Downunder, you can do a simple test. Turn up the volume, arm is in the arm rest, until you can clearly hear the buzz from either one, or both channels). Now slightly loosen the mounting screws and lightly move the cart to and fro. If I'm correct you will hear the buzz changing, or completely subsiding. Now you re-tighten the screws again (the nuts will turn a bit again) and the buzz will probably come back (as it would do during re-alignment of the cart). This will tell you it's the mounting bolt(s) shorting the cart's screen to ground. From there you will know what to do and how to prevent it (I guess :-), there is more then one way to fix this. Axel |
Dear Raul, having looked at your posted stylus replacement link I see "replaces also 1000Z/EX-ERD" --- any idea if the -ERD is a different cart / body / performance to the 1000Z/EX? |
I agree with Raul on the 1000ZE/X VTA to be VERY high, in fact more so than for the M20FL super.
I just comfirmed this, and it is my best sounding cart with this setting. This Empire sound pretty nice with lower VTA --- but REALLY comes into its own with the much higher setting.
Thank you for bringing my attention this Raul. Greetings, Axel |
Well, in all fairness I think we are picking the pickings on the top of the MM/MI lot --- aren't we.
Some of these slightly greater (or lesser) likings are ALSO dependant on one's listening "tastes", as the difference between M20FL and 1000ZE/X is pretty minimal. In fact the M20FL super sounded slightly more open compared to a "level-arm" 1000ZE/X. So now the latter has a light edge with a little bit smoother treble presentation - for who can and will hear it... Yet both of these sound more "natural" in my system then the best MCs I heard in my system. If you like it more "over-detailed" the MC is your pick for sure. "Chacun a son gout..." |
OK, gentlemen let's have some comic relieve -- and let me call MY new love for this week coming. I just replaced the 1000ZE/X with a Shure Type III VN35MR stylus (sounding better the SAS stylus in my rig).
I had NOT tried (dared to, MC conditioned?) to run this one with 4 - 5 mm pivot up and now I do. Well --- Raul, maybe you'd have to give this one another look at.
I all fairness, the last time I listened to it I ran my Pass X350.5 not in DC-coupled mode, and now I do (just 4 jumpers inside) as my ML 326S has little enough DC offset.
So, for now if the 1000ZE/X is a ~8 point? Then this stupid old Shure V15 III is clearly on number up in my rig.
It may help Downunder to get some relaxation for his cardiac system, as in fact (in my system) that Shure now sounds even better then my MP-50. Now go figure :-) Cheers, Axel |
Downunder, here I have a "theory" about this weekly best cart happenings. If you ever read Robert M. Pirsig "Zen and the Art..." and "Lila" you will have come across his MOQ stuff (the books are all about it actually). He would say it is "Dynamic Quality" (the leading edge of perception) of a newly fitted cart that grabs your attention... until - after about a week's worth of listening or so, it becomes "absorbed" into what he calls "Static Quality" (our reasoning, figuring it all out, etc.) and so it slowly starts to loose some of its "magic".
In his example he mentions music, some very nice tune, that initially grabs you, yet eventually become just that: a nice tune -- doesn't grab you any more as such, hm. Axel PS: MOQ = Metaphysics of Quality, Google it if you wish :-) |
Dear Raul: Axel's is clearly the small one (shorter & thinner), by comparison only the Shure V15 III with VN35MR has the same small diameter alu tube, tho' a bit longer +/- 1/3. The treble of this cart begs the theory that a longer cantilever produces less dynamics --- NOT SO. The much longer (tapered) cantilever in e.g. AT140LC confirms this also. (Maybe a case of resonances?)
BTW thickness (related to moving mass?) seems more of an indicator about lesser dynamic ability as I have noticed. The thicker the "mellower"? Greetings, Axel PS: The Shure using my cable capacitance ~ 120pF only and 47k input impedance, 1g VTF and >4mm pivot up. |
Pryso, you are right the "theory" applies to everything we perceive and judge by our senses, includes women else there'd be no girly of the month in mags either. Keeps things from getting boring, hm. M20FL super is my pick of next week. Right now it beats all else. (I'm serious, Lewm knows what he's doing!) --- me going in circles? Enjoy... Axel PS: I'm waiting for my M20E stylus to arrive so it may take me to a new COW (cart of week) experience, I'll be back. |
Limp Bizkit --- no kidding, eh. What's the recommended cart for that then I may inquire :-) Denon 103? Axel |
Downunder, some respondent i know in Malaysia prefers his Shure V15 III to the 1018, which in his system sounds too "bright" (brittle?). The Empire 1000ZE/X sounds very much more "refined" (less forward?) the the Shure V15 III. So all being equal (which it never is...) the 1018 aught to sound a bit more bright (brash?) compared to the 1000ZE/X --- but I should think a bit less exiting too. Let's see if this take will find some support.
