Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
MOSFET MOSFET is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 810
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

First off, I've never posted here, or been here, before so let me start by
saying "HI" to everyone!!!

I have an old Technics SL-B2 turntable that is in perfect shape and works
perfectly as well. I have had it for many, many years. However, it has
been relagated to a box that is kept in my attic or garage for the last 25
years. I still have my record collection going back to 1978 when I
purchased my first LP, and I accumulated records at a pretty good clip
(perhaps 2 a week) until, I would say, 1988, when EVERYTHING was switched to
CD's. Even the EP's that were the last hold-out of recordings not found on
CD, but only on vinyl, really disappeared by 1992. By '91-'93, except for
an extremelly small niche market of audiophiles (who to THIS DAY will claim
that LP's still sound better than CD's given very HIGH quality recordings,
EXPERT mastering techniques, and EXCEPTIONAL equipment used in playback).

Also, besides Audiophiles, DJ's continue to this day to use vinyl in clubs
as
mxing one song to the next is MUCH easier than with CD's (though advances in
DJ oriented CD mixing gear with controls like BPM synchrnozation has leveled
the playing field to a large degree). However, besides those two groups,
NOBODY BUYS vinyl
anymore.

Anyway, I have about 400-500 LP's I was flipping through the other day and
felt nostalgic and wanted to hear some of this old stuff. However, my
turntable is just missing a headshell and cartride (stylus too, of course).
I gave it to someone (the headshell and cartride) about 10 years ago as I
thought I would NEVER want to use the turntable again and he needed one, I
nearly threw my turntable out after that (well, I was going to give it to
the Salvation Army, same diff.)!!!!!

I have already ordered the headshell and it should be here tommorrow or the
next day.

My question is about what would give me the best bang for my buck in terms
of cartridges (with stylus, of course). I definately want to buy new as you
NEVER know how many hours a used needle may have seen. I am NOT an
audiophile NUT when it comes to my home gear (OK, a little bit) and my
turntable is certainly not one you would consider "high-end". But it's
built like a tank (surprisingly heavy) and after literally decades of
collecting dust it fired right up, by using the strobe adjustment I dialed
in the PERFECT 33 1/3 and it never wavered (wow and flutter) at all.

I have no doubt it's as good (SQ wise) as any other Technics turntable (I
know, I know, DJ's all prefer the 1200 series with direct drive, mine's belt
driven, as the 1200's can go from 0-60 MPH in like .02 seconds or some damn
thing like that which is advantages to DJ's). But again, sound quality
wise, they all SOUND the same
(given the same cartride) and it becomes more a factor of, again, your
cartridege and stylus selection as Technics does not employ more esoteric
turntable construction techniques (like thick glass platters, drive-motors
COMPLETELY seperated from the spinning table itself, only joined by the belt
in an
attempt to COMPLETELY erradicate any motor noise that might creep in, and
EVEN MORE essoteric and complicated means of isolating ANY vibrations in the
environment or the surface the turntable is placed upon. These esoteric
turntables might empoly (to name only a few) double decker affairs where the
first part of the table is simply a vibrations absorber; different materials
employed in constructing some tables such as carbon fiber, fiberglass, REAL
glass, and so on and so on......).

Anyway, back to my original question. Do any of you out there have a
favorite cartridge maker and if so why? I don't want to spend a ridiculous
amount of money, I just want my records to sound decent as I plan to
transpose them
to MP3. I used to buy only Audio Technica cartridges as a kid as I thought
they made a very good product at a reasonable price. Is that still the
case? Are there others to consider? Like I said, I am DEINATELY looking
for a NEW cartridge and stylus (I do a lot of shopping on Ebay), but I am
not going to spend $500 on a Grado
flagship model. It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.

Thank you in advance for any advice in this matter!!!!

MOSFET

  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Sonnova Sonnova is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,337
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:14:17 -0700, MOSFET wrote
(in article ):

First off, I've never posted here, or been here, before so let me start by
saying "HI" to everyone!!!

I have an old Technics SL-B2 turntable that is in perfect shape and works
perfectly as well. I have had it for many, many years. However, it has
been relagated to a box that is kept in my attic or garage for the last 25
years. I still have my record collection going back to 1978 when I
purchased my first LP, and I accumulated records at a pretty good clip
(perhaps 2 a week) until, I would say, 1988, when EVERYTHING was switched to
CD's. Even the EP's that were the last hold-out of recordings not found on
CD, but only on vinyl, really disappeared by 1992. By '91-'93, except for
an extremelly small niche market of audiophiles (who to THIS DAY will claim
that LP's still sound better than CD's given very HIGH quality recordings,
EXPERT mastering techniques, and EXCEPTIONAL equipment used in playback).


Well, obviously LPs do sound better than CDs TO THEM. I hear more live music
than most people and I have LPs that definitely sound better than the CD of
the same performance. So, in some instances those who think LPs sound more
like real music than do CDs are correct.

