Over the past few months, I've been hunting down several additional cartridges from the vintage list discussed here... But I must say, I keep coming back to my Ortofon 2M Black. It just sounds right. And closest I can find to the original master tape like sound.
I'm using a Michell Gyro SE and Tecnoarm (Rega) at the moment. But I'm curious to try some different tonearms. I'm not against trying vintage, as a matter of fact, I'm interested in ordering an SME Series III to play with.
Any tonearm recommendations that would work well with Michell, as well as with higher compliance MM cartridges? |
Dear Carr, the ''problem '' with my sister is that she claims to be a man. After some thinking I decided not to mess with linguistics but to answer the ''real question'': what kind of person is she/he? You ''forget'' to say how those ''new kinds'' sound (grin). |
|
|
Dear @frogman : Thank’s to the AHEE 99% of true music lovers/audiophiles as you don’t takes very seriously measurements and specs in audio items, as a fact almost all just does not care about. What they care is what they are listening with out knowing that what they are listening is a huge clown from what recording microphones pick up. All kind of measurements has a precise meaning and when you combine several of those measurements and its charts/diagrams you can see its in between relationship and you can have an explanation on the why’s ( not all why’s. but many. ) you are listening that ( example. ): transients are a little soft or slower than in other different system, or diffrences in the midrange in between two audio systems or brigthness or why the bass is not tigth or almost whatever is happening in a room/audio system. To understand all those we have first to learn the stand alone meaning of each kind of measurements and its charts/diagrams, then we have to learn which ones of those measurements when are " looking/analized " tell us a more " complex " information that gives a more shiny ligth of the whole room/system behavior. Normal specs are ( example, not all. ): slew rate, RIAA eq, frequency response and its deviations, dynamic range, crosstalk, separation levels, common mode refection, input overload, input impedance, output impedance, gain, different kind of distortions: THD, IMD, FIM, etc,, electrical impedance, phase, lateral/vertical response, step response, spectral decay, square waves, etc, etc. Now, the whole understanding of measurements/specs and charts/diagrams can’t tell you if that room/system will like you. Maybe in the near future some one can develop a mathematics model to achieve that. Through all the relationship on those measurements/charts comes everything was pick-up by the recording/playback process and ovbiously with what left of that expression/musicality you taled about and that I agree with you. So, maybe is time for some of us to begin to learn on what till today is a "demon " for audiophiles when in reality is a " false demon " that the corrupted AHEE with success teached all of us for many years, was them whom build that demon when in reality is a totally and usefull TOOL when you learn how to use it. That’s all. Time to learn. Here one of many " tools "/analyzers used to obtain audio/digital measurements ( not only J.Atkinson use it but are tools over the world. Even we used ( something similar. ) to measures our self design: Essential 3160 phonolinepreamps. )): https://www.axiomtest.com/Analyzers/Audio,-Distortion-and-Sound-Analyzers/Audio-Precision/SYS_2322A/...A target for any manufacturer must be that both channels measures the same like in my Essential or my 20.6's monobloks. Any one can make a test in your own system and will found out that both channels in any single audio item measures different at each channel ! ! !, yes I know that that is what we are accustom to. I think it's time to be better audiophiles , more DEMANDING for. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
And last but not least. A very special thanks goes to Peter Ledermann at SS for his passionate dedication for work on his MI alternative, there are many interesting models and the best part is that they are modern, today´s technology. Especially the Hyperion. At the moment it´s beyond my budget but hopefully some day.
|
That 2 dB RIAA devitation is way too much for me, well actually my GENELEC active monitors broduce less devitation at that 50 - 12K range :) So it seems to me that SS SG is a romantic approach to vinyl record play. Don´t be wrong, I am a romantic but prefer female curves instead. Life goes on and I keep searching for other flat (and dull) cartridges, and just recently I suddenly get interested in MI carts, adviced by Chakster, Nandric, Lewn, Raul, bdp24. Thanks, much appreciated. The DECCA Reference doesn´t look so romantic but on an appropriate arm it is a killer (looks like a piece of a Star Wars weapon to be honest) gadget. I also owe one of the best MF carts, no other than the (in)famous GLANZ MFG-610LX w/ boron cantilever. The MFG 51L w/ tapered aluminium cantilever is also a superb performer in my system. And as for MC carts, I´m very curious about certain Highphonic models. I must point out that I do like both frequency extremes but only quality, not quantity. A very few cartridges are able to do it right in quality, in those demanding areas IME. My search is just begun, again.
|
Dear @harold-not-the-barrel : The eq. RIAA curve is measured between 20hz and 20khz and when the recording signal in the LP grooves goes inside the phono stage is applied the inverse eq. RIAA that gives as a result a flat frequency as was in the recording process before the RIAA eq.
