are both pretty good.".
Peace, |
John, I personally like the Acutex 312 more than the 412, but saw the Acutex 412 for such a low price and thought I would point it out. They are both pretty good.
I remember some liked the Acutex 412 better than the 312, but if you didn't like the 420, I would suspect you wouldn't enjoy the Acutex 412, but...... |
Acman3
Hi Danny, I bought an Acutex 312IIISTR from the Italian seller. My friend and I were both highly impressed with the sound of such an inexpensive cartridge even in its day. Do you think the 412 is better? I have the Acutex 420, which is a little dry and analytical when compared to my very musical 320.
BTW my SAS for the Z1 is in LA customs, so it should arrive this week.
John |
Hi Don, Yes, I have a D3001e - .2 mil nude elliptical. Sounds good, outperforms a Jico D81 shibata. I'd rather try for something better. A .2 elliptical has the smallest contact area of any tip. All things being equal, will wear out fastest. I'm not thrilled with Stanton QC anyway and not sure about Pickering.
I can't help thinking this cart can deliver more. I already have the Pickering stylus holder, maybe it will improve with a ruby LC or micro.
Ever see David Dlaloum's web site? Check out the Pickering 7500 - same as 980LZ: https://sites.google.com/site/zevaudio/turt/cartridge-comparison-list/pickering-xlz-7500-s
Regards, |
Looks like our Italian friend is selling the Acutex 412 for $55. A very good price if you didn't get one a while back. |
Fleib,
I have both the 981LZS and the 981HZS. On the HZ I am using the D3500e stylus with excellent results (Stanton recommended replacement). I mention this because there is a NOS D3500e stylus for sale on flee/bay. Not cheap but it just might be the last NOS we'll see. Mine has very low hours of use so I will pass but in your case, I think I would go for it! Regards, Don |
I thought the 64Fx was aluminium whilst the 64S is stainless steel.... |
Maybe it's a mistake. They have the 64FX listed as 20g eff mass. I thought they were the same except for internal wire. Perhaps that number should be for the 66?
I just hooked up my 980LZ - what a nice cart. Wish I had a better stylus for it. I suspect this would be a good candidate for stylus/cantilever upgrade, a Soundsmith level 2 or 3 might be just the ticket. Anybody try something like that? It will have to wait till I get the Z1 squared away. |
Could be wrong, but I did not think eff mass of FR64S was quite THAT high (35gm). I assumed it was in the 20-30gm range. Some of those data on VE are suspect, at best. Of course, one variable is the choice of headshell. I think the FR headshells can be quite heavy. So, maybe with the heaviest FR headshell, the eff mass of the FR64S could exceed 30gm. And if so, one can only imagine what is the eff mass of the FR66S, which some here have used with MMs. (I own an FR64S, but like Dover, I use it with a light-ish headshell. Only so far with a Koetsu.) |
I brought up the question of arm mass numerous times on this thread. I'm unconcerned about low frequency resonance in the warp region, it either tracks or not, but I think there are SQ consequences using a high cu cart on a high mass arm.
VE has FR64S listed as 35g eff mass. Is this correct for the stock arm? I've heard the arm sound great with some moderate cu carts, but I wonder about high cu.
It could be no change using a high quality arm 1/5 the mass, but I suspect otherwise. Eff mass is the same as MOI (moment of inertia) and even with low bearing friction the mass seems to slow down response and make it sound different. What might be authoritative with one cart might sound thick with another? I think Raul was right concerning low frequency resonance, but that's not the only consideration. Peter Pritchard advocated 6.5Hz. Maybe this was for his 50cu carts, but the Sonus arm has 4.1g eff mass. MOI is extremely low. Hard to imagine how extreme mass wouldn't make a difference.
