Koetsu cartridges - myth or reality?


Hi guys - I am looking to upgrade my 1 year old Dynavector xx1 MC cartridge - I have heard (and read) for many years that Koetsu cartridges are a great option for those looking for musicality, right timbre and lush-sounding analog.

Digging further I find that some cathegorize them as slow sounding, not great tracking and poor price/performance ratio as well... I am looking for advise from those who have experience with Koetsu - particulary those who moved from a fast sounding cartrdige like Dyna, Clearaudio or Lyra - missing anything once you moved?

Thanks

Fernando
128x128flg2001


Sirspeedy, thanks for your kind comments. I did find those reviews very instructive when I first read them. I really believe that this tonearm can pretty much handle anything. It is a pleasure to set up and a bigger pleasure to listen to it knowing that it'll extract the most out of the record.

Regards,

iSanchez

Dear iSanchez, I read the URL you posted on the DV507. Your post above Sirspeedy's last one missed the point of my question. I am wondering about tonearm effective mass as it relates to cartridge resonance, and you wrote about counter-weights and the ability to set VTF with a variety of weights provided. I have no doubt that the DV507, like any good high end tonearm, can be made to provide proper VTF with just about any cartridge. What bothered me was that by just looking at the 507, it would seem to have very low effective mass in the vertical plane, due to the vestigial nature of the vertically pivoted portion. If this were so, it would not be a good match for low to medium compliance cartridges, i.e., most LOMCs, including the Koetsus. However, now that I've read the review you've provided, I see that the 507 comes supplied with a 15-gram headshell, which will give it a pretty high effective mass when combined with the short arm tube and the screws, etc. Therefore, my question has been answered, and Raul points out that for high compliance cartridges one can use lighter after-market headshells. So the 507 probably can be made to mate well with most cartridges. Now, if it only allowed for azimuth adjustment....
Lewm said "Now, if it only allowed for azimuth adjustment...."

It does allow for Azimuth adjustments (it's in the headshell)... I've done it before.

Dre


Dear Lewm,

Sorry I wasn't more specific about your compliance question. I somehow missed it. The headshell as you point out is on the heavy side. I brought up the different interchangeable weights to show that the effective mass can be increased or lowered just by changing the weight that attaches at the end of the short part of the arm.

Based on Raul's suggestions, I have also tried using lighter headshells, although not as light as the ones he has. I found an increase of speed on the sound with a lighter headshell. This perhaps is the byproduct of having to use a lighter interchangeable weight to match the weight of the lighter headshell and cartridge. I'm not completely sure about why this happens, but a lighter headshell does have a positive effect on the sound.

IMHO, the issue of effective mass is controversial and difficult to measure. How much friction the arm is encountered with as it tries to move will certainly affect its effective mass. Therefore, a light tonearm with high-friction bearings will behave as if it has a higher effective mass.

I haven't found data for the 507 MK II's effective mass, but I found that the horizontal sensitivity is less than 50 mgrams, and the vertical is less than 40 mgrams.

Some people say that a turntable is only as good as its bearing. Well IMHO, the same applies to tonearm design. Of course, not all tonearms have bearings, but whatever mechanism allows them to move should be taken into account.

Regards,

iSanchez