Dear Dover&Lew, I have no idea how MD sounds or what the thing is worth. But one was listed 'as new' on the German 'audio-markt' for 3 months while the seller reduced his asking price 3 times. Then I made him an offer and, to my suprice, he accepted. I must confess to be intriqued by Andreoli as person and have read his controversial article of more than 30 pages in German. There is this phrase about the small bondary between a genius and a lunatic. But what is without question is the fact that this man is obsessive with our hobby actually. The opinions are devided as is usualy the case and there is no way for an amateur like me to decide whom to believe. Now this 'believe thing' is anylised by logicians and others . Russel was the first to name the issue as 'propositional attitudes'. For the sake of analysis all kinds of attitudes are put in this form: 'x believes that p is true' Whatever individual can be put in the place of the variable 'x' (say Lew, Nikola, Henry,etc) while 'p' stands for whatever proposition. Many attempts are made to logicaly make something of this contruction but without any result. All the attemps lead to contradictory outcome. Alas because we all use this way of speaking and because of this use the issue is important for all kinds of language researchers. But there are also other important issues which are also not solvable. Dover, I have also seen this Magic listed by Walker and the same reason as you mentioned 'puts me off'. If Andreoli thought that the ruby cantilever with some other stylus is to prefer he would do this himself. What I would like to know is what kind of stylus he actually uses. I don't believe (sic!) that his stylus is, uh, 'conical'.
Regards, |
Nandric - I picked up the "Magic Diamond" moving coil preamp from Germany when I was trying to optimise my very low output Ikeda. For a solid state device it is very good, saw off the Klyne 7, but I prefer tubes for phono. My gut feel is that the Magic Diamond cartridge will be very very good. If I was retipping it I would keep within the original design intent. The Garrott Bros were adamant that fine profile tips such as the microscanner were unsuited to the Denon 103 design - they recommended the weinz parabolic. Same with cantilever. I might have made Walker an offer on their one for sale, but the ruby cantilever puts me off. |
HEREThe origin of the MD cartridge is not a matter of opinion, mine or anyone else's. It is a matter of fact. I have cited a thread where the origin of the Magic Diamond cartridge is discussed and debated. Based on what I read, I am tending to doubt that what I wrote previously is actually true. (The ratio of opinions on the cited 2007 thread is in favor of the independent origin of the MD.) It was a factoid that stuck in my memory from long ago, longer ago than the dates on the cited thread. The MD cartridge may in fact have no child/parent relationship to the Denon DL103. The important thing is whether it sounds good; I have no idea whether it sounds good or not. If Raul and Nikola are enthralled with it, I have to suppose that it does sound good. I used to know Lloyd Walker (Walker Audio), and I now recall that the MD was his baby in the US. I trust Lloyd. I apologize to Mr. Andreoli, the Italian gentleman who is said to produce the MD and many other cartridges and who is a believer in spherical styli. |
The issue I have with the Magic Diamond saga is that people are presuming it is a reworked Denon 103 but there is no proof. Even if it was, we have no idea of how much rework is done and at what cost. As far as I recall the original Van den Hul Grasshoppers started life as a Dynavector cartridge - does this mean the Grasshopper should be US$299. As to the value proposition, some people spend $50-60k on amplifiers that look like power stations and sound like dentist drills. If they like them so what. I know someone here locally that changed to monoblocks - he told me they sounded worse than the stereo amp, but he liked the look better. His money, his choice.
|
Dear Lew, I am really sorry for your, say, disturbance. I assumed that you are familiar with the terminology I used. It is actually very easy to explain. Your attitude towards some statements made about Magic Diamond is as you stated. Say a,b, c...n. I assume that you have also seen and read other statements about this same cart with different valuation then yours. So other persons have different attitude than you have reg. those statements. But the statements made are obviously mutual contradictory. Ergo it is logicaly impossible for the contadictory statements to be true. BTW attitudes mean in this context : believing , hoping. wishing ,etc. that such and such is the case. Ié : 'x believes that p is true'. This is a kind of model or general exampel for this kind of statements.