Regards, |
|
Lewm - short answer is I don't know because the Glanz MFG61 came in the original packaging minus the specs sheet. I ran the Glanz MFG61 in the FR64S with a light headshell and 170g counterweight to lower the effective mass as much as possible. Cantilever looked reasonably stable and centred in this set up. I also run the X1 with the 170g counterweight on the FR64S which was an improvement over the standard counterweight. If the Glanz MFG61 sounds better in a low mass arm than what I experienced then it would be an extraordinary cartridge. |
It would be nice if someone can email me Glanz MFG61 manual or any tech specs ? chakster45 on gmail
Lewm, this is not a low compliance cartridge, but higher compliance than 31L (which is a mid compliance itself). |
Dover (and possibly others), is the MFG61 unusual in that it has a low compliance? Otherwise I have to wonder whether your impressions of its sound are "colored" by the fact that it is mismatched with the FR64S. I know Raul convinced many that the "rule" about matching compliance and effective mass is made to be broken, but I have to think there are some limits to the heresy he championed. Since all these judgements are subjective, it is nigh impossible to know where the limits apply, however. |
Everybody talking about SAS stylus as an upgrade over originals on several cartridges: Garrott, Victor/JVC, Shure, Technics and others. I have mentioned before that my experience with SAS is limited to the one made for Technics 205 series and to be honest i preffer the original stylys on Technics 205c mk4 and it was far more enjoyable than SAS. The only problem is to find original technics stylus in decent condition of suspension.
After this experience i'm not a fan of jico sas in my system.
As for the Glanz upper models i will report a bit later.
But with the cost of Glanz 31L in stock condition it is a winner at the moment. On Zyx Live-18 headshell it looks like they are made for each other, integraded very well. I will upload pictures later. |
I have both the Glanz MFG61 and the Victor X1 with the original Beryllium cantilever/Shibata stylus. From my testing thus far the Glanz 61 is smoother in the top end and more refined than the Victor X1. I have not heard the Glanz Halcro refers to above and cannot comment on those. The X1 on my Platine Verdier/FR64S has a similar balance to my Koetsu Black, but is etched through the mids and a little brittle in the top end. The Koetsu sounds more relaxed and is more refined. The MFG61 mounted on a FR64S on my Final Audio VTT1 is much smoother and more refined than the X1, sounds like you are sitting a few rows further back in the hall. |
The Glanz top and very rare models: MF61 and MF71L If the 31L is so good i can expect 61 and 71 must be simply amazing. Not necessarily..... I had the 31L, 51L, 71L and M5 (integrated headshell) in my system all at the same time.... HERENot only was I underwhelmed by them all (considering the hype)...but the M5 was a mangy animal insistent upon excising any manner of realism and joy from the grooves it encountered. M5In the end I kept the 51L as sounding perhaps the best of the lot (albeit there was little audible differences between it and the 31L and 71L in my system). The left channel stopped operating after about 6 months of 'forced' ownership and luckily I don't miss it...💩 |
Yes, Acman3 Glanz 31L (line contact) equal to Astatic MF200 (shibata) according to Nandric experience. The MF200 raved by Raul before he discovered mega rare MF2500 (older and better model).
The Glanz top and very rare models: MF61 and MF71L If the 31L is so good i can expect 61 and 71 must be simply amazing. |
Welcome to the Victor 'cheer squad' Jbethree and Fleib. With the Professor, Griffithds and 'your truly' also belonging, it is not such an exclusive club anymore....and indeed, it needn't be as there seems to be hundreds of Z1 and X1 bodies in Japan available quite cheaply. Add the SAS stylus (possibly the most musical implant available today) and one has a cartridge which is every bit as incisive, emotional and mellifluous as the impossibly scarce Signet TK7LCa and Garrott P77/SAS. These four cartridges fight it out for 'playtime' chez-moi with the FR-7f/Lc LOMC on my Raven AC-2. The choices one must make...🙈👀 |
I too have a JVC/Victor Z1s on the way. This one has an upgraded stylus, an E. I have to thank Griffithds for an extended listen to both the X1 and Z1/SAS. Discussion of this is on Audio Circle, AT95 - Clearaudio thread. Results were promising for the X1, but I think a loose stylus compromised performance. I used some tack, but apparently not enough.