Any minute deviation in that inverse RIAA eq. makes that what we have inside the phono stage does not mimic the recorded signal. Those inverse RIAA eq. deviations affects not only to a discrete frequencies where are those deviations but affects almost third complete octaves. We have to remember that we are talking of a curve.
Now, normally a decent phono stage comes with RIAA deviation of 0.1db that in theory is near of what was in the recording.
By words coming by the SS owner ( you can read it in the link I posted. ) he measured a deviation in the straing gauge self curve of a swing of 2 full dbs. ( that per sé is terrible. ) between 50hz and 12khz where below 50hz and and above 12khz the deviation is even greater. Unfortunatelly he deleted from his site the chart/diagram of the italian reviewer that measured the starin gauge curve.
Of course that with that very high deviations levels there is no more flat frequency results.
I don't know if today he fixed this critical subject or not. The other issue is that with SS electronics you can't use other cartridge but SS starin gauge, again I don't know if this was fixed or not.
Btw, through my posts in those two " old " threads my attitude was not to questioning the SS owner his choosed trade-offs with his design. No one can do it because it was his privilege to do everything he wants it.
What I was " quetioning " was that he said in his site that the starin gauge design coincide en natural way with the RIAA inverse eq. and looking for those italian diagramas ( deleted by him from his site. ) and as he posted that statement is totally untrue because it does not conforms in any way with the inverse RIAA eq.
What I made it in those threads after learned about was to disclose that critical characteristic/subject, that's all. I never try to questioning him in any way.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dear @frogman : Yes, original performance is the same but it's home reproduction sound is different.
I understand perfectly your point of view. Now, every kind of expression/musicality/rythm comes in what the microphones pick-up during the recording process and I mean everything. That " everything " is reflected in inherent way through measurements as frequency response and many other kind of. We can't say that inside a frequency response chart content only numbers, well in the chart are numbers but inside those numbers comes " everything ".
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
We all have lots of RIAA standard records. When using the Soundsmith Strain Gauge amplifier how does the frequency response (line) look after it has left that amplifier, is it flat or curved in some/certain extent ? And how wide is it ?
|
|
Dear Raul,
Perhaps it IS a linguistic or semantics problem why we don't seem to be connecting on this issue. Anyway, I have too much respect and admiration for your passion about audio to risk our back and forth getting contentious; and, with my "cartridge drawer"as proof, I have learned quite a bit from you about phono cartridges.
My comment was in response to your comment "totally different performance" and which you now characterize as a "different kind of sound". Of course, I agree it would be a "different sound"....as concerns frequency response. But, to me those are two very different things and what I don't understand is why you don't understand the point that I (and others) am making, which is is that there is much more to the record/reproduce process than frequency response and how "accurate" it supposedly is. In my book that is not what determines whether the most important aspects of a musical "performance"....the music, are reproduced well. Even if your use of the term "performance" refers to the technical performance of a piece of audio equipment, to me, again, frequency response is not the most important. As I said...different priorities when listening to reproduced music. Not because some of us are "ignorant" about some kind of "truth" in technical matters, but simply because as with all art what moves the listener emotionally can seldom be explained fully with data and numbers. Personally, I think that's a good thing.
Regards. |
The suspension enigma (aka ''parts and wholes''). I was informed by my friend Axel Schurholz about his problems regarding parts supply from the supplier. As the general rule : ''one can get only what is available''. This apply for cart producers as well for the retippers. However Axel never mentioned the problem with suspensions (aka ''dampers''). Because Axel retired I was forced to search for other retippers. My ''new one'' are Expert stylus and ''some'' person in Slovenia. The curious thing, among other, is the fact that I was able to communicate about analog stuff for the first time in my life in my native language. Slovenia was part of (former) Yugoslavia so this Slovenian and I are (former) compartriots. He is very reluctant to do retipps because not only cantilevers/ styli but also dampers are difficult to get. Now some facts about dampers. The AKG produced the best ever MM cart, P 100 Le , but was forced to close the cart division of their company because they used wrong suspension material for their carts. The known ''weak part'' by EMT carts is suspension known for more as 30 years. EMT was not able to fix this problem in all those years. We already talked about Technics 205 series suspension problem. ''In the other side'', as Raul would say, there is this FR-7 series carts from, say, the 80is with ''perfect suspension'' 40 years later. Ortofon, for example, has its own lab in which continous reserch is done for dampers. J. Carr mentioned in this thread that Lyra used Ortofon dampers for their previous cart versions. Now as we all know we use the division between ''low'', ''mid'' and ''high'' compliance as a kind of ''orientation frame'' for our discussion. This imply at least 3 kinds of dampers which any retipper should have. What if they can't get them? According to the mentioned Slovenian a cart can't sound the same with ''wrong damper''. I assume that tech. specs about compliance by each cart should be the guideline for any retipper. |
Dear @frogman : """
Absolutely not true. """
Look, when we have a 2db deviations in a signal curve as the RIAA against " no deviations " then we have a different kind of sound . Please tell me why that is not true when the fundamental notes and all its harmonics developed are different in between those signal curves.