My pick of the week changed (for today?) and is the AT-440ML which might be closer to the 1018? --- Let's see for how long I can take the added "exitement" of the more detailed presentation compared to the M20FL super. Axel PS: AT-440ML now also with ~4mm pivot up. |
OK, M20E super stylus fitted to existing M20FL super body. Sounds a tad more natural right through the audio band than the FL one, so I agree with Raul on that.
Is it a 2 point difference between the E and the ZE/X? I would not hear it this way in my system --- but I'll be back if it will change :-) Axel |
OK, M20E super will have to stay as it looks like right now, wow! It is better then my MP-50! (less "mechanical" Raul would agree, I guess) and better than FL AND ZE/X (more "dynamic" Raul would not necessarily agree, I guess). So Lewm, 99.99 bucks might be worth it, tho' we have rather different systems as we know. Greetings, Axel |
Lewm, Raul is absolutely correct in what he states - but of course for MM only! As far as MCs are concerened it is the other way 'round and follows your argument.
Axel PS: The clue is the *much* higher impedance of MMs. |
Lewm, you got the Porscheee, and the Merc - it's just a question of the best tyres, hm. BTW, there is a re-vamp version for 1/2 price for that M20E stylus at LP-Gear. I got mine in the Ortofon original package (by that german source) and that is $99... I have no idea about that E "after-market" version's quality performance but from the little experience I have this far, I'd go for the real thing. That "E" is it! as far as I can tell, and as I mentioned it will stay so for some time. Greetings, Axel |
Well, thanks Timtel, you put it pretty well and with regards to Lewm's question in deed (I hope he can agree by now!)
I also go along with Raul's tonearm/head-shell related experience. In the SME V this M20E is just the most "balanced", "integrated" cart I heard to date. It has the most beautiful treble resolution heard with cymbals and the like, as well as the best width and depth to boot and in no way less (rather more) then the FL. The bass is also more tight, very similar to the MP-50's. This creates the listening impression of more dynamics (faster transients) most noticeably by comparison with the ZE/X which sounds somewhat layed-back by comparison. The "speed" of the "E" is that of the MP-50 yet it sounds less "jumped-up" (MC like) in the treble. Is it back to boron cantilever behaviour for the MP-50 ? It be interesting to hear an alu (or beryllium) tube cantilever MC just to see whether this is more then just coincident. The only such item I know: the Blue Angel Mantis MC, the listening feedbacks seem to point in this direction also. Greetings, Axel |
Lewm, 1) If you want more "air" = less roll-off, best use higher load with MM/MI. (Any added C tends to do more harm then help).
2) Those "recommended" ~higher C (250pF - 450pF) for MM/MI was *never* meant to "roll it off"! MM/MI roll-off is already more so then with most MCs. It was to ensure a proper match and thereby get most "air" / treble rather then the opposit! (Older phono gear would provided this mostly by default)
3) I'd thought we talked about the effects on "listening" and not electrical theory... Raul had this in mind, so did Timetel and myself.
4) This does not explain why the "E" sounds more dynamic the "FL" --- yet don't even try theory to exlain it... it just does, with my arm, and pre not to forget please :-) Axel |
Lewm, Pas du tout! De rien!
Wasn't it a scientific “truth” that: "the exception confirmes the rule"
The other item comes to mind: "It is a sign of higher intellect not to continue with an argument..." O.W.
(How nice to know we so many highly intelligent folks contributing :-) Greetings, Axel |
Lewm, yet I guess you just did aspired "higher" anyway, no one seems guilty of prolonging the argument. "All is for the best in the best of worlds" aye.