The SAS fit snugly on the Z1. I did use a tiny bit of damping on the body to prevent ringing, but not sure if it did anything. With SAS, this is a great MM IMO, not that it's perfect but what it does well it does very well and that's just about everything. It's fast and detailed with dynamics to die for. If you'll pardon a trite phrase, it brings the music to life.
Halcro pointed out that the SAS stylus VTF is 1.25 - 1.5g. I was tracking a bit heavier and reduced it to 1.4g with no mistracking. It seemed to get better. In an ultimate sense it might not be perfect with low level harmonics, but on the vast majority of my records (mostly acoustic jazz) nothing seemed amiss. In fact, the enjoyment factor tops the scale.
Regards, |
For those keeping score at home, I believe that is the Astatic MF 200 equivalent. |
|
Joined the Glanz club recently. It was the best find this year. Purchased locally from an old guy at the car service here in St.Petersburg for a very reasonable price in Mint condition. The man told me he owned 18 turntables and it was mounted on one of his Luxman delivered from Japan. This Glanz MFG 31L is the most musical MM cartridge i have ever heard. Mounted on ZYX LIVE-18 headshell in my second system. Simply amazing, this Muving Flux is really something. Can't beat my Argent MC500HS, but anyway the GLANZ MFG 31L is exceptional MM/MF in my opinion. |
Just received a very nice Victor Z1s from jauce.com. A very interesting and useful resource but very fee intensive. Mounted the cartridge to make sure it was OK and it sounds great with the original NOS cartridge. Can't wait to receive the JICO SAS styli to hopefully upgrade it. |
Everyone can download from my google drive ADC Astrion review (scan from the 80s magazine):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7SnhzDV__cCel9VT2ZpZTB1Y0U/view?usp=docslist_api
It's also on vinyl engine.
P.S. Kevin's little stock of Astrion sold out long time ago and his stuff does not contained original box, manual, individual test of the actual cartridge, tool etc (thats why ebay auction ended over $900). So that was from another source, a true nos collectible from the 80s. |
Chakster, I agree with you about the 1200. At least it runs at correct speed, even if the correction seems a bit abrupt. In the '80s many DJs brought in their decks for me to set up, and by invitation I went to a club to hear what it was all about. The SPL/bass was unbelievable. I had to stuff wet paper napkins in my ears. The 1200 seems perfect for that application. Not many decks without a 100 lb. plinth and some with one, could survive that environment, but the 1200 took it in stride.
With something like a turntable, you can't overcompensate with one parameter (damping) without affecting another, usually in a negative way. That is, if you're trying to reproduce the sound of live music. It's sort of like a belt drive with a heavy platter and inadequate drive train. It might have good deep bass, but sounds thick, slow and ponderous, not live, dead.
I have no experience with Astrion, but 8Hz w/26g arm suggests the exemplar is out of spec. VE lists VTF at 1.0 - 1.4g, Correct? Many top ADC have cu of 30 to 50. Perhaps the review was on a defective cart. That cart would have a cu around 12. Not likely.
BTW, some months ago KAB got a batch of NOS Astrions. Kevin was selling them for around $169 US. Some enterprising person probably resold them on fleabey - bargain hunters paradise!!
Regards, |
Yeah, Fleib I use my cardas burn-in LP, cos i have no speakers in the second room (just headphones) where the Astrion mounted just on the sl1210 with silicon fluid damper. The cartridge was nos and i'm the first user. The deck was totally rewired with cardas and zu phono mission rca. It's a second system and i do not expect much. Once i brought this deck to main room and replaced my SP10 for a little while (with Reed 3p and Argent MC500 on it) i couldn't resist even 10 min of listening sl1210. Just proved myself it's a dark sounding turntable and not involving presentation compared to sp10 with Reed and Argent. Not sure which arm can change the sound of sl1210 to make this deck much better (i think it's just a waste of time and money).