The digital players in those times was not using the today ADC/DAC levels, even that I posted that with the begin of the DVDA I learned that something was happening in favor of the digital experience.
In the other side on that strain gauge discussion my point is that PL was not saying in his site the true behind its design. He was telling something different to the people and to the customers. That's all. I ask him by email and never gave me an answer and was through my self research/learning work that I " discovery " the whole " thing ".
As I said, I don't know if today finally that starin gauge cartridge conform the RIAA eq.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
I am very, very sorry chakster but I like to tease persons that I like because this was the custom among friends in my upbringing. Add to that my irresistable inclination to be humorous so no wonder people get angry. But if nobody would try to be funy we would have no reason to laugh. Again I am very sorry. I had no idea that Lada is (much) more expensive than I thought. |
Dear Raul,
Who was it that said "The more things change, the more they stay the same"?
I wasn't going to respond any further on our analog/digital debate since I felt the subject was getting a little tired, I felt I had said just about all I had to say, I feel that our differences are a matter of different priorities when listening to music, and you would probably have the last word anyway. Mainly, as I have said, I trust my ears and I know what I hear, and if you need to feel that you are "correct" that is fine with me. However, I had to chuckle and could not resist when I revisited the "strain-gauge" thread that you linked above; a thread that I had forgotten I had participated in. I bring this up because my comments (and yours) in that thread are remarkably relevant to the more recent debate:
++++++ frogman 3,650 posts 12-05-2008 8:12pm
I have been following this thread with a bit of reluctant curiosity. I was, at one point, going to chime in and encourage responders to cut Raul a little slack; but only a little. Reason being that as a person for whom the English language is a second language, I understand all too well how sometimes one's statements, particularly those made in writing, can sound more severe and austere than what was really meant; due to a certain linguistic aukwardness. I can't recount how many times I have had to mediate misunderstandings between my Anglo wife and Latino mother; all due to the in-law's less than perfect command of the English language. But alas, after upwards of twenty posts, I think Raul has made his point perfectly clear; language aukwardnesses and all. While I admire anyone who is so passionate about audio as he is, I just happen to think he misses the boat. One comment he makes I think says a great deal:
"...when you play a recording that was recorded with ( before ) a non RIAA eq. standard then you heard a totally different performance of what is in the recording that comes with a different equalization curve."
Absolutely not true. It will be different as far as frequency response goes, but as we all know there is far more, and arguably far more important, to the proper (I deliberately did not use the word "accurate") reproduction of a recorded performance besides absolutely accurate frequency response. In fact, as I understand Peter's comments (and I confess to limited technical knowledge), a deliberate choice was made to make some sacrifices in absolutely accurate frequency response, in order to gain the potentially more musically significant advantages of fewer phase problems. Makes sense to me.
What doesn't make sense to me is how it is possible that one of the most prolific writers on this forum, one with such strong opinions about audio, and the reproduction of sound, one with over seven hundred responses in various threads, has not made one single contribution on the subject of MUSIC. +++++
Additionally, while I realize that it was made a few years ago, in one of your comments was this nugget:
+++++ I just don't like what I'm hearing specially on the high frequencies and a little in the un-natural tonal balance of its performance, I'm a little sensitive on both frequency extremes and after a time my ears were " tired " of that SG sound ( maybe because that SG was almost new . ) that was not analog like or music live one it was more like a digital source: a good one digital source ( DVDA ). +++++
I find a bit of humor in it all; I hope you can as well.
Regards. |
@rauliruegas
Now, when I read and listen for the first time to the SS Strain gauge I did not know that its design just was made it with out conforming the RIAA standards. Latter on and reading the SS site I learned that critical RIAA subject with that Strain gauge system and I knew it because in their site they showed a chart/diagram where every one can observe that the SS cartridge was designed with out that RIAA eq. in mind. PL arguments many things about trying to compensates for that " mistake ". Through my posts in two different SS Strain Gauge threads he posted that he never be again to accept any cartridge re-tipping to my cartridges ( I was a customer from him with 4-5 of my cartridges in the past. ). Btw, sooner after those threads he deleted the link in his site that showed the differences between the SS curve and the RIAA curve.