Now let's see what master Raul with come up with next for us :-) A. |
Raul, what you find about the 1080LT sounds exactly like my "Malaysia" source feedback. I had mentioned it before (but got the 1080LT twisted into a 1018..)
Question: Would that make for a similar performance compared to the MP-50? It sure sounds like it.
Axel |
Dear Raul, as to the 1080LT play-in time I have no exact information, other than the person had given it "a good try" comparable with his other tests. It would support (along the line of common sense) that if a cart is lacking in "realness" / "lifeness" it is a tall order to listen to it for 30-50 hr! In fact most folks would not find it very rewarding to do so --- it maybe your ears in the end being played in rather then the cart?! :-) In my experience if a cart doesn't show the "right" sort of synergy in one's system, 30-50 hr (so my experience) usually makes little positive difference -- the basic characteristic is never changed as such. If it sounds quite nice to start with it may get a bit better after a while yet - if something is lacking it hardly much changes that characteristic, AND in fact it may very well be more a system, then a cart issue. Note: not every one can be good in every one's sack, aye? Greetings, Axel |
Dear Raul, interesting notion glueing in MM/MI styli... The ONE! you missed in the fixed list is the MP-50 which is screwed in from both sides, hm. I'd be loath to glue it on top of it! I do recall hearing the Shure V15 III glued-in giving a ~ better result. (Then what to do with that SAS stylus? :-) In case one has some "doubles" (like yourself) gluing be not too daring I guess. Like to hear what Lewm will come up with for this one -- "you can't always get what you want, but then some time and if you try... :-) A. |
Hi guys, have been reading on and on about the bickering and also some, in deed, of more general interest? :-) With so much other stuff out on the web and I still keep looking into my favoured audio-thread almost daily. Yes, no BS. Alas due to personal circumstances (quadruple bypass a minor item as it turns out), I had a major mind-reboot. I guess this the main reason I been so *very* quite the last year and a half. Keep it cooking. A pity I don't seem to see any female contributors other then the very odd sporadic one once a while ago. It is a boys-toys affair after all, or? No offence to any girl(s) looking into the thread just as I do. Keep up the good work, now *Axelle* if you please :-)
PS: Yes, still very much alive and kicking |
+++ Why then they [women] decided not participate on audio forums like Agon one?, especially that they have better " ears " ( frequency response range. ) than almost all of us. I think because they are on every day more creative and productive " work/job/subjects " than we are, IMHO the each day time has different priorities for the women than for us. +++ Raul, have hit the nail on the head... again. Thank you. Nicely put. Yet still do enjoy what you guys are on about. A lot is over most girl's heads [not all!]. So we read, understand some - and not bother much about the rest, typical, yes? "Toys for boys"? Can only listen to one cart at a time. How many good ones needed in box, 5, 10, 18? Rest is "hunting the mammoth" great fun, um. Glad all having fab time, include some bickering also :-)
Enjoy the MUSIC, Axelle |
Timtel, +++ Vive la différence! +++ hey.
You're one funny and most enjoyable "dude". And thanks for that "chic" complement, um. Seems you know me better then expected, hallo! Long distance intuition? OK we all know Raul's "the man" no surprises here. Now some of that stuff mentioned like SO catches my fancy! Ouch! Got me just bowled over. Decidedly like SO must haves... Louis Vuitton et al, am drooling. Mild MM/MI sprinkling on floor? Fine by me for those that done enough collecting by now. Why not? Nice to have hip comment in between all those grants and gripes, not sure bickering was the right word? Too girly? Sorry. Thanks for a good laugh and have a lovely day, Axelle
PS: Keep it up (pun intended) might get bit of gender variation on this all male persuit - never say never :-) |
Says Thuchan: +++ No - there is no sex after marriage. +++ Such a comforting thought (to some of us...?) And Raul, Dear Thuchan: +++++ "we should also keep in mind that for three overprized cheap vintages... +++
Oh hell? So just go easy on the diamonds? I do say that sucks, but then there you go. Can't have it all as we know --- (eventually). Enjoy the music never the less, Axelle :-) |
Hi Timeltel you may want to look up: "VTA setting for 'parabolic' and 'elliptical' styli" http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1244713018
Find some more insights and entertainment on the VTA subject.
I measured the VTA on my V15 III again, and it is 1.5mm negative/down with 180g records.