ADC Astrion is probably good cartridge, my favorite Argent MC500 also comes with sapphire cantilever btw. I was very optimistic about ADC Astrion. Strange but in the scan of old review on vinyl engine they said even with 26g effective mass to earm the resonant frequency of Astion was 8Hz. They used it also on medium mass arms for review.
Not sure about Astrion compliance, but not as high as Sonus cartridges for sure! |
Chakster, "It's a bit shoking price for me as i have one NOS Astrion myself, but i don't have the right tonearm for this cartridge. It was in the Raul's list of interesting MM cartridges in the beginnings."
You were right the first time - don't have the right arm. Either does Griffithds unless his arm collection is more extensive than listed.
Raul was of the opinion that arm mass, bearing type, removable headshell or not, etc. didn't matter when mating to a cart. This was all based on resulting low frequency resonance and overall quality, like those are the only considerations. I think this mentality was adopted by most everyone posting here. Raul was wrong.
I'm not saying your comparison of the EPC100c MKIII to the Astrion would change, but you don't really know until you optimize the set up for each. What's the compliance of Astrion, 30 to 50cu?? I don't know but that wouldn't be unusual for ADC or Sonus. Pritchard's Sonus unipivot arm has eff mass of 4.1g - very low moment of inertia.
I've read about older ADC carts having dried up or semi functional suspensions, but if it tracks it probably needs more time. NOS means it's never been played and might require 50 hrs or more break in.
Regards,
|
No, i'm fine with my MC as the reference :) |
If you really want to hear what a good M/M cartridge can do then you need to buy a JVC X-1 MKII. Or you could get a JVC Z-1 and install Jico's SAS stylus in it. Either would have your Technics shaking in fear! (grin) |
Mounted my NOS ADC Astion few days ago to check it out in the second cheaper system on upgraded SL1210 (i have two of them) with grado preamps. Not sure if the cartridge need some more burn-in hrs, i put it on cardas burn-in LP for couple of nights. Anyway my used Technics EPC-100cMK3 cartridge creamed the new ADC Astrion. |
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, |
|
Thanks Griffith Which tonearm do you use ? |
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, i'm back to this thread to ask for ADC Astrion now. The last auction for sealed nos ADC ASTRION on ebay ended @ AU $955 in June 2015 (wow)
The package looks great: http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTg2WDY1OA==/z/B0YAAOSwBahVYteX/$_12.JPG
It's a bit shoking price for me as i have one NOS Astrion myself, but i don't have the right tonearm for this cartridge. It was in the Raul's list of interesting MM cartridges in the beginnings.
Any ADC ASTRION users here ?
Seems like it's a pretty RARE cartridge, top of the line ADC (Saphire cantilever etc). Comments by Eric who was the designer of the ADC in 1978-1982 here: http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=305018&page=3
The designer of the previous model ADC TRX was Count Hisayoshi Nakatsuka (now ZYX owner). I wonder how is the ADC Astrion vs. ADC TRX ? |
I noticed a AKG P100 box for $100. Much better deal! |
Tubed 1, the pricing alone may serve as a caution to "beware".
But I wonder if you have any other reason to post your warning, such as bad business dealings? |
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Extremely-Rare-AKG-P100-Limited-Edition-MI-Cartridge-/252022528190?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3aadb698be
beware of foxtan |
Dear Lew, If my kitchen scale as well as my math are reliable then: 22-6 = 16g. I ever bought two of those MIT I carts and am more surprised by the cart weight (6g) then the Orsonic's. |
Lew, i don't onow if it helps but my Orsonic 11v weight 9.52 g. with two short cartridge mounting bolts and nuts, but without lead wires. This is the lightest Orsonic shell. |
Dear Nandric, Is it possible for you to weigh your heaviest Orsonic and let me/us know the result? I would be curious to know how it compares to my two AV101s. Let us know whether you weight with vs without the detachable yoke to which the cartridge is fastened. Thx.