That's interesting story. Good to know. |
@nandric
Mother Teresa was even more helpfull but , if I am right she was catholic while the Russians are Greek orthodox.
Please remember that i do not belong to this small group of religious people and all that stereotypes about my country you are using in every 3rd post in your metaphors (vodka, lada, rich people, orthodox, you are only forgot bears on the streets, snow, matreshka and balalayka). |
@pryso
Cacti styli may now be unusual, but they are not"unique".
Am i said they are unique? No. But we know that Miyajima use Bamboo cantilever. |
Dear @chakster : I don't think that PL of SS post in this thread never because is me who started this thread. Is a long and " old " history " that was developed precisely because his unique Strain Gauge system. As you said was Panasonic ( Matushita group member as Technics. ) whom first appeared in the market with a Strain Gauge cartridge that conformed with the eq. RIAA standard. After Panasonic came Stax, Sao Win and some one else. All of them conforming according that RIAA standards. Srain Gauge cartridge concept is in true the best way by a wide margin to make a cartridge transducer, no doubt about. It's not perfect but better than MM/MI/MC technology. Unfortunatelly is not free of trade-offs and the main one is that needs an external " electronics " that must be a real top design and that was not happened in those times as it does noth happens today with the SS one. Now, when I read and listen for the first time to the SS Strain gauge I did not know that its design just was made it with out conforming the RIAA standards. Latter on and reading the SS site I learned that critical RIAA subject with that Strain gauge system and I knew it because in their site they showed a chart/diagram where every one can observe that the SS cartridge was designed with out that RIAA eq. in mind. PL arguments many things about trying to compensates for that " mistake ". Through my posts in two different SS Strain Gauge threads he posted that he never be again to accept any cartridge re-tipping to my cartridges ( I was a customer from him with 4-5 of my cartridges in the past. ). Btw, sooner after those threads he deleted the link in his site that showed the differences between the SS curve and the RIAA curve. Here is one of those threads where he thougth that I was attaking him when in reality I was looking for direct and precise answers about because I want it to know why I listened what I listen the first time I heard his Strain Gauge cartridge. I have to say that today I don't know if the SS Strain Gauge electronics in the system confoms according the RIAA standards: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/would-like-to-hear-from-strain-gauge-owners#3Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
chakster, ". . . if you want to talk about unique design. And cacti growed by his friend Frank Schröder"
Cacti styli may now be unusual, but they are not"unique". At the beginning of home playback the acoustical Victrolas and other models utilized cactus as well as steel needles. ;^)
|
|
Mother Teresa was even more helpfull but , if I am right she was catholic while the Russians are Greek orthodox. What kind of argument is that? Like Polish? When one ask a Pole ''are you Slavic?'' his answer is : ''no I am catholic''. |
Right, but Ledermann also fix cartridges for other people like the hardest working man in this business, so i believe his experience is great and he knows the weakness of the carts (of any type) very well. |
My dear brother, The old Roman's already invented the so called ''oratio pro domo'' argument. I do see J. Carr more as an scientist than ''producer'' but the fact is that he produce and sell MC carts while the impressive looking Ledermann produce and sell MI carts. Besides considering the price of my Allaerts MC 2 finish gold I would be crazy to prefer MM kinds(grin). |
I'm just collect the arguments, i do not take anyone's opinion too seriously. Jonathan Carr did not find any advantages in Raul's long time favorite 100c mk4, but he has mentioned Victor L-1000 MC as very unique design with tiny printed coil right above the stylus, i think Decca MI can be in this category too for its design. SoundSmith video is interesting, how about those 5k MC with very poor channel separation he has mentioned in the video? He even mentioned distortion that MC owners like so much. The stupidity of using conical tip. Strain Gauge cartridge (originally developed by Panasonic) if you want to talk about unique design. And cacti growed by his friend
Frank Schröder |
Addition, I knew that love can make people blind but thanks to my Russian brother it is obvious that t love also can cause deafness. |
My Gosh, chakster knows better than Carr??? When will we see the first MI cart designed and produced in ''Russia with love''? |
Unfortunately J.Carr's statement is outdated on this forum, but the Ledermann's statement is dated October 2017 and he speak about MI (not MM). It worth to watch just to see Peter and to check some technical data he's talking about. |
Who would compare cart manufacturers with philosopher? Well to refute whatever philosopher the only thing one need to do is read some other. ''Our own'' J. Carr explained in this same thread why he prefer MC - and never even try to design an MM kind. |
Mr. Peter Ledermann of the SoundSmith could post in our thread too, i just realized he's not a fan of MC cartridges at all (serviced many thousands of them). In the middle of this video he explain the advantages of MI cartridges over MC. And Strain Gauge over any of them. Very interesting lecture. I also noticed that he hate conical styli :) |
Dear @analogluvr @frogman : Each one of us has to do our job. Belive me that I did it for years not months and in all this time I learned a lot.