Also, besides Audiophiles, DJ's continue to this day to use vinyl in clubs
as
mxing one song to the next is MUCH easier than with CD's (though advances in
DJ oriented CD mixing gear with controls like BPM synchrnozation has leveled
the playing field to a large degree). However, besides those two groups,
NOBODY BUYS vinyl
anymore.

Anyway, I have about 400-500 LP's I was flipping through the other day and
felt nostalgic and wanted to hear some of this old stuff. However, my
turntable is just missing a headshell and cartride (stylus too, of course).
I gave it to someone (the headshell and cartride) about 10 years ago as I
thought I would NEVER want to use the turntable again and he needed one, I
nearly threw my turntable out after that (well, I was going to give it to
the Salvation Army, same diff.)!!!!!

I have already ordered the headshell and it should be here tommorrow or the
next day.

My question is about what would give me the best bang for my buck in terms
of cartridges (with stylus, of course). I definately want to buy new as you
NEVER know how many hours a used needle may have seen. I am NOT an
audiophile NUT when it comes to my home gear (OK, a little bit) and my
turntable is certainly not one you would consider "high-end". But it's
built like a tank (surprisingly heavy) and after literally decades of
collecting dust it fired right up, by using the strobe adjustment I dialed
in the PERFECT 33 1/3 and it never wavered (wow and flutter) at all.


I suggest the Sumiko Blue-Point No. 2. It tracks beautifully, sounds great
and only costs about $300. It is also a high-output moving coil and does not
require a head-amp or a transformer. You can order one from Needle Doctor.

I have no doubt it's as good (SQ wise) as any other Technics turntable (I
know, I know, DJ's all prefer the 1200 series with direct drive, mine's belt
driven, as the 1200's can go from 0-60 MPH in like .02 seconds or some damn
thing like that which is advantages to DJ's). But again, sound quality
wise, they all SOUND the same
(given the same cartride) and it becomes more a factor of, again, your
cartridege and stylus selection as Technics does not employ more esoteric
turntable construction techniques (like thick glass platters, drive-motors
COMPLETELY seperated from the spinning table itself, only joined by the belt
in an
attempt to COMPLETELY erradicate any motor noise that might creep in, and
EVEN MORE essoteric and complicated means of isolating ANY vibrations in the
environment or the surface the turntable is placed upon. These esoteric
turntables might empoly (to name only a few) double decker affairs where the
first part of the table is simply a vibrations absorber; different materials
employed in constructing some tables such as carbon fiber, fiberglass, REAL
glass, and so on and so on......).


Actually, your Technics table is not very good. The platter rings, the
bearing is relatively poor and the arm is both resonant and poorly designed.
You'd be better off with a new Pro-Ject Debut III, a Rega P1, or a Music Hall
MMF-2.2. But if you get a decent cartridge first, you can start enjoying your
records now, and when you can afford it, you can upgrade your turntable. Then
you will be better able to appreciate the improvement that even a modest
modern turntable will bring to your listening.

Anyway, back to my original question. Do any of you out there have a
favorite cartridge maker and if so why? I don't want to spend a ridiculous
amount of money, I just want my records to sound decent as I plan to
transpose them
to MP3. I used to buy only Audio Technica cartridges as a kid as I thought
they made a very good product at a reasonable price. Is that still the
case? Are there others to consider? Like I said, I am DEINATELY looking
for a NEW cartridge and stylus (I do a lot of shopping on Ebay), but I am
not going to spend $500 on a Grado
flagship model. It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.


Sorry. There's nothing decent in that price range.

Thank you in advance for any advice in this matter!!!!

MOSFET


  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Norman Schwartz Norman Schwartz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 28
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Jun 20, 7:14*pm, "MOSFET" wrote:
to MP3. *I used to buy only Audio Technica cartridges as a kid as I
thought
they made a very good product at a reasonable price. *Is that still the
case? *Are there others to consider? *Like I said, I am DEINATELY looking
for a NEW cartridge and stylus (I do a lot of shopping on Ebay), but I am
not going to spend $500 on a Grado
flagship model. *It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.

Thank you in advance for any advice in this matter!!!!


There are very many both standard and P-mount cartridges within your
price range:

http://www.needledoctor.com/Online-S...ono-Cartridges

The Sumiko Pearls prefably the Oyster or the Grados (the Green or even
the less expensive Grados). I'll even go so far as to dare say that
they will produce results equal to many which cost thousands of
dollars. (This was true many years ago in my relative youth when my
hearing was a lot better :-(
The Sumiko Oyster and Grado Green will even track as well as their
more expensive brethren.

To generate excellent sounding MP3s from your old LP collection you
needn't spend big bucks.

MOSFET


  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
bob bob is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 670
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Jun 20, 7:14*pm, "MOSFET" wrote:
First off, I've never posted here, or been here, before so let me start by
saying "HI" to everyone!!!