Dear Fleib, i did concede that cartridge specs, most notably inductance and internal resistance are valuable for knowing how to load the cartridge properly, particularly as regards high inductance MMs. (I guess I did not say that last part in my earlier post.) But for pure sound quality (whatever that is), I never have paid much attention to stated frequency response, distortion, and channel separation specs (back in the day when such data were supplied with each cartridge). Whereas, Raul seemed to place a higher importance on such numbers. |
Hi Dover, you make many good points.
My comment to Lew was indeed a "generalization" and was intended as such. Like you, and I'm sure many others here, I've found both good and bad among MM/MI as well as MC models over the years. I only mentioned the rising high end with many MCs because that has been discussed for so long.
Now your comments on the Koetsu Black Goldline caught my interest. I happen to have one among a collection of cartridges I picked up from a friend (and former dealer) who gave up on vinyl because of his age. I haven't installed it yet but your reference suggests I should move it to the head of the line. So thanks for that. |
|
Which Orsonic are you talking about? To my knowledge there are 3 kinds. For some strange reason they all have the same name: AV 101. But all 3 have different weight, strenght and construction. I own the heaviest kind and am, like Dover, very satisfy with its perormance. The nearest I know to the Arche made by our old friend Dertonarm. I even think that Dertonarm was inspired by the Orsonic for his own construction. |
Dover, as far as i know all Denon carts are indeed different from sample to sample and that's why brands like Zu Audio sell hand selected (tuned) Denon mods. Anyway with a stock Denon price no one should complain. It's the cheapest mass production MC after all. But if the $5000 hiend MC from respected brands like Dynavector, Zyx whatever... would be different from sample to sample i would complain. This is a typical problem of DIY products made somewhere in the basement. |
05-25-15: Pryso Lew, one possible exception regarding what "specs" tell us. Most MC cartridge specs show a rising high end, often above 15K. Some perceive that as added detail, others as objectionable brightness.
I believe that may be a basic difference between those who prefer MC and the many on this thread that found listening pleasure with MM or MI models. Pryso - this is a gross generalisation and I think most participants in this thread are looking beyond that paradigm. In my case a have no aversion to MM's or MI's. I ran Shure V15V's in an Eminent Technology ET2 tonearm for a number of years and currently own a Glanz MFG61 and Victor X1 ( original with beryllium cantilever and shibata diamond ). I also own Dynavector Nova 13D, Koetsu Black, Denon 103D, Fidelity Research FR1mk3 & Ikeda Kiwame MC's. Both the Dynavector and Koetsu Black Goldline have a flat measured response and a lower published resonant peak than the Victor X1. In my system the Dynavector Nova 13D simply digs deeper than the Victor & Glanz - for example on massed choral work I hear clearly separated individual voices with variations in vocal tone and nuance on each voice, whereas the X1 simply does not have that level of resolution. The Koetsu Black is roughly on about a par with the X1, though a little smoother across the spectrum. In my view there are more serious challenges in amplifying moving coils - ringing in MC Transformers, Granularity in FET/Transistor MC gain stages and noise in all-tube MC gain stages. Similarly tonearms have a significant impact on the performance of individual cartridges. I have run most of my cartridges through multiple arms including Eminent Technology ET2, Naim Aro, FR64S & Dynavector 501 (all currently owned ) and SMEV, Alphason HR100, Zeta and a few others previously owned. I hear bigger differences between arms than between cartridges in the same arm in some cases. For MM's there are clearly big differences in perceived performance due to the impact of loading ( both capacitance & resistance) that many modern phono stages simply do not provide. In my view one can only get a semblance of understanding from a description on this thread of how a cartridge could sound if one can see arm/phono and the rest of the system, otherwise it is meaningless. Cartridge performance is very much a sum of the parts generated outcome. For the record I currently have running two turntables - Final Audio VTT1/Naim Aro/Dynavector Nova 13D ( this is my reference deck ) Platine Verdier (modded)/FR64S/Victor X1 & Koetsu Black Goldline in rotation. I also listen regularly to an Soundsmith Paua Moving Iron and Ortofon Rohmann MC, both are musically compelling and enjoyable to listen to. |
Hi Lew, Certain specs can tell us something, especially within a context. How about MM/MI inductance? High inductance models tend to be mellow (Stanton 681 - 930mH) and lower inductance less so (881, 981 - 450mH). All 4-ch carts were low inductance for high frequency extension.