Regards, |
|
Dear Lew, those hearsay 'árguments' of yours are called 'propostional attitudes' (Russel)and there is no consistent logical interpretation of them possible (see Quine: Quantifiers and Propositional Attitudes).
Regards, |
to Nandric and everyone....I don't want to start argument but Yes i agree... Dover has an ax to grind..I have no idea why but..maybe he enjoys drama?!..
anyways my experience with the Conical shaped diamond is a good one.....Raul mentioned Fulton which is a very good example of what a good Conical cartridge can be(I own several) ....also the conical Decca's when working right are an excellent cartridge with good FR to 20kc
there are many more and personally like them a lot IMO they just sound like music :)
Good listening
Lawrence Fidelity Forward |
Dear Raul, Of course, no cartridge is "worth" $15K. It amazes me that any are sold at that price, but they are sold, in fact. Why was my post on the Magic Diamond so provocative to you and Nicola? I did not say it was a bad cartridge. I did not say that it was not better than its forebear, the DL103. I only said what I said. It's just a fact that it derives from the DL103. I think the news was greeted with anger at the time, because the maker was not forthright about the source of his product. Just as Lexicon took a lot of criticism in the audio press when it was shown that they did not do much except to re-package an Oppo. But could the Lexicon be superior in sound to the Oppo, perhaps because of a more sturdy chassis, better shielding, more damping, etc.... Yes, it could. |
Nandric, There is complete logic in my post. Please read it again. To say that the Magic Diamond cost 10 times more than the Denon that spawned it is not to say that the buyers were stupid. Where is the word "stupid" in my post? The audio business is full of such deceptions. Are you aware that a Lexicon digital player is an Oppo in disguise, for many times the price of an Oppo? (In fact, many other upscale cdp's are Oppo's in disguise.) The makers of such gear would defend their actions based on the notion that they have added some "secret sauce" that makes their product superior to an Oppo. So too did the maker of the Magic �Diamond vis the Denon. The worst offenders are the purveyors of interconnects, power cords, and speaker cables. How much do you think they really pay for the wire that is the only functional part of their respective products? I am reporting information, not making a judgement. Therefore the fact that I have not heard the Magic Diamond is irrelevant. I am sorry, but your accusation would not stand up in court. You could say that I am guilty of reporting hearsay evidence, but I did identify my statement as hearsay. |
|
This discussion of conical styli reminded me that back in the days when J Gordon Holt was still publisher, editor, and chief writer for Stereophile, he drew a fair bit of criticism for rating his favorite Shure V-15 (whatever) conical version above the comparable elliptical stylus version. But then he was only making comparisons with LPs against master tapes he had of the same performances. ;^) |
Dear Professor, By universal quantification 'all' each and every single object needs to satisfy the given condition(s) in order to make the statement true. By 'existential' quantification 'some' just one object which satisfy the given condition(s) is needed to make this statement true. BTW 'a duck' is not a determinated object so very difficult to own. You probable mean the word 'duck' but a real duck is not an expression but an object. You are still by Aristoteles logic of classes so whatever operations you try you get classes as result. The modern logic started by Frege. Also the logic of quantification which he called the logic of 'generality'.
Regards, |
Dear Lewm: There were and are cartridge designers that supported and still support spherical stylus shape.
Fulton was one of them I own one of his models that's a LOMC that from its specs goes on frequency response up to 50khz and performs really good.
Stylus shape is very important in a cartridge designs but only a part in the whole design.
I own the Denon 103 and is an average performer, many persons said that for its price is a great performer.
I don't know what Andreoli made with that 103 platform but I heard it and is a lot better than the 103. IMHO those persons that affirm that the performance on both cartridges is similar I think ( with all respect ) their audio systems has no adequate resolution for or their ears are " closed ".
About the MD price: what do you think on the 15K+ Koetsu Coralstone or other " crazy " prices on cartridges that IMHO has no quality performance justification??