Unfortunatelly there is no rules about , we have to learn and stay/try to mantain a self training to have sucess. Not easy task and is more of knowledge level that we go step by step acquiring than too much money to spend. Money is guarantee of nothing, always need it but......
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
|
Dear @analogluvr : """ your preference for digital and solid state tells me that you listen with your head and not your heart. .................................................................. You may have spent a lot of time studying these things but you need to spend more listening and trusting your heart and feelings while listening.""
If in any audio sytem what I’m listening does not moves me then I stop to listened. MUSIC is " feelings/emotion ", as you I know very well and understand your point.
For years I was a tube lover and owned, listened in my system and in other systems the tube electronics you can name it. I was a lover.
Many times want it to come back to SS and every time I intented was dissapointed with, I never gave a good opportunity and in those years SS was not like today where we have several alternatives of very good SS designs that makes the differences.
With SS alternative happens the same as with digital: gentlemans/audiophiles as you have a deep foundation in analog and tubes and shows it through all your posts but and this BUT is what makes the difference with all of you: BUT almost no one gives a true opportunity and the effort need it to SS and digital.
What means a serious " opportunity ": means that we have to invest money on SS or digital, it’s not that we listen to it for a few hours or few days NO, we have to be serious about. But it’s not only that we have to invest on it but we have to make a new whole system/room SET-UP with the new items.
We can’t imagine that SS or digital will works only connecting it, no it’s a mistake to do it that way. Both technologies hide almost no one " errors " in our set-up as happens with analog and tubes. With SS and digital there is no way to hide the system/room " mistakes " that exist all over the audio chain at each single link. We have to remember that each one system is fine tunned ( in this case ) to those tubes or analog.
Now, when we have a really fine tunned room/system with SS/digital then the analog experiences shines on it as never before and we are truer to the live experience.
Is very dificult to give an opinion ( that I respect. ) when we have not true and serious first hand today experiences on the subjects.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dear @frogman @pryso : """ you’ve confused me again with your statement, "Remember that my main target in my home system is to stay nearer to the recording not to the live experiences."
How many of us can have the experience of hearing a recording session to then judge how closely the resulting media (in any format) sounds on our home systems? """
""" to make that very point numerous times in other discussions when faced with the argument that the live music experience is not a valid reference. ........ To use the resulting recorded sound as a reference is problematic as you point out ....... """
I’m sorry for both of you confussions. As you know several times my explanations are not really good because my ignorance levels on the english language.
Here I go: for third time in this discussion I post that my ultimate reference always is LIVE MUSIC ( I posted in this and other forums hundreds of times. ). Period.
Now, of course that I never was on my LPs recording sessions and I don’t need it to fulfill my target: truer to the recording.
Why I don’t need it. Because ity does not matters about the recording sessions that I can’t change it in any way .My whole/overall home audio system work has its solid foundation in this statement:
TRY TO MANTAIN AT MINIMUM EVERY KIND OF DISTORTIONS OR ADDED INFORMATION LEVELS AT EACH SINGLE LINK IN THE ROOM/SYSTEM AUDIO CHAIN.
The target it self permit that you lost the minimum information you can and that at the same time you add the least information that was not created in the recording process but generated through the playback one.
That was why tubes are forbidden for me as all metal undamped tonearm and poor cartridge trackers and many other things as can be that in a system with passive speakers the owner owns no self powered subwoofers. The list is to long to analize it here as is why tubes are a forbidden item for that precise target. Yes, we have to look for something that does not exist: PERFECTION but at least to stay nearest to it.
So, when any one of us fulfill the target to in true mantain at minimum the system/room distortions or added information we will stay nearer to the recording and then to the LIVE experience too.
