Dyscoveries on Dyna, Denon, Supex, Technics,FR,Ik


Dear friends: Over the time and testing/trying different cartridges ( " old " and new ones ) with different tonearms to find the " best " performance on each cartridge I find some interesting subjects that I want to share with all of you:

Denon 103: this is one of my oldest cartridges that I own and I use it for a while many years ago. In the last three years every time that I mounted and hear it I can't heard it for more than half hour, that's why I always treat it like a " rubbish cartridge " in my posts about. I try it with almost every single tonearm that I own and the result was always the same.
Then, I take in count that in all the tonearms ( removable and fixed headshell ) I can't tighten to much the headshell screws because the 103 is " open " ( input to output ) all the way where the screw goes and if I try to really tighten then the screw goes out of the cartridge body ( it is dificult to me this explanation because my English problems, I hope you can understand ).
I don't like to tailored the cartridge sound through tight ( more or less pressure ) the headshell screws, I always tighten the screws at " its limits " where IMHO and experiences there are less resonances/vibrations on it with better overall performances.
So, what to do?, it happen that I have an Audio Technica AT-LH18/OCC headshell ( headshell weight: 18grs. ) that has screwed holes underneath the headshell ( these holes are 2mm in deep, don't cross/pass the headshell ) in this manner I can tight the screws at maximum with out any trouble, well this was a great solution ( along with the weight of the headshell ) because I mounted the 103 in the Dynavector 505 ( similar to 507 ) and the performance change for the better like night and day, now I can hear the 103 for more than half an hour: very good improvement, this not means that now the 103 is at the XV-1/Myabi/etc performance level: no, but now the 103 has a decent performance that for its price is very good.

Dynavector XV-1: this one is one of my favorite cartridges, I really like it. It is a cartridge that almost always perform very good in almost any tonearm. Well I never be satisfied with " very good " performance I always look for excellent/exemplary performance.
I read some posts where XV-1 owners posted that this cartridge is a very good match with the Dynavector 505/507 tonearms and this was not my own experience about, it sounds good but nothing more.
I decide to try a little hard on the subject with: VTA/VTF/load impedance/etc,/etc with out any " great " results.
Then I decide to try with different headshells ( other than the original 507/505 ones ) till I find that with a light weight headshell ( Denon 100% magnesium, 6gr. The Dyna headshells weight: around 14-15 grs. ) the performance was/is glorious for say the least: I never heard ( any where ) better XV-1 performance that in this set-up.

Fidelity Research MC 702: this is a very " old " MC cartridge design. It is an integral headshell design, bulky one ( " ugly " ? ) at 30-32 grs, low compliance 6-7 Cu, low output 0.2mv and likes VTF 2-3grs.

I own this cartridge for at least 20 years and I buy it second hand in almost new/pristine condition. After many years I set up ( last December ) in my Micro Seiki MAX 282 tonearm ( it likes tonearms like: Ikeda, Dynavector, Audiocraft, SAEC, etc, etc ) and for the very first musical note I knew that this cartridge was something very special.
After 20 hours the sound performance was/is formidable/marvelous, I don't have words to describe my " surprise ", the best I can tell is that the music flow easily through this cartridge like in almost any other ( any where ) cartridge I heard.
If you " see " it ( second hand ) and if you have the right tonearm and phonolinepreamp then buy it!!!!!

Supex SDX 2200R: Another " old " MC design with screw open body type design ( like the 103 you need the right headshell ), ruby cantilever and low output 0.2mv. Man

I make the set-up on the Lustre GST 801 tonearm and sound was terrible at the begin, I have to wait 30 hours for the suspension settle down.
This was/is a great cartridge too, IMHO it competes with cartridges like the Universe ( are very similar in quality performance ) or any other today ones. Many people look for the Supex 900 series ( that I owned ) well the Supex Ruby beats easily those ones.

Audio Technica ATML 180 OCC: One of the greatest MM cartridges ever made.
This model ( I understand ) never sale in USA, the one that was on sale was the ATML 170 and 160 ( still very good ).

Till you hear a MM cartridge with the right phonolinepreamp you can't understand how good/great are the MM cartridges. During my last trip I was in San Diego and Norm heard in his system ( I think for the first time ) a MM cartridge the Empire EDR.9: he was happily surprised, he really likes the quality sound performance of this 100.00 dls MM cartridge.

Some MM cartridges like this one not only compete with any top MC cartridge out there but in some ways beat them, yes ( IMHO ) is better that any single Koetsu I heard it, that any ZYX or Lyra.
It is incredible that a 500.00 MM cartridge could be better performer than a 6-8K MC one.
This cartridge I mated with the Technics EPA 100MK2.

Technics 205CMK4: A marvelous MM cartridge. As good the Audio Technica is this one is better!!!!
What can I say about?, almost nothing but: Magic Diamond, Allaerts, Dynavector, Transfiguration, you named: the Technics is at least at the same level in any single sound performance parameter and beat almost all those MC cartridges for neutrality/natural tone balance, like I already say: marvelous cartridge!!!!!, if you have the tonearm and right phonolinepreamp then buy it!!!!
Mine is matched with the Micro Seiki MAX 282.

Ikeda 9REX: This one is a today MC cartridge with a unique design characteristic for a MC cartridge: it does not use cantilever ( like the cutter lhate/heads on the recording ), the design is with out cantilever. It is a very low output 0.16mv, weighty: 17grs, low compliance: 6CU and like VTF 2.8grs.