I have an old Technics SL-B2 turntable that is in perfect shape and works
perfectly as well. *I have had it for many, many years. *However, it has
been relagated to a box that is kept in my attic or garage for the last 25
years. *I still have my record collection going back to 1978 when I
purchased my first LP, and I accumulated records at a pretty good clip
(perhaps 2 a week) until, I would say, 1988, when EVERYTHING was switched to
CD's. *Even the EP's that were the last hold-out of recordings not found on
CD, but only on vinyl, really disappeared by 1992. *By '91-'93, except for
an extremelly small niche market of audiophiles (who to THIS DAY will claim
that LP's still sound better than CD's given very HIGH quality recordings,
EXPERT mastering techniques, and EXCEPTIONAL equipment used in playback).

Also, besides Audiophiles, DJ's continue to this day to use vinyl in clubs
as
mxing one song to the next is MUCH easier than with CD's (though advances in
DJ oriented CD mixing gear with controls like BPM synchrnozation has leveled
the playing field to a large degree). *However, besides those two groups,
NOBODY BUYS vinyl
anymore.

Anyway, I have about 400-500 LP's I was flipping through the other day and
felt nostalgic and wanted to hear some of this old stuff. *However, my
turntable is just missing a headshell and cartride (stylus too, of course).
I gave it to someone (the headshell and cartride) about 10 years ago as I
thought I would NEVER want to use the turntable again and he needed one, I
nearly threw my turntable out after that (well, I was going to give it to
the Salvation Army, same diff.)!!!!!

I have already ordered the headshell and it should be here tommorrow or the
next day.

My question is about what would give me the best bang for my buck in terms
of cartridges (with stylus, of course). *I definately want to buy new as you
NEVER know how many hours a used needle may have seen. *I am NOT an
audiophile NUT when it comes to my home gear (OK, a little bit) and my
turntable is certainly not one you would consider "high-end". *But it's
built like a tank (surprisingly heavy) and after literally decades of
collecting dust it fired right up, by using the strobe adjustment I dialed
in the PERFECT 33 1/3 and it never wavered (wow and flutter) at all.

I have no doubt it's as good (SQ wise) as any other Technics turntable (I
know, I know, DJ's all prefer the 1200 series with direct drive, mine's belt
driven, as the 1200's can go from 0-60 MPH in like .02 seconds or some damn
thing like that which is advantages to DJ's). *But again, sound quality
wise, they all SOUND the same
(given the same cartride) and it becomes more a factor of, again, your
cartridege and stylus selection as Technics does not employ more esoteric
turntable construction techniques (like thick glass platters, drive-motors
COMPLETELY seperated from the spinning table itself, only joined by the belt
in an
attempt to COMPLETELY erradicate any motor noise that might creep in, and
EVEN MORE essoteric and complicated means of isolating ANY vibrations in the
environment or the surface the turntable is placed upon. *These esoteric
turntables might empoly (to name only a few) double decker affairs where the
first part of the table is simply a vibrations absorber; different materials
employed in constructing some tables such as carbon fiber, fiberglass, REAL
glass, and so on and so on......).

Anyway, back to my original question. *Do any of you out there have a
favorite cartridge maker and if so why? *I don't want to spend a ridiculous
amount of money, I just want my records to sound decent as I plan to
transpose them
to MP3. *I used to buy only Audio Technica cartridges as a kid as I thought
they made a very good product at a reasonable price. *Is that still the
case? *Are there others to consider? *Like I said, I am DEINATELY looking
for a NEW cartridge and stylus (I do a lot of shopping on Ebay), but I am
not going to spend $500 on a Grado
flagship model. *It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.

Thank you in advance for any advice in this matter!!!!

MOSFET


Ignore the attitude. Your turntable is fine if it seems fine to you.
Nice carts you can find for under $100:

Grado Black
Shure M97
A-T 440

Enjoy.

bob

  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
MOSFET MOSFET is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 810
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

Well, obviously LPs do sound better than CDs TO THEM. I hear more live
music
than most people and I have LPs that definitely sound better than the CD

of
the same performance. So, in some instances those who think LPs sound more
like real music than do CDs are correct.


Well, actually that's part of the reason I want to resurrect my turntable.
Like I said, I know it's not what you would consider a super-high-end
machine, but I have always been impressed with how solidly it is built
(compared with other turntables I may come across at second-hand stores or
people's homes who still have turntables). I mean, every component
(tone-arm, controls, platter) are built incredibly solidly and NOTHING on
that entire machine is even slightly "loose". I have a friend who believes
very strongly in the superiority of vinyl over CD's and it is he who
convinced me to resurrect mine. I have to admitt, listening to his system
certainly made me think there's something to that. AND, he and I both felt
the SL-B2 was certainly worthy of getting the most out of my LP's.

And although it's true, you get what you pay for, the rest of my system is
really just OK; a Denon AVR-3600, Michael Green Designs speakers, Discovery
speaker and Interconnect wires, however, it really does not warrent a
ridculously expensive cartride as I would probably not hear the subtle
differences given my turntable and the rest of my system. I will be happy
if I find it is the equall of my CD's. And as I recall, I always thought
that CD's did not sound any better than my vinyl. It was more a matter of
convience and being able to play them in my car that drove my to make the
switch, not really that I felt CD's were any better sounding.




