Fidelity Research cartridges


Any FR cartridge experts out there? Raul? Dertonarm? Syntax?
I have had an FR-7 which I bought a while ago. I tried it ever so briefly when I got it on an arm I now recognize as not being able to handle that weight (close, but no cigar). I just now pulled it out for kicks and after getting it adjusted with the big counterweight, I am VERY pleasantly surprised. Actually, I'm feeling kind of bubbly. It does not dig out the utmost in detail, but it just sounds very right.

Are there any other FR carts out there which are real steals if still in good condition? I know the MC-702 and the FR-1Mk2 and Mk3f by name, with good reps being assigned to the Mk3 and the MC-702. Given that the MC-702 and the FR-7 look quite similar, and they were offered at about the same time, what is different? And is the FR-7 just an integrated headshell version of the FR-1Mk3?
t_bone
@chakster I agree that the choices made by the tonearm/cartridge designer are the most important and should not be disregarded. The FR-7 have the Stevenson alignment as part of their design criteria and the sonic results speak for themselves.

@nandric I doubt if this choice has anything to do with Japanese culture. Various tonearm manufacturers chose their own alignment, using neither Baerwald nor Stevenson. Not just Sony, I know from experience that Pioneer and Audiocraft used their own alignments as well. So I'm not sure what national custom you're referring to. Innovation is impossible without deviation from the norm and I think we all agree that Ikeda was some innovator.

I've seen some heated debates on this forum about Stevenson versus Baerwald. The 'experts' all claim that Baerwald is way superior. So it seems that some people do hear something special when the 'o' points are set to Baerwald. I just don't.


@edgewear, You changed my ''point'' about ''0'' points on the

record radius. I stated that nobody has claimed to have heard

something special by those ''0'' points: ''so it seems that some

people do hear something special when the ''0'' points are set

to Bearwald''. This however is different statement. Bearwald

geometry means that other radius on the record is optimal

then Stevenson. Stevenson nearer to the spindle , Bearwald

across the radius. Your statement is about relation between

the (two) points which determine the geometry my about individual

points regardless of  the geometry.