Regards and enjoy the music, R |
Nikola has a duck. I'd have not thought it but he said so. A duck is an amphibian, not all amphibians are ducks. He also has a dog. I'd not have thought it but he said so. A dog is a canine, not all canines are dogs.
Styli, in whatever manner truncated, taper to a point. Not all styli are cones, there are also those of the square shank species. Spheres are round. There is no harm done in describing a stylus as having "a spherical tip". To assert that a stylus is spherical is an egregious error. This is a matter requiring great specificity.
So.
After having given it much consideration, I conclude Nikola likes animals. Other than cats. Nobody's perfect.
Peace, |
Dear Lew, There is no logic in your post: 'I never owned a Magic Diamond or heard one.' Then you quote some others opinions because you have non of your own but your first sentence starts with: 'I think the issue with the Magic Diamond was..' I am sure you wrote those lines not just before you go to bed but probale early in the morning. Do you really think that others are so stupid to pay 10-15 times more for a Denon in disquise?
Regards, |
I think the issue with the Magic Diamond was not really that it did not sound "good" but that it sold for roughly 10-15 times the cost of the Denon upon which it was based and to some did not sound any different. In other words, it was thought to be a scam, by some. (I have no opinion; I never owned a Magic Diamond or heard one.)
Back in the 70s, Harry Pearson fell in love with the spherical stylus version of the Decca cartridge (model name escapes me), just at a time when the audiophile world had drunk the Kool Aid of elliptical stylus supremacy uber alles. Many of the cognoscenti rushed out to buy the Decca, of course. I heard one; it had a great midrange, no doubt. Later, I bought the elliptical version, the SC4E. It could gouge a neat path through any vinyl, should have been used for a cutter instead of for playback. Very heavy body and zero compliance. |
Dear Dover, You must be joking. The Vetere tonearm? Any idea what I have spend the last month only? My sons are seriously thinking to consult some (other) lawyer about their legal rights. BTW , as I already mentioned, the whole 'Artillery' is still on the way to Holland: Shiraz, Kiseki and Magic Diamond. Why is your Andreoli pre 'on the shelf'? Would the Sony XL 44 l be of any help?
Regards, |
Dear Lharasim, I am sorry for us both but according to Dover we have no idea what we are talking about. This seems to (logicaly ) follow from our assumptions about the conical stylus. I was all the time aware how dangerous this New Zealand guy is but I learned from Frege that there is no mercy in the truth questions. I even like the guy probable because of this strange Slavic inclination towards suffering.
Regards, |
Hi Nandric,
;~)
As always... |
Nandric - I'm surprised you have time to post given the number of cartridges awaiting your attention. I have a Reto Andreoli moving coil preamp sitting on the shelf, but alas no cartridge. Will be interested to see what you hear. My old Denon 103 Garrott still has fond memories for me. Are you going to go for the Vertere tonearm for the Shiraz ?? |
|
Hi Dgob, From the qualification 'the top Astatic MF 2500' by Lharasim I deduce that Astatic has something similar to Glanz 5 or 7 . But because of Raul I am reluctant to mention the headshell.
Regards, |
Dear Dover, If one assume that conical= spherical then either can be substituted for each other salva veritate. That is to say if the premise is also true (LOL). No idea how and why but I was the first to mention Anderoli in this thread asking implict for the 'rehabilitation' for the poor old innocente conical thing. I have then just read this paper of Andreoli in some Swiss Magazine. Well I may also have read some papers about particle physics...So I forwarded this article to Axel , Tuchan and Dertonarm but, alas, never got any comment except from Axel who was not interested but mentioned to me that 'only elliptical, etc styli are capable to reach fr. above 20 Khz'. I see now that I should post this article to you but back then I had no idea who you was as well that German is an official languge in New Zealand (LOL).