Also, besides Audiophiles, DJ's continue to this day to use vinyl in

clubs
as
mxing one song to the next is MUCH easier than with CD's (though

advances in
DJ oriented CD mixing gear with controls like BPM synchrnozation has

leveled
the playing field to a large degree). However, besides those two

groups,
NOBODY BUYS vinyl
anymore.

Anyway, I have about 400-500 LP's I was flipping through the other day

and
felt nostalgic and wanted to hear some of this old stuff. However, my
turntable is just missing a headshell and cartride (stylus too, of

course).
I gave it to someone (the headshell and cartride) about 10 years ago as

I
thought I would NEVER want to use the turntable again and he needed one,

I
nearly threw my turntable out after that (well, I was going to give it

to
the Salvation Army, same diff.)!!!!!

I have already ordered the headshell and it should be here tommorrow or

the
next day.

My question is about what would give me the best bang for my buck in

terms
of cartridges (with stylus, of course). I definately want to buy new as

you
NEVER know how many hours a used needle may have seen. I am NOT an
audiophile NUT when it comes to my home gear (OK, a little bit) and my
turntable is certainly not one you would consider "high-end". But it's
built like a tank (surprisingly heavy) and after literally decades of
collecting dust it fired right up, by using the strobe adjustment I

dialed
in the PERFECT 33 1/3 and it never wavered (wow and flutter) at all.


I suggest the Sumiko Blue-Point No. 2. It tracks beautifully, sounds great
and only costs about $300. It is also a high-output moving coil and does

not
require a head-amp or a transformer. You can order one from Needle

Doctor.

I am familiar with Sumiko and the Blue-Point. I have no doubt it would make
an outstanding cartridge for my application. It's just a little on the
pricy side for something my wife feels is not exactly a necessay expense.I
really need to keep it under $100.




I have no doubt it's as good (SQ wise) as any other Technics turntable

(I
know, I know, DJ's all prefer the 1200 series with direct drive, mine's

belt
driven, as the 1200's can go from 0-60 MPH in like .02 seconds or some

damn
thing like that which is advantages to DJ's). But again, sound quality
wise, they all SOUND the same
(given the same cartride) and it becomes more a factor of, again, your
cartridege and stylus selection as Technics does not employ more

esoteric
turntable construction techniques (like thick glass platters,

drive-motors
COMPLETELY seperated from the spinning table itself, only joined by the

belt
in an
attempt to COMPLETELY erradicate any motor noise that might creep in,

and
EVEN MORE essoteric and complicated means of isolating ANY vibrations in

the
environment or the surface the turntable is placed upon. These esoteric
turntables might empoly (to name only a few) double decker affairs where

the
first part of the table is simply a vibrations absorber; different

materials
employed in constructing some tables such as carbon fiber, fiberglass,

REAL
glass, and so on and so on......).


Actually, your Technics table is not very good. The platter rings, the
bearing is relatively poor and the arm is both resonant and poorly

designed.
You'd be better off with a new Pro-Ject Debut III, a Rega P1, or a Music

Hall
MMF-2.2. But if you get a decent cartridge first, you can start enjoying

your
records now, and when you can afford it, you can upgrade your turntable.

Then
you will be better able to appreciate the improvement that even a modest
modern turntable will bring to your listening.


I know there have been some big improvements in turntables in the last few
years. Although many "appear" similar to their older brethren, I know that
the technolgy employed in modern high-end turntables has advanced greatly.


Thank you for all your great advice!!!!!

MOSFET




  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:14:17 -0700, MOSFET wrote


It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.


Sorry. There's nothing decent in that price range.


Sure there is - the Shure M97Xe.


  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
bob bob is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 670
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Jun 21, 10:50*pm, "MOSFET" wrote:

I know there have been some big improvements in turntables in the last few
years. *Although many "appear" similar to their older brethren, I know that
the technolgy employed in modern high-end turntables has advanced greatly.


Yes, they've added USB ports.

Anything else?

bob
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Sonnova Sonnova is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,337
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:51:05 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:14:17 -0700, MOSFET wrote


It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.


Sorry. There's nothing decent in that price range.


Sure there is - the Shure M97Xe.



Yeccchhh! If you think those are decent, then I begin to understand your bias
against vinyl records. If I listened to records with a cartridge like that,
I'd probably hate records too.
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:51:05 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:14:17 -0700, MOSFET wrote


It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.

Sorry. There's nothing decent in that price range.


Sure there is - the Shure M97Xe.



Yeccchhh! If you think those are decent, then I begin to understand your
bias
against vinyl records. If I listened to records with a cartridge like
that,
I'd probably hate records too.


Sue me for not being prejudiced against hhigh performance equipment just
because it lacks a 3 or 4 digit price tag. I''ve heard many high end
cartridges that people worship, and very much of what they idolize
disappears in a blind test.