Within a line like AT we can often fill in the blanks if some specs are unknown. If an AT MM has 3.2Kohm impedance we know it has a 120/440/160/155/140 etc. type generator - 490mH. Output might vary by a mV or so due to magnet strength. That's the only difference between a 440ML OCC and a 440MLa. That could also tell us the type of stylus we might prefer on that model. An AT100E has almost identical specs as a 150MLX, so..... BTW, the design team that brought us the 50 and 150ANV and probably the ART7 and 9, redesigned the 350mH (150MLX) motor for the near budget 5V. It has 360mH and lower impedance.
Remember all the conjecture trying to figure out Clearaudio MM's ? I started a thread about that and since then CA scaled back the specs even more to where they're virtually identical to an AT95. At first some V2 models had greater output, but apparently that too is gone. The shocking thing about that thread was poster Kiddman: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1392385752&openfrom&1&4#1
Last year I posted a link to a magazine test (HFN?) of a Concerto. The tip was misaligned by something like 10° and the high end was absent. In all fairness, all their tests have high ends rolled at 15KHz, but this was a bit much. The reviewer said it was a rock cart. Funny name for a rock cart. I wonder what a good sample sounds like, but not enough to want one.
Regards,
|
Lewm, a few years ago local distributor found a cache of NOS Denon 103D's in their warehouse. I went through all of them examining their supplied measured response graphs. None of them were the same, and I was able to pick one that had the most accurate response and best channel separation. The variance was quite noticeable between samples. |
Lew, one possible exception regarding what "specs" tell us. Most MC cartridge specs show a rising high end, often above 15K. Some perceive that as added detail, others as objectionable brightness.
I believe that may be a basic difference between those who prefer MC and the many on this thread that found listening pleasure with MM or MI models. |
Fleib pointed out: "no two cartridges sound exactly alike, even if they are the same brand and model."
It's a bit scary - no ? I hope you can't say the same about tonearms ? If they build in garage then maybe, but new hi-end products from one brand must be identical or nearly identical... when it's very hard to hear the difference. Otherwice it's not a hi-end production. If the quality is different from item to item then it's low quality production. Used items are different - i agree, but new items must be identical (i mean the sound for human ears, not specs on the paper). |
Fleib, et al. Some of these posts raise a question that has always lurked in the back of my mind: Do "specs" on a phono cartridge tell us anything about how one cartridge sounds compared to another? For many reasons, I have always assumed the answer is "no". The specs can tell us what voltage output to expect, roughly, and how to load the cartridge, but otherwise I never even think about comparing the published frequency response, channel separation, and distortion figures, to choose one cartridge vs another. The foremost reason for that is related to what Fleib pointed out; no two cartridges sound exactly alike, even if they are the same brand and model. |
Reel to reel would be nice, but first i have to sell my soul to devil to make it more affordable in my area. Today i come across this article, maybe you have seen it before, this is an interesting quote:
"Kavi Alexander is monitoring disc production by comparing test pressings to the master tape. What cartridge is he using? Another moving magnet, this time the Technics EPC 100 MK IV. But he describes the Audio Technica ATML-170 as very similar, and very close to the actual sound of the tape. In this comparison, he says, virtually no moving coil does so well; most have seriously apparent colorations. "
Any thought about Audio-Technica ATML-170 ?
source: www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html |
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. |