Regards, |
Dear Nandric: Dear Nandric: This is one of the MD threads I refered to:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1174270052&read&keyw&zzspu
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
There is no such thing as a conical stylus, a conical stylus would gouge your record out. There is a spherical tipped stylus. Now there is an interesting summary or explanation of Reto Andreoli's theory on why spherical tipped stylus are more appropriate than fine tip profiles here : http://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=9mqival9n98ha639bu21sse1j3&topic=705.msg6149#msg6149 I strongly recommend you have a read and think. It is very interesting and quite logical to follow. "That the stereo groove undoubtedly could be traced with less distortion with a narrower stylus than with a spherical stylus is true. But only if the suspension of the cantilever is the same as that of the cutter stylus. And this is never the case! And here begins the tragedy of the industry, which has been grinding away on the spherical stylus since the first stereo records came about, hoping to improve the reproduction. The actual problem, namely the geometrical design of the cantilever suspension, was wholly ignored - except by Decca, EMI Varilux, Neumann and Ikeda. That this thoughtlessness, or the ignorance of the complexity of the matter has led to design errors, even has increased playback error, is a fact." It is suggested that if you are going to use a finer tip than a spherical, then the cartridge compliance should match the cutterhead to minimise pinch distortion. Due to the unknown compliance of the cutterhead, as it will vary with each recording then one could surmise that fine tip profiles should only be used with low compliance cartridges to ensure the cantilever has less compliance than the cutterhead. ( Timeltel this is your cue to add some intellectual rigour here ) The article acknowledges that Decca, Ikeda, Neumann & Varilux have recognised this in their cantilever design. Both the Decca and Ikeda cantileverless cartridges are the quickest cartridges I have heard by some margin. Interesting to note that some record companies compensated for the stylus distortions of the day. Now I know why when I packed an elderly gentleman's record collection into my wagon a few years ago he said with a glint in his eye "dont worry, I've kept a few of my favourite 78's". |
Dear Lharasim; You are right, your Astatic is the " losted link " and no one can find out. Lucky you are!
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Audiopulse: Just a good luck and patience.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
The mouse and the elephant : Nandric due to the size of the contact of the stylus, the record groove is about 1/6th the size of a human hair, 1.5g tracking force equates to roughly 340lbs/square inch. |
Dear Nandric: +++++ " Raul is not willing to actually share carts but only his opinion about them. ... " +++++
you are right but there are some reasons about that I would like to explain:
- first almost all those cartridges are vintage ones. - the more valuable are very and some extremely hard to find out. - I live in México that's far away from almost all of you. Shipping both ways has an inherent risck.
in the other side and even that all of us really take care about the cartridge fragility even on cartridge set up/handling time to time some of us have " accidents ".
My latest one was two weeks ago with my NOS Stanton 981HZSMK2!!!!!! and in the past I can remember: Grace Ruby, four times ( yes, four times. ) one of my Colibris, one of the AKG P100, At 160, At 180, Technics P100CMK4 and I can go on and on.
It is a " pain in the ass " to work in the middle of ten tonearms/cartridges where your body is surrounded by those delicate items: when is not one finger is your arm or the sweter you dress or even your head. I take care a lot on each one of the cartridges but almost all days I'm doing something around the analog rig system so the probabilities of an accident are higher that when you have only one-two tonearm/cartridges at the same time.
Not only you offer me to send me one of your value treasures but other Agoners too and in all cases I refuse to accept not only because is a critical responsability for my self but to protect those vintage treasures.
If I remember was you whom posted something like this: " a cartridge is like my wife, I don't borrow she to any one ".
Many times and even if we can find out again one sample of a vintage cartridge maybe its quality performance ( due to its vintage status. ) been poorer than the first sample. I experienced this more than once.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Quote: The other curious thing is that Andreoli quasi pretended to believe that conical styli are superior to other kinds
why would you say pretended? there are many conical MM/MC cartridges that will play out there in the 40kc range and beyond....