  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Harry Lavo Harry Lavo is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 735
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:51:05 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:14:17 -0700, MOSFET wrote

It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.

Sorry. There's nothing decent in that price range.

Sure there is - the Shure M97Xe.



Yeccchhh! If you think those are decent, then I begin to understand your
bias
against vinyl records. If I listened to records with a cartridge like
that,
I'd probably hate records too.


Sue me for not being prejudiced against hhigh performance equipment just
because it lacks a 3 or 4 digit price tag. I''ve heard many high end
cartridges that people worship, and very much of what they idolize
disappears in a blind test.



I think Sonnova's reaction is a bit of overkill..for $100 it is okay, bu IMO
it is outperformed in it's own price range by the AT-440, which is enough
better that I would (and did) make it my recommendation instead. The Shure
for one thing is inferior in imaging to cartridges most would consider
high-end. If you have never heard a cartridge that sounds substantially
better than the 97xE you just haven't listened to enough...or the
right...cartridges. And while their may be a correlation with price, that
is not the only factor, and better sound doesn't require a
mega-thousand-dollar cartridge. A Blue Point Special (at $400) and to a
much greater degree a Dynavector Ruby (at $800) or Shelter 501 II (at $900)
will wipe the Shure (and its more expensive siblings). That is, if
reproducing a facsimile of live acoustic instruments and voice is your
standard and you use well-recorded records of same as your souce.



  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:51:05 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:14:17 -0700, MOSFET wrote

It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.

Sorry. There's nothing decent in that price range.

Sure there is - the Shure M97Xe.



Yeccchhh! If you think those are decent, then I begin to understand your
bias against vinyl records. If I listened to records with a cartridge
like
that, I'd probably hate records too.


Sue me for not being prejudiced against hhigh performance equipment just
because it lacks a 3 or 4 digit price tag. I''ve heard many high end
cartridges that people worship, and very much of what they idolize
disappears in a blind test.


I think Sonnova's reaction is a bit of overkill..for $100 it is okay,


Actually, it costs $61.17 postpaid at Amazon,

bu IMO it is outperformed in it's own price range by the AT-440,


At $169.90 same place, same terms.

And way over the OP's price range.

Well opinions are indisputable, but how do we know that your opinion is more
accurate than your pricing information?

which is enough
better that I would (and did) make it my recommendation instead. The
Shure
for one thing is inferior in imaging to cartridges most would consider
high-end.


Absence of reliable confirmation for that opinion noted.


If you have never heard a cartridge that sounds substantially
better than the 97xE you just haven't listened to enough...or the
right...cartridges.


That would be a gratuitous insult given the fact that it is well known that
I have heard very many so-called "better" cartridges. It's completely
mind-blowing how quick some are to accuse people of something that is in
fact far more true of themselves.

It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in this conversation
(probably the entire forum) that has ever done level-matched, time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of various price levels and
perceived quality levels. Some of those tests, and they were true tests,
were done about 30 years ago when unlike most people here, I didn't have the
hearing of someone who is well into the second half-century of their
lives. I was in my early 30s at the time.

And while their may be a correlation with price, that
is not the only factor, and better sound doesn't require a
mega-thousand-dollar cartridge. A Blue Point Special (at $400) and to a
much greater degree a Dynavector Ruby (at $800) or Shelter 501 II (at
$900)
will wipe the Shure (and its more expensive siblings).


Well, based on widely-separated listenings, no level matching, no
time-synch, and no bias controls. IOW, nothing but the unsupported beliefs
of some one, some place.

That is, if reproducing a facsimile of live acoustic instruments and
voice is your
standard and you use well-recorded records of same as your souce.


This dogmatic posturing is indeed getting tiring. :-(


  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Sonnova Sonnova is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,337
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:13:12 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:51:05 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:14:17 -0700, MOSFET wrote

It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.

Sorry. There's nothing decent in that price range.

Sure there is - the Shure M97Xe.



Yeccchhh! If you think those are decent, then I begin to understand your
bias
against vinyl records. If I listened to records with a cartridge like
that,
I'd probably hate records too.


Sue me for not being prejudiced against hhigh performance equipment just
because it lacks a 3 or 4 digit price tag. I''ve heard many high end
cartridges that people worship, and very much of what they idolize
disappears in a blind test.



Have it your own way, but an M97Xe isn't even as good as the old V-15 Type
VxMR, and it's not as good as hundreds of better cartridges then or now (it
was a hell of a tracker, though, I'll give the V15 Type VxMR that!).
  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Jenn[_2_] Jenn[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,752
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in this conversation
(probably the entire forum) that has ever done level-matched, time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of various price levels and
perceived quality levels.


Could you describe how you time synch these tests?
  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Jun 22, 6:13*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Sonnova" wrote in message

...





On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:51:05 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):


"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:14:17 -0700, MOSFET wrote


It MUST be under $100, preferably under $50.


Sorry. There's nothing decent in that price range.


Sure there is - the Shure M97Xe.