Funny, or expected if you wish, the measure comes to pretty level arm on 'normal' vinyl. It is still so sparkling (with the MR stylus) that I could go more down, B U T using a SME-V arm, it would start to touch the vinyl (at the rear arm end) with 180g records.
This would require fitting a shim, throwing out everything, plus I'm not sure if the sound be affected.
Have you compared the MR to the SAS on your V15 III?
Greetings, Axel |
Hi Raul and All, I have a question, that might help me to understand some of these MM 'issues'. The guy that gave that A$R P77 to me (also V15 VN35MR) has replaced it with the relative new Ortofon OM 5E, their most affordable MM if I'm right. e is convinced that it sounds much better than the former two mentioned.
In your opinion, can that be the case, and that OM 5E would be a further improvement on a P77, or would this indicate that he never got his alignments right?
Regarding the V15 VN35MR it might be easier to explain, since in my set-up it does not sound as coherent than he A&R P77. That V15 VN35MR sound more detailed, but seems to lack the coherent mid to bass of the P77 and sound more somehow a bit etched.
Anyone that can comment on that OM 5E? see under --- http://www.ortofon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44&Itemid=64
Many thanks, Axel |
Halcro, you ask: >>> ... did you receive the photos and technical information I sent you on the Garrott P77 by way of Email? <<< Oh, yes! I did, and send you a reply also... was it lost in the mail?
In fact I'd asked you for a pic from the bottom of your P-77 so as to see the stylus and cantilever more clearly. Meanwhile I could ascertain that the cantilevers are of the same construction (as in the A&R) -- an 'Aluminium Dual Tube' something I had not come across this far. I've no idea if the stylus shapes are different. The A&R uses originally, styli made by Dr. Ernst Weinz in Idar Oberstein, Germany. When Dr. Weinz unexpectedly died, A&R were able to source UK made diamond styli from Expert Pickups in the UK. Any idea where the 'Brothers' sourced theirs?
Thanks again, Axel |
Hi All, I got another dose of anti-MM yesterday and it brings about my question: Has the better 'fit/sound/match/etc.' of these MMs to do with the 'inability' of 60dB plus phono-stages to 'truly' resolve the much smaller MC signals, than the one offered by an MM?
The argument is, that most 60dB plus stages use 'inadequate technology' to do MCs 'justice' i.e. using op-amps and even if discrete components --- not good enough also with most all of them MC stages... The problem (if it is such) is not present using only 40dB step-up stages, all of the 'tricky' 60-78dB step-up stuff is simply eliminated.
So, only some of the VERY TOP MC stages would actually qualify to do 'justice' to carts like 'Titan i', Orpheus, DV drt xv-1s/t, etc. etc.? Alan Wright's phono-stage seems to qualify I'm told, and it seems way 'under the radar' and is not even mentioned in the: "Stand out phono stages" thread! http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1195322402&openfrom&70&4
With 40dB for MMs we can happily use tubes only also, going higher starts to get VERY EXPENSIVE to do MCs any justice, or? Hybrid tube stages with almost unobtainable JFETs in the first stage... Is that why my (and most every one else's) MC stage sux, and why MM is the way to go --- IF you like to listen to music rather then 'over-contrasted' un-real Hi-End MC sound only? I really can't say, but I can say that my currently running S1000 ZE/X Empire sound CLEARLY better than the Orpheus I listened to... and what about Rauls PC-1 argument that comes to mind?
So is it, that if I do not spend >$10 000 on the phono-stage (you know all the contenders) I better stick with a top MM? Raul, has one pretty snazzy phono-stage/pre-amp as I know --- who else can shed some light on this argument?
Also, I 'dumped' my previous stage in favour of one integrated into my pre-amp, better power supply, no extra cables, no extra connectors, better screening, etc. etc. Have I gone the 'wrong way' like --- MM only now?
Not that I'm complaining, but I'd be very interested to hear some expert comments on this one, since I'm getting close to sell off my PW MC when ever I get it back. Lest I have another $10k plus to spend on a 'commensurate' phono-stage, which by DEFFINITION will NOT EVER be able to reside inside my or ANY pre-amp, as I understand it.