It is obvious that this cartridge is not for everyone, not only need the right tonearm and the very best phonolinepreamp out there but a lot of patience to obtain the best performance.
When you achieve this " best performance " you knowed because you will be in heaven.
The sound performance of this cartridge is a " little " different for all we know: the inmediacy of the sound and transients are second to none, the pitch/texture/no overhang/tight/fast bass is second to none, the high frequencies extension and speed are second to none, etc, etc.
You can't be near the live music like with this Ikeda cartridge: this one really is truer to the recording audio device!!!
You have to be a experienced music lover who attend very often to live events to understand what you are hearing through the Ikeda cartridge, you can't compare its sound performance with the sound performance of any other cartridge: it is not only the subject if it is better or not but the subject is that is different/near the live event.
It is an infamous bad traker: it does not like any single dust in the LP or in the stylus, we have to have everything in pristine condition. It takes more than 200 hours to hear it at its best. Like I told you: we need patience and know how.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Raul, thanks for the link. The manual at vinyl engine is interesting - the tracking force line looks like it has been changed because it is white on black, like a sticker. On mine, in that space it reads "Tracking force range 3/4 to 1-1/4 grams. It's in the same type face and red/black ink as the rest of the leaflet.
Hi folks
Have just aquired an edr 9, on Gilbodavid's recommendation....got it on a Rega RB300 arm on my Lenco (yeah, I'm another of jeannantais fans!)...was initially a little disappointed but after reading later posts on this thread, I played around with the tracking weight a bit more and ended up reducing it from the recommended 1.5g to 1.2g and what a difference! Its had about 5 hours playing now, and im VERY impressed with it..quite blown away in fact. There's an aliveness and dynamism Ive not heard from my system before..brings out the perkiness and PRAt of the Lenco superbly...cant wait to see what it sounds like after another 20-30 hours!!!
Well, I spent the weekend comparing the ~$150 EDR.9 to the ~$1,200 Ortofon K-B. I've had the K-B for a few months and have loved every minute of listening to it. I broke in the EDR.9 for about 15 hours before doing a head-to-head listen.

Both carts are mounted on swappable Yamaha headshells, easily changed onto and off of my Yamaha YP-D8. The K-B was tracking at the recommended 2.5g, and the EDR at the recommended 1.5g.

I listened to Fasano's version of the Four Seasons, Grateful Dead's Reckoning, Debussy String Quartet, Coltrane and Johnny Hartmann, Norah Jones' first LP, Ella sings the Harold Arlen songbook, Stephan Grappelli & Yehudi Menuhin's collaboration on 1930's music (sorry, I'm at work now and don't have all the titles with me), and Nancy Griffith's live LP One Fair Summer Evening.

Used both a Musical Surrounding Phonomena (cover off for quick changes of settings) and the amazing budget preamp TC-760 (that phonopreamps sells on ebay). I'm presently using a Yamaha RX-V2400 receiver as my source of power, playing LPs in the "Direct Stereo" mode. Speakers are GMA Continuum 1's.

First of all, at the end of the weekend, both carts win. The K-B is a wonderful cart to listen to; so is the EDR.9. Of course, that makes the EDR.9 a much better value, at about 1/8 the cost of K-B.

Soundstage for both carts in my system was comparable. Depth is somewhat limited because I can only place the speakers about 18" away from rear wall. Width was about the same for both carts, with each spreading out about 2 feet beyond outer speaker edges. Height was also comparable.

The differences I did hear were in imaging and instrumental timbre. Keep in mind these were very subtle differences.

On stereo recordings, the K-B seemed to image more precisely. It allowed me to point to a space in between the speakers and "see" a precise point in space where a specific instrument was playing. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that that space was a 4" square imaginary spot. The EDR images wonderfully, but I would be pointing to a 16" square spot. Personally, I preferred the EDR's imaging because it struck me as more like my experience of live music. When I sit in a hall, I can hear the wonderful timbre of, say, a live violin, but with eyes closed I cannot point precisely to the sound hole -- the sound fills the room. So for imaging I preferred the EDR.

Instrumental timbres are excellent on both carts as well, but, again, I preferred the EDR. I thought that the K-B produced "thinner" voices for each instrument. The EDR produces weightier, fuller voices. And, again, these thicker voices struck me as sounding more like my experience of listening to live music.

Both carts excel at rhythm and speed. I was pleasantly surprised to find that the MM EDR didn't appear to lag in any way when conveying pace. It also handled trills and vibrato on a par with the K-B.

So, I'll be putting the K-B up for sale soon, and using the proceeds to buy more LPs and, perhaps, another EDR. I've enjoyed it a lot, but I can't justify keeping it when the EDR can satisfy me this well. Frankly, it also makes my life a lot easier if I only have to manage switching between an MM stereo cart and my MM mono cart.

Of course, your mileage may vary. These results are purely subjective, for one person, with one system, at one moment in time.
Dear Winegasman: Thank you for share with us your EDR.9 findings.
Do you already try it at 1.2grs VTF?

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Nice report Rich and congratulations on your decision. I'm surprised how well the EDR9 does dynamics and I'm with you in preferring realistic imaging to "audiophile holographic."

I'm tracking at 1.1 gms now and it's great - I may try 1.2 soon.

How come this cart wasn't famous in its day, when we were all buying Shures and Audio Tecnicas?