Yeccchhh! If you think those are decent, then I begin to understand your
bias
against vinyl records. If I listened to records with a cartridge like
that,
I'd probably hate records too.


Sue me for not being prejudiced against hhigh performance equipment just
because it lacks a 3 or 4 digit price tag. I''ve heard many high end
cartridges that people worship, and very much of what they idolize
disappears in a blind test.- Hide quoted text -


I'd love to hear about those time synched, level matched double blind
comparisons you did between the Shure and the four digit price tagged
cartridges. I mean if you are playing the blind test card you must
have the goods. Which four digit price tagged cartridges did you use?
How did you manage to do the time syncing and level matching? What
tables and arms did you use? What preamp? What LPs did you use? Must
have been quite a job.

  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,


"Arny Krueger" wrote:


It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in this conversation
(probably the entire forum) that has ever done level-matched,
time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of various price levels
and
perceived quality levels.


Could you describe how you time synch these tests?


Precise adjustment of speed on identical variable speed turntables. Bring
the discs into synch by braking the LP that was leading by dragging a finger
on the outside of the TT platter. Once the (hidden) person who does the
adjusting hears that they are in synch, he enables the ABX comparison to
proceed.

We used the same basic means to time-synch CD players, except we used a
variable high-precision clock.




  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Jenn[_2_] Jenn[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,752
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,


"Arny Krueger" wrote:


It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in this conversation
(probably the entire forum) that has ever done level-matched,
time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of various price levels
and
perceived quality levels.


Could you describe how you time synch these tests?


Precise adjustment of speed on identical variable speed turntables. Bring
the discs into synch by braking the LP that was leading by dragging a finger
on the outside of the TT platter. Once the (hidden) person who does the
adjusting hears that they are in synch, he enables the ABX comparison to
proceed.


Do you remember what variable speed turntables were used?
  #17   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,


"Arny Krueger" wrote:


It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in this
conversation (probably the entire forum) that has ever
done level-matched, time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of
various price levels and
perceived quality levels.


Could you describe how you time synch these tests?


Precise adjustment of speed on identical variable speed
turntables. Bring the discs into synch by braking the LP
that was leading by dragging a finger on the outside of
the TT platter. Once the (hidden) person who does the
adjusting hears that they are in synch, he enables the
ABX comparison to proceed.


Do you remember what variable speed turntables were used?


TD 125 comes to mind.

  #18   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Sonnova Sonnova is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,337
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:26:34 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,

"Arny Krueger" wrote:

It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in this
conversation (probably the entire forum) that has ever
done level-matched, time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of
various price levels and
perceived quality levels.

Could you describe how you time synch these tests?

Precise adjustment of speed on identical variable speed
turntables. Bring the discs into synch by braking the LP
that was leading by dragging a finger on the outside of
the TT platter. Once the (hidden) person who does the
adjusting hears that they are in synch, he enables the
ABX comparison to proceed.


Do you remember what variable speed turntables were used?


TD 125 comes to mind.


With or without the lousy Thorens TP125 Arm?
  #19   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Robert Peirce[_2_] Robert Peirce[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
Do you remember what variable speed turntables were used?


TD 125 comes to mind.


The VPI Synchronous Drive System is also highly adjustable.

--
Robert B. Peirce, Venetia, PA 724-941-6883
bob AT peirce-family.com [Mac]
rbp AT cooksonpeirce.com [Office]
  #20   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Robert Peirce" wrote in
message
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
Do you remember what variable speed turntables were
used?


TD 125 comes to mind.


The VPI Synchronous Drive System is also highly
adjustable.


In this day and age just about any turntable is adjustable. If it has got a
synchronous motor, just set up a variable frequency power line source with
about 10 watts of power available.



  #21   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Sonnova" wrote in message

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:26:34 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message ...
In article ,

"Arny Krueger" wrote:

It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in
this conversation (probably the entire forum) that
has ever done level-matched, time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of
various price levels and
perceived quality levels.

Could you describe how you time synch these tests?

Precise adjustment of speed on identical variable speed
turntables. Bring the discs into synch by braking the
LP that was leading by dragging a finger on the
outside of the TT platter. Once the (hidden) person
who does the adjusting hears that they are in synch,
he enables the ABX comparison to proceed.


Do you remember what variable speed turntables were
used?


TD 125 comes to mind.


With or without the lousy Thorens TP125 Arm?


SME 3009, of course. ;-)

Of course I know that today it is fashionable to bash both of these
components. But in the day, they were arguably SOTA. Not only that, but
they both measured well and sounded good.

BTW, the whole ensemble ran me less than $150 via mail to APO addresses from
a West German retailer who plied the Armed Forces trade.


  #22   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Sonnova Sonnova is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,337
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:42:07 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:26:34 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message ...
In article ,

"Arny Krueger" wrote:

It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in
this conversation (probably the entire forum) that
has ever done level-matched, time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of
various price levels and
perceived quality levels.

Could you describe how you time synch these tests?