Greetings, Axel PS: To hell with all that misleading review MC stuff if the above said holds any truth. Eish! |
Hi Timeltel, so you still do like your type III, I can't blame you :-)
I still haven’t received my SAS and now having 'discovered' this –negative- VTA bit with my VN35MR.
I guess I should have known all the time, but as I stated in another thread on VTA, in the late 70s early 80s when I had the exact same cart no one ever seemed to talk about VTA. I think it was then, that most folks used conical and elliptical styli at best ---- Micro Ridge, Shiabata, Fine-Line wow! Who had that?
Well *I* had this MR, but didn't know even what VTA was if I recall, and so with most every one else (in my part of the world).
And so we learn, but I like to ask you if that SAS can still do MORE than the MR? It is pretty hard for me to imagine actually --- I did read the reports on the SAS, but recall I decided to go for it when that 'wrong' VTA made that MR cart sound just too harsh.
Now it sounds like you described it with that SAS stylus, how’s that?
Greetings, Axel PS: Best cart in my system for my ears this far... and it's an MM! |
Timeltel, >>> Regarding the V15VxMR, the cartridge seemed so designed for a specific voice, I had difficulty pinpointing VTA <<<
In my case it needs to be negative (down arm) VTA/SRA from my normal spacer ~ (1/2") 12.7mm to ~ 8,7mm = 4mm delta, and equal to about 2.5mm negative. Without this, that V15 III VN35MR sounds very aggressive in the treble. Due to my SME V arm's down limitation it is as low as I can go thereby I a have no difficulty in 'pinpointing' VTA in this scenario... :-)
I was **hoping** that SAS could do with some negative VTA.
Please keep us posted on your further findings. Thanks, Axel |
Dear Raul: have you found using a spacer can work between cart and head shell? Or will it mess with the cart/arm match i.e. not a recommended fix for very low arm positions required?
>>> capacitance/impedance/VTA <<< Only VTA will be able to 'tame' treble as I understand. Capacitance and/or increased impedance will cause treble to increase, even if only above the audio band, but not recommended as I understand.
Regards and enjoy, Axel |
Raul, y.s.: >>> you are using those VTA spacers. <<< Hard-wood block spacer, ONLY to set up the V arm, I.E. a measurement spacer between arm-rest and bottom of the arm-base, 9.8mm to be exact. I then just pull it out from under the arm after the arm height is adjusted. I hope this clears up this misunderstanding.
As to 100k ---- that M20FL has jolly good HF extension at 47k, and very little if any less then the best MC I heard in my system, but 'some' MC could have a bit more 'magic' from HF, maybe? I have ~ 100pF from arm cables to phono-boards and having increased only by very little, it does only bad things to the sound (more etched). Knowing the 100k is just a more benign form of raising HF extension/performance, and I would have to mess with surface mount devices, I guess it is fine, or better then putting 50k in the signal path to reach 97k. More R in the signal path? I know first hand what resitors can do to the sound! So far ONLY NOS Tantalum Shinko non-magnetic was ~ acceptable. Note also! Some spec. says that 20k! load should be used with M20FL super!!!? How about that? Hm, |
Hi, I am currently using one of my 'old' MMs, the Empire 1000ZE/X. (Still awaiting my Windfeld replacement back from Ortofon).
That said, I'm still curious what any of the currently available Ortofon MMs sound like when comparing with some of those much older MMs. Development of MMs, at least in theory, should not have stopped, or in deed gone backwards --- or has it?
Or is it that any 'good' MM will simply cost now as well many times the price of most of those discussed in the thread ~ >2k$?
We are also now seeing top MMs with mostly boron cantilevers and Shiabata stylus rather then Elliptical styli and alu-tube cantilever... It this actually an 'improvement', or simply going with the current trend of what is used on MCs?
Some say, that a case can be made for alu-tube type cantilevers in terms of resonance behaviour when compared to that little hard stick of boron. When beryllium, also titanium was still used it was also a tube, yes?
Any thoughts on these questions? Thanks, Axel |
Howdy All, Frogman you do have come up with the same explanation I did (and posted in various threads), but here comes the 'problem': I like to overcome it by using an SUT with my 0.3mV Windfeld.
Raul is no friend of SUTs in general, neither in particular, we know each other's take, agree to differ and have some 'bliss'.
Now I have received my NEW (replacement) Windfeld back from Ortofon after 3 months wait and SOME exercise in patience and then some.