Tha’s all.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R.
|
The best MI cart ever produced is the AKG P-100 Le. Lew already mentioned MI carts in the context of the lowest moving mass assumptions which postulated that MC carts have lower moving mass in comparison with the ''MM kinds''. AKG invented MI system with a small iron tube on the cantilever end which moved between 4 small rod magnets. Alas AKG made a big mistake by chosing the wrong material for the suspension. To avoid liability they closed the carts division of their company. The P-100 Le is made in (very) limited numbers but appears from time to time on eBay. The only person who owns one is Raul if my memory still works. Now speaking about suspension. We are so obsessed with retips that we totally overlooked suspension. Because I know Axel for such a long time I know what the problems by retippers are. One need to discriminate between cart producers who also have repair service like Van den Hul and Soundsmith and ''ordinary retippers''. The cart producers have much better access to part supplier. This is not the case with ''ordinary retipper''. They have not only the problems with styli and cantilevers but also with dampers (aka ''rubber ring'') . According to my new retipper from Slovenia if he can't get the right damper the cart will not sound as original. They can't get coils have limited supply of styli/ cantilevers and dampers. So no wonder Axel bought second hand carts as donors for parts. So my advice for a new suspension is either Van den Hul or Soundsmith. Both produce carts with different compliance so should have different dampers available for their customers. |
Not sure "what's the best", Harold, i think it can be the best of the month only :) But i like Joseph Grado Signature TXZ (MI) model. Those Decca are the uglies in my chart, but i never owned any of them and i don't think i have tonearm for them. |
What are best MI carts produced, DECCA London Reference is one ?
|
Dear @downunder : That AS TT is nothing especial. Appeared in 1983 along the heavy weigth fashion of all those old times. Yes, a very high inertia moment that can helps to speed stability but with draw backs too. Nothing is perfect.
If you observe this design is very similar to MS one: all metal, four metal arm boards and all these arm board at the worst place: at the TT feets where everything must pass.
What's new with? what advantage has over any today top TT? . I have no curiosity about.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Raul your preference for digital and solid state tells me that you listen with your head and not your heart. Both analog and tubes do a much better job at capturing the emotion of the music. In fact I believe that SET when run within its proper parameters also offers less distortion than ss and sounds natural when doing it. You may have spent a lot of time studying these things but you need to spend more listening and trusting your heart and feelings while listening |
Raul and all, My Dynavector Karat Nova 13D. It was for sale at Hart Audio UK and advertised as a demo cart direct from Japan. The seller said they had used it just for 10-15 hours at most, so the cart was practically as new. It came w/ original wooden box but no papers, in ad there were specs about and if my memory serves me right the average VTF was stated as 1.4 g. So I used 1.5 g to be in "safe area" as I also understand that too lower weight may cause damage to vinyl groove. Raul, I may have a slightly different sample of the Nova 13D, it also looks that the body is longer than yours. Anyway, now I have 1.65 g and it tracks 100 microns :) Thanks for advice.
|
**** if I attend enough live performances I can fix in my sonic memory the tones, colorations, dynamic abilities, and details of say a trumpet. Listening to trumpet recordings at home may not be an exact replication but I can judge how close I've come to some average of those ****
That is such an important point; and you made it very succintly. I have tried, with varying degrees of success, to make that very point numerous times in other discussions when faced with the argument that the live music experience is not a valid reference. Whether in a hall or a recording studio the mics pick up the sound of a live performance and do so with varying degrees of fidelity depending on the mics used and how they are used. To use the resulting recorded sound as a reference is problematic as you point out and should be obvious.
|
|
|
Raul, now you've confused me again with your statement, "Remember that my main target in my home system is to stay nearer to the recording not to the live experiences."
How many of us can have the experience of hearing a recording session to then judge how closely the resulting media (in any format) sounds on our home systems?
At least in attending acoustic musical performances I can "refresh" my auditory memory of the sounds of the instruments being played. For me that furnishes a basis for judgement of my system at home. No my recording will not (likely) be the same musician with the same instrument in the same acoustic environment. But if I attend enough live performances I can fix in my sonic memory the tones, colorations, dynamic abilities, and details of say a trumpet. Listening to trumpet recordings at home may not be an exact replication but I can judge how close I've come to some average of those.
Attempting to understand the basic sonics of each and every recording to judge the accuracy of playback seems an impossible task.
Sorry if I've diverted from the analog VS digital discussion which is a diversion from the original cartridge design type topic. ;^) |
Dear @frogman : For years Mike was an analog lover and as thousands of audiophiles and music lovers digital was a forbiden alternative. For some time now he " understand " digital scenario and its top quality performance and today he is really deep learning about.
Today digital alternative is working in the beginning of its maturity step and what it shows it is just fabolous and the good news is that it’s every day improving it so the best is forth coming. Nothing can stop it, not even we analog lovers because I’m one of them.