Precise adjustment of speed on identical variable speed
turntables. Bring the discs into synch by braking the
LP that was leading by dragging a finger on the
outside of the TT platter. Once the (hidden) person
who does the adjusting hears that they are in synch,
he enables the ABX comparison to proceed.


Do you remember what variable speed turntables were
used?


TD 125 comes to mind.


With or without the lousy Thorens TP125 Arm?


SME 3009, of course. ;-)


That's better. At least the 3009 had decent bearings.

Of course I know that today it is fashionable to bash both of these
components. But in the day, they were arguably SOTA. Not only that, but
they both measured well and sounded good.


Thorens 'tables rang like a bell. Mine had little bass until I installed one
of those heavy, 5 pound Naoka (SP?) turntable mats which consisted of a
rubber compound mixed with ground-up lead. I had to re-adjust the turntable's
suspension to keep the mat from pushing the platter down to where it touched
the plinth, but the improvement in low frequency response was simply
astounding! Before the mat the TD125 rendered the bass drum whacks on the
Frederick Fennell Telarc recording of the Holst 'Suites for Military Band'
as an anemic thwack. After the mat, they were rendered as a startling, loud,
deep BANG just the way they sounded in the Soundstream demonstration room at
the NYC AES Convention at the Waldorf Astoria several years earlier! There
is a reason why the better 'tables these days have platters made out of more
sonically "inert" materials (such as machined acrylics, MDF, etc) rather than
cast, machined aluminum.
  #23   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Harry Lavo Harry Lavo is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 735
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:42:07 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:26:34 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message ...
In article ,

"Arny Krueger" wrote:

It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in
this conversation (probably the entire forum) that
has ever done level-matched, time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of
various price levels and
perceived quality levels.

Could you describe how you time synch these tests?

Precise adjustment of speed on identical variable speed
turntables. Bring the discs into synch by braking the
LP that was leading by dragging a finger on the
outside of the TT platter. Once the (hidden) person
who does the adjusting hears that they are in synch,
he enables the ABX comparison to proceed.

Do you remember what variable speed turntables were
used?


TD 125 comes to mind.


With or without the lousy Thorens TP125 Arm?


SME 3009, of course. ;-)


That's better. At least the 3009 had decent bearings.

Of course I know that today it is fashionable to bash both of these
components. But in the day, they were arguably SOTA. Not only that, but
they both measured well and sounded good.


Thorens 'tables rang like a bell. Mine had little bass until I installed
one
of those heavy, 5 pound Naoka (SP?) turntable mats which consisted of a
rubber compound mixed with ground-up lead. I had to re-adjust the
turntable's
suspension to keep the mat from pushing the platter down to where it
touched
the plinth, but the improvement in low frequency response was simply
astounding! Before the mat the TD125 rendered the bass drum whacks on the
Frederick Fennell Telarc recording of the Holst 'Suites for Military
Band'
as an anemic thwack. After the mat, they were rendered as a startling,
loud,
deep BANG just the way they sounded in the Soundstream demonstration room
at
the NYC AES Convention at the Waldorf Astoria several years earlier!
There
is a reason why the better 'tables these days have platters made out of
more
sonically "inert" materials (such as machined acrylics, MDF, etc) rather
than
cast, machined aluminum.


I had a Thorens 160 Super as a second TT back in the early '80's, an a
Marcoff Glassmat made all the difference in the world, with much the same
results.

  #24   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Sonnova" wrote in message

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:42:07 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:26:34 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Jenn" wrote in
message
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in
message ...
In article ,

"Arny Krueger" wrote:

It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in
this conversation (probably the entire forum) that
has ever done level-matched, time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of
various price levels and
perceived quality levels.

Could you describe how you time synch these tests?

Precise adjustment of speed on identical variable
speed turntables. Bring the discs into synch by
braking the LP that was leading by dragging a finger
on the outside of the TT platter. Once the (hidden)
person who does the adjusting hears that they are in
synch, he enables the ABX comparison to proceed.

Do you remember what variable speed turntables were
used?


TD 125 comes to mind.


With or without the lousy Thorens TP125 Arm?


SME 3009, of course. ;-)


That's better. At least the 3009 had decent bearings.

Of course I know that today it is fashionable to bash
both of these components. But in the day, they were
arguably SOTA. Not only that, but they both measured
well and sounded good.


Thorens 'tables rang like a bell.


Only if you played the high end audio dealer game of removing the mat.

If the resonance of the turntable makes a difference, then it would show up
in some kind of objective test?

I've done all sorts of measurements on turntables, and while the resonances
that are described in the technical literature of the LP are there, many of
the things that audiophiles have been *taught* to believe by high end
marketing teams masquerading as high end audio ragazines, are not.

There's a reason why almost nobody does technical tests on turntables -
most of the things that people have been *taught* to pay the big bucks on
are figments of someone's overheated and/or greedy imagination.

There does happen to be an archive of objective and material for blind
subjective tests of some very inexpensive turntables and one or two very
expensive turntables on the web. Given how crappy much of what was tested
is, one the better inexpensive turntables acquitted itself remarkably well.