I have replaced my Empire S1000ZE/X MM with the Windfeld MC and am listening right now.
Frogman, your point about transient speed and resolution is right-on as well -------- of course MUSIC is not ONLY about speed and detail. It is where those good MMs score, plain and simple.
Right now I have to go against my urge to take that Windfeld out again and put back the Empire ---- in all fairness I will TRY not do that, as I have to give that 'poor' 4k$ MC cart at least a chance of a couple of hours playing in, yes.
The point however is: how these MMs beat the socks of these 'transient & resolution master MCs' and I am playing it with an SUT! (which aught to slow it some). Without SUT, I would have a hard time to listen for 20 - 30 hours of transient-speed and high resolution detail, with a shortfall of MUSIC. It sort of pisses me off actually.
A very well regarded phono & pre-amp designer (Allen Wright) once mentioned how EVERY ELECTRON counts when you want top performance from a LOMC and I believe he knows what he is talking about.
This, Frogman, gets back to your phono-pre take and the very low voltages the phono-pre has to work with when running LOMC. In the case of MMs there is no counting of electrons indicated by having 10 to 20 times more output voltage.
I'll see for how long I'll go with the Windfeld, though right now it sounds just too 'mechanical' and lacking the liquidity and musical flow of the Empire.
I'll be back with more some time later. Cheers, Axel |
Hi all, yes, lots of things seem to play into it. For my setup, it's all SS, it ALWAYS just seems to sound more 'complete' when I run MM or MI.
It is a weird thing, that MC seems to have 'everything' more in terms of transient-speed and -resolution- of sorts, maybe 'false' resolution? But at the same time there is something 'missing' with MCs and I think it has to do with lack of 'harmonic completeness'. Rationally all seems to be there, but emotionally, subjectively, it sounds too perked up and slightly bleach in my SS system, highlighted/exaggerated and yet somehow ‘empty’ at the same time, actually just NOT the way real music sounds.
I guess if I had all tubes it might easily be very different. Incidentally I use the exact same phono-pre gain for both MC and MM (60dB) but change the input gain of my ML pre-amp instead (+ or - 18dB), if I use MC without SUT.
The trouble with all this guess work --- only the ear can notice the difference. Currently available measuring technique is not able to help pin it down, it's too subtle for measurement. Axel |
Hi, a quick report back on SAS stylus for V15 III cart. It is *hyper* resolved, but I can not go enough down with my SME V arm to get at least to 'level arm' position. (last band is lifting the arm out of the groove)
So far the V15 III with SAS is the only cart that can track my most difficult LP band see comment: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1245595534&openflup&65&4#65
Therefore currently I'm back with Windfeld and XF-1 tranny, (without any resistive loading) whilst awaiting an SME V arm shim as to obtain more VTA travel. Cheers, |
Well Lewm, since I find the exact same words for it all as Raul did, (of course I do not manufacture any Hi-end equipment as such) you may add a pair of Burmester 961 to your enquiry, if we’d stick with speakers. Following add the X350.5 Pass and ML326S preamp.
I think I'm repeating myself, but what you are getting at is what I mentioned a few time before: -the apparently favourable match between SS gear and MM-. EVERYTHING that Raul experiences is my listening experience too, to the dot and pretty uncanny that is.
MCs are great (the good ones!) but MM do just more for the music, that simple and that controversial? It may have something to do with what some call: "completeness of the harmonic train".
Greetings, Axel |
Hi Lewm and All, >>> He [Axel] has been absent from this thread for a while.<<<
Not really, McKillRoy is watching you :-) I just don't feel like adding non-relevant info to an already very long thread.
>>> I think Axel also likes the M20FL, but I don't know what he has compared it to.<<< Firstly, the "FL" stands for "Fine Line". This cart has been originally designed for Quadro playback and as such it has no problem to track a 40kHz Quadro groove information, therefore it has RANGE. I go along with some earlier comment that it is ever so slightly on the "gentler" side of dynamics. YMMV
I'm currently comparing it with a Shure V15 III with original VN35MR (MR = Micro Ridge) stylus. The Shure is a bit "faster" yet doesn't have the delicacy of the M20FL in the treble.