I don’t dimish you or other gentlemans that think like you, things are that I see " things " from a different approach. Remember that my main target in my home system is to stay nearer to the recording not to the live experiences.
I’m not talking of " numbers " per sé I only pointed out clear sources ( and many more than exist in analog. ) where in this alternative the original information is losted and this like it or not alter everything on what we are listening.
As you I know what I listen what my ears, brain and body perceives. Years ago I was a furious defender of analog against digital but as digital through the time I learn what happens all over the recording/playback process of what we are listening.
Like it or not what you and every one listen in its systems are reflected through ( at least. ): frequency response, noise/distortions levels and SPL. Inside this characteristics and other goes everything we percieves at listening sessions.
Mike is a gentleman that’s polite and mind opened to any kind of subjects as the one we are touching and I?m sure that he never did the " 3 months digital test " but I’m sure too that you and tyour friends and furious digital detractor neither and if we don’t do it then we can’t talk inside the same scenario.
You can tell that maybe you don’t need that test as Mike that does not need it but today he knows and through many of his posts you can read that that " expression " exist even for his musicians/composer friends as he pointed out in the link I posted:
" Friday night I had a few serious analog focused guys over and we listened to quite a bit of digital; mostly string quartets, and classical piano. they were quite amazed at the natural, spacious and focused presentation. one of them is a classical composer and music professor. he was especially taken with a redbook Haydn String Quartet and the sound staging and natural tone. "
" he was especially taken...
and his friends was not in the daily listening in digital.
Btw, if we analize a little to the Mike’s system we can note that exist no tubes that can’t honor music/expression ( impedes to stay nearer to the recording, no matters what. ), DD TT, no LT tonearm ( he was owner for year of a Rockport series 3 TT that came with LT. ), no all metal tonearm and no undamped tonearm, speakers with two self powered subwoofers. His TT is not only a DD but the most importan issue is that the manufacturer before builded TTs is an expert in damping devices for audio and that TT has that expertise including in the arm boards.
Now, maybe we don’t like or don’t want to stay truer to the recording and this is up to each one of us.
For me this dialogue with you was and is a learning one and my target is not who has the reason because both alternatives has its own trade-offs. Maybe what you and other gentlemans need is to be exposed more frequently to decent or top digital listening sessions.
Btw, in this subject we are discussing is happening the same that happened when I touch for the first time in this forum the necessity to have: a pair of self powered subwoofers, DD turntables, tonearms with removable headshells, well damped tonearms and the like. Many many people was and posted against what I was telling but years latter almost all of them areb using exactly what they were against it. Such is life.
@toddverrone said: " well said. ", with out explanation why is good said because I’m not using " the data " as a main argument.
frogman even in this audio system subject we have to walk ahead, digital is a step ahead and not as you posted somewhere a backwards. It¿’s not this way. As Mike there are several analog lovers that " knows " about and like it .
I think it’s a good time for every one to start to build a digital rig at least: just for fun ! !
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R.
|
Well said, frogman. This same dichotomy appears in the cable debates. Those who say the data show cables don't matter and those who say their ears say cables do matter.
I tend to go with the ears.. |
Dear Raul,
I always hesitate to approach discussions/debates such as this from this vantage point for reasons that may be important only to me; but here goes...and for whatever it may be worth to anyone:
I, like the great majority of my "friends" (as you refer to them), have been playing music (mostly, but not entirely, in acoustic settings) on a daily basis for (in my case) almost fifty years. There have been countless experiences in performance and recording settings employing both analog and digital. I mention this not to gain any kind of exclusivity, but simply to set the backdrop that is at the root of my views on the analog/digital issue. All of the "facts" and "clear evidence" that you present mean little when our ears tell us something different. Yet, you expect us to ignore what our ears tell us. You offer a lot of technical data; but, ironically, little or no details about what you actually hear that support your views. In another thread another musician offered a point of view similar to mine that was also in opposition to your point of view and you, likewise, dismissed it. Moreover, you previously referred to the musicians that you say you have a relationship with as "almost deaf". Could it be that your musician friends also feel the way that mine do? Have you asked them? Additionally, there are many intelligent and very musically astute audiophiles here that, likewise, share these views. Do you ever consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, there is something, on a very fundamental level, about how the two technologies capture and present music that transcends all of the "facts" and "clear evidence" that you present? This "evidence" is "clear" only on paper. Remember the THD "wars" of yesteryear? The point is that numbers seldom tell the whole story.