IMO overall a good conical diamond designed cartridge plays in a more coherent way... meaning what i hear is a more togetherness... no frequency range sticks out
Lawrence Fidelity Forward |
Dear Raul, To me this Magic diamond looks like a modify EMT TSD 15. The strange thing is that so many designers are somehow chalenged by this 'oldfashioned' German cart. Van den Hul, Brinkmann, Einstein, Touraj Mogaddan (Roksan) and possible some others all try to improve on the original design. My friend Tuchan was the first who recommended this EMT cart to me but mentioned some LZI model made for the Japanese market. Difficult to find and very expensive. So I used your method,so to speak, and bought defective kinds for cheap with intention to post them to Axel and then see what he can make of them. This way I bought the Shiraz and Kiseki blue for about 250 GBP and posted to Axel. He was at first very sceptical about the possibilities for reapair but somehow 'invented' the way or the method to repair them. So I am very curious about those carts. The other curious thing is that Andreoli quasi pretended to believe that conical styli are superior to other kinds but designed some special shape for his own Magic diamond and other carts which can reach 40 Khz. I am not a technical guy but dont believe that any conical stylus can reach 40 Khz. BTW that is what Axel told me also. So dear Raul we have obviously the same 'disease' but yours is much worse than my (grin). |
|
Nandric, Raul,
I have read on other forums that Sound Smith (Peter), is doing great things with what he refers to as a manor rebuild of the Denon 103. It's not cheap but claims to make it a world class contender, bar none! Regards, Don |
Dear nandric: Appreciated. Now, that Magic Diamond: well in the past in a few Agon threads the Magic Diamond was under " deep " scrutiny. I had the opportunity to heard it in one of my trips to great Agon friends home places in USA ( J.Galbraith. whom own a top system: Walker TT between other items. ).
Sounds very good. Things happen that the Magic Diamomnd used the Denon-103 " platform " and from there born the cartridge with several designer modifications.
The debate about was " serious " because the MD owners refused to belive that Denon procedence. At the end was proved that in fact the original procedence was Denon even that what we read on the net by the designer it self could tell something different.
Anyway, Denon procedence ( I think there is nothing wrong with this. ) or not the MD is very good performer and I know you will be satisfied with.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Hi Nandric,
Although not infallible (who is?), Raul's judgements are generally of the highest order, based on lengthy first-hand investigations and should rightly be praised.
In my experience and consequent opinion.
As always... |
Dear comrade Don, I am sorry to report that I am excommmunicated as a party member because of my capitalistic inclination and petit bourgeois mentality (LOL). The Shiraz is, I hope , on the way to me but meanwhile I got the 'problematic' Stanton 981, the less problematic Benz LP S and the misterious Magic Diamond made by even more misterious Reti Andreoli the 'kid' who learned this trade by the Bross brothers for two years. He was probable more fanatic about carts than our Raul. He come to Australia as kid specifically to meet the brothers. He was then not able to speak English. To reinforce the mystery his cheapest cart is the Magic diamond ($5000) the next one $ 15000 and the next to the next $ 25000. For the last two mentioned the waiting time is 6 months. BTW I got my for much less because, despite the fact that his native languge is German , very few Germans have ever heard about him.Otherwise I would have much more competitors on the German 'audio-markt'. But it may be the case that they don't trust the Swiss. Because of the 981 my Benz is still in its box while Siraz, Kiseki and Magic Diamnod I hope to receive next week. So I have much to report about.
Regards, |
Dear all, I need to defend Raul. He was with me the only one who quoted the data from his 981 'calibration performance data' card. It would be strange to own the card and not the cart. His and my sample are nearly identical as I already mentioned. There are no such calibration data for the 980. So those can be only compared by listening test. I don't see why his comparison between the original 981 stylus and the Pickering 5000 should be so strange. Our Fleib, for example, does such comparison all the time. Raul is still the 'Emperor' of this thread and his contributions the most valuable. I deed not purchased 30 MM carts thanks to him but certainly about 15. So I still feel very obliged to him.