I have also checked this Shure with the SAS replacement stylus, this "corrects" the slightly more grainy treble of the original VN35MR, alas is no match in the bass performance of the original MR stylus.
That SAS stylus is also somewhat shorter (a Boron cantilever inserted into the alu tube). This makes the cart ride very, very low, meaning that a rather low ending mounting bolt would touch a thick-ish label when at the end of record. In my system the original VN35MR is my preferred stylus compared to the SAS one.
Greetings, Axel |
Hi Lewm, >>> slightly on the "gentler" side of dynamics,<<< ain't exactly "SLOW" as you read it. I can't recall having said that s~l~o~w . . .
I also think *your* description sounds fine by me. My rig: SME 10, SME V, and SS phono-boards in a ML-326S, using silver hybrid SME phono cable (vdH, ~70pF capacitance.
I agree 100% with what you call "bloom", and it may well be that within this "cloud of beauty" some of what I called: slightly on the "gentler" side of dynamics, resides.
Compare it to the Shure V15III, VN35MR, that cart clearly has "attack"! and there ain't such a thing as "attacking bloom" either, at least it be a new one for me :-)
So as the earlier commentator posted, the M20FL is of great delicate detail, high resolution, but all in all on the more gentle side, which I can hear as well. In fact, it is mostly the kind of tuning that Ortofon seems to go in for when looking back over a number of their carts that I listened to.
It will be interesting to hear by you, if you consider a M20FL to be a cart with "great attack" (i.e. very high transient speed). If so, then can a cart like the Shure be too fast? No! not possible I say, but it would well be the case of harmonics, which was also mentioned by the previous poster, and I can go fine by that too.
It would mean that the Shure have more odd order harmonics which makes it sound "faster" but also more brash.
Greetings, Axel |
Lewm, it may be of interest that *ALL* M20FL super characteristics you mentioned are exactly as I find them: - bigger image - more "real" or more pleasing piano tone - makes known good LPs sound fantastic - more vivid
Note: >>> cannot fault the calmer and very accurate presentation of the MC7500, <<<
I personally fault the Windfeld for being colder and less involving. So much so, that some records sound just plain boring, though very resolved. Playing the same LP with the M20FL brings the apparently "dead" record to life, so they can go back into my "handy", close by, collection and not one floor up in a shelve. Greetings, |
Siniy123, Beryllium has the best "inner damping" (very low density i.e. very light and stiff) of known metals or metalloids (like boron) in use for e.g. dome tweeter caps as mentioned.
So, yes it is superior even to diamond in these applications. But why bother?! It is not being used anymore for cantilever applications due to it's highly poisonous dust. In fact the next best damped material is Alu in form of single tubes or even double tubes as e.g. used in the P-77.
My point again, a boron-stick has a less "real" sound and it is more of late (20-25 years?) that all went for this "glare-y" presentations and then we call it “resolution”! Sooner or later this will be overcome I'm quite sure. In fact it is not only piano that sounds more real with the M20FL, also percussions, drum skins of tympani etc., and all string instruments are noticeably sounding more natural. These plain boron-sticks (and MC construction?) just sounds like some over-exposed copy by comparison. This would be the case *with any* resolving reasonably un-coloured back-end, as Raul tried to explain. Tubes will just wash over all the added odd harmonics by their own even order harmonics preference, thus creating some more balance I guess. Greetings, |
Lewm, y.s.: "Have you guys heard the A90?"
Frankly *WHY SHOULD I BOTHER*, true it may sound better then their until then best of breed (Windfeld), and now this A90 with only 400 made --- welcome to that marketing spiel!
If I listen to the M20FL (to stay with this right now), we are so stretching getting not even the same sound experience from this > 10x the money cart... That really begs the question --- big time! (At least for me, and as always YMMV :-)
The MP-50 I ordered has that hybrid construction (as have the SAS replacement styli for the V15) Boron-stick inserted into an Alu-tube-end. Even there I actually find the original VN35MR (all alu) cantilever clearly more close to "natural" sounding. All this maybe of course pure coincident, but having heard Lyras, Axia, Orpheus, etc. yet more coincidents? (And NOT only in my system!) The SA cart maker Angel Blue Mantis also had decided to stay away from boron, hm --- now he may have changed as business may require such to be offered. His alu cantilever carts had A LOT of rave reviews (they are all MCs, aye). Now go figure.