The beauty of art is that it transcends what can be explained factually and only by accepting this can we get closer to the facts. I WANT digital to consistently sound as true to the musical values that I feel are most important as analog does; it simply doesn’t. Btw, as usual I am perplexed by some of the supporting "evidence" that you offer:
In the link that you included in your most recent post the audiophile that you cite wrote this after extolling the obvious virtues of his new DAC:
**** can Lps still be better? sure they can but not by as much as you might think.......****
So, what is your point? Is this not what I have been saying all along?
Regards.
"It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure.” - Albert Einstein
|
dc_bruce, If moving mass was the whole story, then MI cartridges would be king. They have lower moving mass than MCs. So do the optical and strain gauge cartridge types. (But many do say that those are "special".) |
Dear @frogman : I dont think we are around circles but if you think are " circles " is better because a circle is closed not something that just left in the " air "/open. I respect your position on the subject but I posted clear evidence of all the different steps and sources where the analog signal is totally losted and never recovered because there is no way to recover it. I told you that I was not analizing all the other steps during the playback where that true losting of information is happening and where additional are generated full of different kind of distortions that at minimum puts blur in the analog signal but this kind of blur happens to during the recording process and I did not analize it yet. Other lost information analog source: if your phono stage was not designed with the Neumann pole in the inverse RIAA eq. then you are losting information too. All those " facts " not only alter but disappears the original expression you talk about and what we are listening from the speakers through analog is a totally new " expression " if exist at all. and the like Digital has not that kind of heavy different problems if any. People think that R2R is the " reference " and better than same digital process but it's not because is way different to record in tape zeros and ones than the complexity of the analog information signal. We have to think that the analog signal must " suffer " the R2R noise levels, frequency response limitations, speed stability of the recording mechanism, wow&flutter and the like where to the digital recording signal is not affected by and you can attest what I'm saying: take one of the D2D Sheffield LP and check it against is counterpart ( same LP recording, same session. ) recorded direct two 2 track tape and you will listen a huge differences in between where the D2D is way superior to the one that was recorded using a R2R. Analog is a mess, problem for we analog and music lovers is to understand it and accept it's. I remember very well and I own it several LPs recorded digital in the old times with all the digital limitations that the medium had. Examples about are the Denon PCM LP recordings that if you listen one of the good Denon recordings you will be extremely satisfied with. Not all Denon's LP sounds good and comes with that " expression " but the good ones are really good. Telarcs are other very good example of digital LP recordings. Yes, there are the bad ones here too but the good ones you can't say if are full analog or digital/analog, even if you invite one of your friends and with out tell him is a digital recording he just can't take it in count is digital. Delos is another great example of labels with digital LP recordings. Delos and Telarc used the rudimentary Soundstream digital machine where Denon, that are experts about, designed his own PCM recording machine that in theory was better than the Soundstream. From some time now ( in the last times. ) many of the LP recordings are recorded with the latest digital technology and many audiophiles just don't know it and like a lot what they are hearing. Look this gentleman in one word is a true reference, take a look on his audio system where he has top reference analog rig including R2R and top digital rig but additional well not additional but before all that he is a true music lover and as a human beeen a true top gentleman . Read what he posted and again read and see his home audio system details: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/what-sounds-best-vinyl-or-cds/post?postid=1445044#1445044https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/615I'm not closed to your " expression " it's only that other than listen it I analize if in reality is preserved by analog and things says it's not. Even this I like analog alternative and as he I like digital too and know for sure its inherent today superiority. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Thanks Raul, apparently I just assumed wrongly that vinyl was your preference over the years of this post, with MMs being your favorites until recently when you again discovered MCs you found satisfying. At least up until your most recent statements about digital.
I only have about 3K LPs. But that has been enough to keep me committed to vinyl playback. And while I'm not anti-digital (some local audio friends, including a couple you met when you visited San Diego, stated they couldn't stand listening to digital for at least the initial 20 years or so) I find I simply enjoy listening to analog more. So I'm in a similar place as frogman.
Peace
|
Dear @downunder : That original cartridge is just terrific. Good luck with it and yes play with all this warranty days time.
Btw, @pryso maybe we don't need a mk5 new Technics design today but this same MK4 with some kind of up-dates. It's a killer´s cartridge.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dear @pryso : Easy: I own over 7K LPs and when I re-discovered the MM alternative was really enligthed and I wanted to share every one.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Hi all, j. carr ever proposed to extend this thread to other kinds of carts. I started this thread but, alas, nobody was interested. However if there are members who own either: Panasonic strain gauge EPC 450, 451,etc,; Toshiba electret C 400 or Stax CP-Y I got the address of an lab in Slovenia where those can be fixed, improved ,etc. www. eselab.si |