Regards, |
Dear Dover, As you see Raul is not willing to actually share carts but only his opinion about them. I was, I think, the first one who put forward that Glanz and Astatic are 'the same' carts. I first got the Astatic MF 200 and then the Glanz 31 l (l=line contact). To my suprise I was not able to hear any difference between them. Then I discovered the user manual included by my Glanz 31L and got , what the German call 'Aha Erlebnis'. For both (import) brands Mitachi Corp. in Japan made the those cart. All the corpusses or corpora (thanks Lew) are the same while the only difference are the styli. Shibata by MF 100 and 200 and line contact by Glanz 71, 51 and 31. There are also models with elliptical styli MF 300 -400 while the most Glanz models have both choices. But my MF 200 was more than $200 while my Glanz 31 l was about $50. I sold my MF 200 for $380! That is how Raul's 'Ahe' works. If you are curious about about Glanz you can get my Glanz 31 l and 31E to compare. My Glanz 5 I am not willing to lend out even to Tuchan, Henry or Lew.
Regards, |
Dear Dover: Thank's for your offer but IMHO in all cases the best arbitrate almost always are each one of us.
Imagine that all the cartridge comparisons in this thread could needs an arbitrate!!!!!
Fortunately things in audio are not so complicated as to have an arbitrate, at least for now and at least with persons that are not audio " rockies ".
What I can do is to put on sale for you the cartridge that was outperformed after my comparison. Just tell me.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Raul - if you would like to send me the Glanz & Astatic, I would be happy to arbitrate in this matter and give a fair and balanced review. |
Raul, what is your secret to tracking down cartridges that are difficult to obtain ? Before we know it you will be telling us that you two/three of the same Glanz cartridge. I have been searching for the same cartridge and just gave up. It is like chasing a ghost. |
Raul,
A few weeks back there was a Glanz MFG-71L up for auction on eBay. I came close to bidding on it but because I already have a Astatic MF100 & MF200 I decided to pass. I hope you still have a MF100 in your stash because I really would like to hear how the two compare and if perhaps they really are the same cartridge. Looking forward to your results. Regards, Don |
|
Raul, I feel tracking distortions (or lack of), is even more important than cantilever/stylus profile. What I wonder about is the fact that your 5000 is not even Pickering's top stylus. There is still the 7500 series. I understand changing cantilever material or a stylus profile by Axel or anyone else can and does make a dramatic improvement. What I would like to understand better is why swapping a Stereohedron for another Stereohedron could make such an improvement, especially when both were manufactured by the same company and both stated to be TOTL. Raul, do you have access to equipment that would let you see a frequency response from a cartridge. I would like to see or have explained to me, what differences the two styli produces. I would also like to know what the factory loading produces compared to your preferred loading in ref. to F/Response. Knowing you like your loading better is fine, but what is actually happening to the F/Response between the factory settings and your preference which I think was Res. 100K and cap. 350 + cables. What does the F/Response look like at cap. settings of 100, 250? You settled on cap. of 350 because you liked how it sounded at this setting. What does the F/Response look like? A lot of questions but no documented answers. I would just like to better understand all this Raul, in more scientific terms. Regards, Don |
Raul, you forgot IMMHO the top astatic MF2500 that i have is tops!
Lawrence Fidelity Forward |
Dear friends: The Precept experiences have to wait because I just receive in amint condition a Glanz MFG-71L that was the top of the line and in theory " similar " to the Astatic MF-100 that is a well regarded cartridge by its owners including me.
In the Glanz thread and maybe in other thread too ( I can't remember if in this one either. ) I have a serious disagreement/controversy with the Glanz against the Astatic ones and against the integrated headshell Glanz versions against the stand alone version as the one I'm talking about.
That controversy was so serious that the other person involved in that controversy implied that I was lied.
So, time to leave clear the " old " Glanz/Astatic controversy by my self and no better way that with the top Glanz ( stand alone version ) " dog ". We will see, normally " the time always put things in the right place where belongs".
Btw, maybe not many of you are interested about and I say this because almost no one took in count seriously the Astatic similar cartridges that at least the MF-100 and the MF-200 IMHO are top performers. I insist, if you look somewhere any of these Astatic cartridges my advise is: buy it with no ask.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Griffithds: I forgot. What I posted has to take it as an opinion based on precise experiences and that's all. It is not a rule.