J.Carr (Lyra) may be able to shine some light into this “can of worms”, but he is conspicuously absent from this MM/MI thread, hm. Greetings, |
Hi, something came up for me after listening, comparing, and the reading what J. Carr had to say about his new cart --making better "distinctions". You may look it up on this thread: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1258844370 it is about his new MC cart, but an interesting insight into sonic distinctions. He is explaining about most carts "homogenising" details and I have to agree with him. Since the MP-50 is closer in presentation to my Windfeld I did a quick cross-check between those two and the MP-50 clearly makes much better "distinctions". This is what Lewm is also talking about when reviewing the M20FL, yet those two carts have a rather different presentation as mentioned earlier.
At that level the more "distinctions" a cart can produce, the more life-like the reproduction, where I completly agree with J. Carr. Greetings, Axel |
>>> Garrott P77 is back in production <<< Anyone ready to go for a test, comparing e.g. to M20FL and MP-50?! Tell me it betters those two and I'll be VERY tempted in deed :-) (or are we getting a bit reckless here?) |
Timtel, y.s.: >>> Axel, when next you align for your M20FL, strap on your V15/SAS without lowering the VTA.<<<
If I understand you right, you are saying the M20FL needs quite some heel- / bearing-up / VTA. In deed, it is what I found myself to be the case, more substantial then *any* of my other carts. (Not sure about my A&R P-77 though)
I'm not on the same page with you concerning the SAS35 for the V15-III. I think the original VN35MR sounds better by comparison. Also I do not like the changed geometry i.e. a much shorter cantilever then the original! I find the bass performance of the SAS not to be up to the VN35MR (original), the treble is slightly more refinde though. This *may* be set-up related, and is why I'm sharing my findings. Axel |
Dear Raul, I read this refresh with some interest. I had a Dorian re-tip with Jan Allaerts (ex-apprentice to vdH… long ago). So looking at the cost is something else. In this case Euro 900.00, THAT is "where dog lays buried" (German saying). Not sure if you can give some $$$ idea here, but if the refresh is more than the new item (as was the case with that Dorian) I would not recommend it given my own experience. It was good but not THAT good, aye. Greetings, Axel |
Downunder, >> ... Ortofon M20FL Super - arse slightly up, got that.<< Well, if you'd ask me it's quite A LOT up! In fact (measured at the arm post) about 5mm, and that certainly is more then "slightly" in my book. That cart is ~ 2.5mm less in height then most others. So having the arm about level with say a ~18mm height cart, I'd leave it right there for a start. The M20FL will now be "dipping" nose down, creating a relative large tail-up position. Also looks OK, if you check the stylus (SRA) position. With out "substantial" tail-up the cart sounds pretty sat-on, at least in my rig, where I usually use "lightly" tail up with just about every other of my carts. Let us know what your findings are, it'd be ineresting to know. Thanks, Axel |
Now after all this M20FL.... talk, and Raul's cursory mention that the Ortofon A90 is not going to change his opinion about the MM/MI's by comparison, I wonder if anything at all will transpire of Mike Levine’s intended testing of these MI's (M20FL & MP-50) in his rigs. As far as I go, I had another couple of days with my Windfeld in various settings and must say I'm happily back with my M20FL and MP-50. I'm posting this here rather, then incur the wroth of these A90 lovers since they do not really like to hear of anyone that has not purchased and listened to one A90, hm. Go figure... (don't talk about Ferrari if you ain't got one, right so) Axel |
Is anyone actually reading the Pioneer statement provided by Timetel? It is the different resonance behaviour between MM/MI and MC that causes this different behaviour. There are multitudes of graphs on the web to document this.
To consider the C's behaviour with out considering the cartridge construction is strange for me to behold...
I have added C of between 100 - 300pF and the result was a grainy kind of INCREASED treble. BTW, this size of C does practically NOTHING to an MC, only some 10nF (~ > 100x) will start to show up. IF an SUT is used it's a different matter again, but we are not talking about that right now.
So the cleanest way to increase MM/MI treble is by increasing input impedance (e.g. Raul's 100k), the increased C does ~THE SAME, yet unless some "silvered mica" caps are used, it will sound clearly more grainy. Seems to me we now do have two schools of hearing... Axel |