What if I was owner of the Lyra Atlas or the Ortofon Anna or other new top dog? Will I send it to any of the existen re-tippers?, maybe not.
A today premium cartridge invlove not only the designer in deep effort to achieve pre-determined targets but those targets were and are achieved b by the design, parts selections and execution to taht design as the very especial cartridge voicing to match that designer targets.
With vintage cartridges or not so " today " top ones I will look to a re-tipper.
Btw, froma few months now I'm buying LOMC cartridges and for some of them I'm buying a second cartridge sample.
For example, my original Spectral cartridge that performs so great I bought a second sample that I send to Axel to re-tip for compare it to the original one. I already made it this with other LOMC cartridges that es exactly what I did and I styll do with MM/MI cartridges where IMHO is worth to do it.
About the Goldring G800 your experiences with is exactly what the UK re-tipper told me and that's why I bought 3-4 samples on it and why I higly recomend it.
About the 981HZSMK2 maybe you missed my post about. Yes, I compare the Stanton original stylus against the Pickering 5000MK2 and I posted that this Pickering stylus replacement was and is better by a not so small margin especially on tracking distortion/habilities.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
One thing that has been established by Raul himself is that he does not have an original 980 and as a result, he is not qualified to make an assessment of the strengths and weakness of that cartridge. What Raul should have said at the start of this debate is that he has a hybrid and that he is very well qualified to make an assessment of. I was even confused when the debate started on the cartridge but later with some postings from our guru(Raul) and others, I came to find out that the whole discussion was not about the stock 980 from the standpoint of Raul. We should all concentrate on the 980 and maybe deviate a little as to how to extract more from the cartridge like we did on the Signet cartridge. I am interested on the 980,981 and its different variants if I can hear more from people that have tried them. Thanks all. What a great bunch you all are. |
Dear Comrade Nickola,
"I will report about my Shiraz when I get the cart back from Axel"
You may have just made your first step into heaven! Keep us informed. Regards, Don |
Dear comrade Don, I was not as brave with my Goldring 800 and asked Axel for my 'usual upgrade': line contact pressure fitted in a aluminum alloy cantilever. My 'bravery' limit for the retip is 175 euro btw. The result is , say, 'nice' but not staggering in my opinion. However you got support from an unexpected 'source'. Axel is still busy with my Shiraz cart while the Shiraz is a modify EMT SDS 15 by Touraj Mogaddan from the Roksan brand. Touraj is a graduate from Imperial College of Engineering. According to him the stylus is the most important part in a cart and he thinks that Gyger II is the best there is. He made no statements about the cantilevers that I am aware of but in our forum we already have had some discussion about this subject matter. Anyway your berylliun/ Gyger II combo may explain the results you reported. When I bought Shiraz my intention was to get the EMT SDS 15 suitable for a SME kind of headshell. However I also got the Gyger II with this cart unintentionaly. Dover already praise the Shiraz and your comment about your Goldring is also encouraging. I will report about my Shiraz when I get the cart back from Axel.
Regards, |
Sorry Comrade,
Should read "If the Emperor has no clothes,
Regards, Don |
Regards, Richardkrebs/CT05-Chris: Long post, you'll be sorry you asked.
Choice of elements in a turntable can be comfortably left to a qualified other, assembled through random decisions by the consumer, or, given some degree of awareness by the hobbiest, sometimes by homegrown theory, speculation and intuition.
In a paper presented to the AES, 1977, Bruel & Kajer (B & K) conclude that the "fundamental problem creating parameter is the frequency response of the turntable". Rumble, wow & flutter were identified as the primary miscreants. The choice of belt, idler or direct drive units is a matter of personal preference. In an arena where less is more, technical attributes might be considered.
B & K (trying to avoid the homegrown aspect here) also points out that "one should not make tradeoffs with respect to tonearm rigidity and fixtures, spurious resonances could be the result and destroy stability of the stereo image". Reflections are identified as an important factor, "A linkage of mechanisms can be expected to result in a number of resonant modes". Spurious resonances and excitations of these resonances can cause relative movement between the record, cartridge body and stylus. This movement generates a signal that is not on the record. Consequently, some degree of damping and maintaining a stable relationship between the spindle and pivot appear to be somewhat beneficial.
Structural and acoustically borne vibrations are recognized concerns. Failure to address either may result in audible coloration or in the extreme, system oscillation. Resonances from sharp transients tend to build, there is a need to address duration of extraneous vibration. Otherwise at termination of the signal there is residual energy resulting in the cartridge producing the generation of a signal when there should be none. This is adequately described as "ringing". Once identified, the listener is increasingly aware of this type of distortion.
Let's say correction of resonances in the turntable and arm are desirable. In a worst case situation, inadequate damping can result in sideband intermodulations resulting in increased amplitudes. This is where addressing boundary resonances becomes important.
If it can be accepted that a mechanical system can have as many resonant frequencies as it has degrees of freedom, then each degree of freedom CAN act as a harmonic oscillator. Let's view a gimbal bearinged tonearm as a beam, anchored at one end but still having two degrees of freedom, vertical and horizontal. Rotation of a unipivot arm is not being considered.
Journal Of Applied Physics, 2004: "Fundamental resonances --- observed, overtone resonance was found to depend on the ratio of beam length to cross-section diameter". Variation of cross-section diameter of the beam along it's length was measured and showed a linear variation. It was found that "there was a negative shift in frequency for the fundamental mode due to an increase of mass near the end of the beam, but positive for the higher modes" (this needs IMHO, to be understood), for which increased stiffness dominated over the increased mass. For a tonearm, there is then a correlation between cross-section diameter, taper, rigidity and mass, particularly at the free end where headshell and cartridge mass bear on this relationship. Additionaly, added complications arise in that the tonearm beam is free in two planes at the bearing end but also if constrained at the distal point by the stylus, compliance then enters the picture. We simpler folks call it matching cart to arm.
It would be simpler to state that (a) deflection of the beam, (b) the Young’s modulus, (c) the momentum of inertia, and (4) unit mass of the beam are respectively involved in the performance of a tonearm, a system neither perfectly clamped nor completely free. The wand is constrained in a condition somewhere between these two limits.
Then there's substrate. We're getting close to plinth territory now. One of the essential decisions is wether to couple or de-couple the resonating beam (tonearm) to substrate. Boundary resonances exist when vibrations reflect from a surface, external or internal. Measurement can be taken at the point source or at the point of reflection. To borrow a term from physics, let's call this turning point resonance. Dependant on the convergence point of resonances, increase in amplitude or a shift in phase are detected. This makes coupling of mechanical devices, including CLD plinth designs, an extremely sophisticated approach. Interruption of a homogenous material dampens resonance, the material of convenience was high density particle board.
Using 1/4 inch plywood a template was made. A top-bearing flush trimming router bit guided by the template produced a copy in 1" high density particle board. The drive and TA were installed, a trial revealed a resonance derived tracing error, heard as grain. A second layer increased mass, bonded with a polyurethane wood glue and clamped on the milled surface of a table saw, a gluing caul above.
So, be it homegrown theory, speculation, intuition or application of a basic awareness of influences, so far, so good. This began with a scheme to recover my borrowed out SP-25/Black Widow from a 33 yr. old son by replacing it with a patched together outfit.
Alas, a project grown out of control. Apprehensive of monopolizing the thread & etc,
Peace, |
Raul,
Perhaps you need to address your findings to Richard Steinfeld, the Guru of all that is Pickering/Stanton. I only quoated what he has placed in print. I don't doubt you like your hybred better than a original 881LZS. But you do not have a original 981HZS to do a comparision. I have a Goldring G800 that was designed to be an entry level cartridge. I can claim that it is better than many of the cartridges that we have reviewed on this Forum including the Virtuoso. The fact that it now has a Beryllium cantilever and a Shibata tip, and no longer has a alum cantiliver with a conical tip I quess doesn't matter. |