This shows once again that audiophiles have been getting sold a bill of
goods. Actually, many bills of goods. Most of the technical problems with
the LP format are on the disk, and giving it a golden throne to squat on
does not make the bad smell go away. ;-)

Mine had little bass
until I installed one of those heavy, 5 pound Naoka (SP?)
turntable mats which consisted of a rubber compound mixed
with ground-up lead.


Reliance on sighted evaluation noted.

I had to re-adjust the turntable's
suspension to keep the mat from pushing the platter down
to where it touched the plinth, but the improvement in
low frequency response was simply astounding!


If that were true it would be measurable. Trust me, it most likely is not.

The platter/arm substructure's resonance on the TD125 is already well below
the audible range. You did change that, most likely. You changed it from
doesn't matter to a slightly different doesn't matter.

I tire of continually pointing out that the current audiophile lore of the
LP is heavily dominated by unsubstantiated blather, unless you call "Tell an
audiophile a bedtime story that he will drink it up like fine wine because
he is totally unlettered, uneducated and has suspended rational disbelief
anyway", substantiation. I don't!



  #25   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message


I had a Thorens 160 Super as a second TT back in the
early '80's, an a Marcoff Glassmat made all the
difference in the world, with much the same results.


The 160 was a cheap joke compared to the TD 125. However, again we see
nothing but a sighted evauation by someone who invested in questionable
pseudo-technology. FWIW, my Rega has a glass turntable, and without its mat,
it rings like a big glass bowl. At least die cast turntables provide some
eddy-current shielding for the motor's EM field.

But, I just thought of a great tweak for my Rega. I have a big sheet of
1/16" steel. I think I will cut a circle out of it with my diamond saw, and
punch a hole in the middle. Then I can fend of complaints of what it is
said that Rega's do to Grado cartridges, one of which I commonly use. BTW, I
took my own advice and scooped up on Amazon's $62 sale on Shure M97XEs.
If Harry or Sonova were up to it, I would challenge them to a
measurement/ABX comparison test with their choice of high end *treasures*.



  #26   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Norman Schwartz Norman Schwartz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 28
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Jun 28, 4:15*pm, Sonnova wrote:
That's better. At least the 3009 had decent bearings.


Thorens 'tables rang like a bell. Mine had little bass until I installed one
of those heavy, 5 pound Naoka (SP?) turntable mats which consisted of a
rubber compound mixed with ground-up lead. I had to re-adjust the turntable's
suspension to keep the mat from pushing the platter down to where it touched
the plinth, but the improvement in low frequency response was simply
astounding! Before the mat the TD125 rendered the bass drum whacks on the
Frederick Fennell Telarc recording of *the Holst 'Suites for Military Band'
as an anemic thwack. After the mat, they were rendered as a startling, loud,
deep BANG just the way they sounded in the Soundstream demonstration room at
the NYC AES Convention at the Waldorf Astoria several years earlier! *There
is a reason why the better *'tables these days have platters made out of more
sonically "inert" materials (such as machined acrylics, MDF, etc) rather than
cast, machined aluminum.- Hide quoted text -

I find this interesting and/or questionable. Perhaps it's the
difference in listening environments or memory which contributed to
the effects you describe. Today this very day I use the TD-125 with
the original SME arm with detachable headshell. My cartridge is a
Sumiko Andante FGV with the Fritz Gyger I stylus configuration. It
resembles the Sumiko Pearls of today in output and shape. At 1.8 grams
it tracks anything and everything including the Telarc 1812 cannons
(first recording). I own both the LP and CD releases of the Holst
Military Suites. Using a hybrid Magneplanar system comprised of
Tympani IVa panels on the bottom end (powered by a Bryston 4B-SST) + a
3.6R on the top (powered by two Bryston 7B-STs) I hear no discernible
difference in the bass drum between the LP and CD versions. Age and
listening to loud music has taken its toll on my ability to hear upper
frequencies, but I'm thinking that the bass drum comes across as it
should.
  #27   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Sonnova Sonnova is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,337
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:02:38 -0700, Harry Lavo wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...


[quoted text deleted -- deb]

Thorens 'tables rang like a bell. Mine had little bass until I installed
one
of those heavy, 5 pound Naoka (SP?) turntable mats which consisted of a
rubber compound mixed with ground-up lead. I had to re-adjust the
turntable's
suspension to keep the mat from pushing the platter down to where it
touched
the plinth, but the improvement in low frequency response was simply
astounding! Before the mat the TD125 rendered the bass drum whacks on the
Frederick Fennell Telarc recording of the Holst 'Suites for Military
Band'
as an anemic thwack. After the mat, they were rendered as a startling,
loud,
deep BANG just the way they sounded in the Soundstream demonstration room
at
the NYC AES Convention at the Waldorf Astoria several years earlier!
There
is a reason why the better 'tables these days have platters made out of
more
sonically "inert" materials (such as machined acrylics, MDF, etc) rather
than
cast, machined aluminum.


I had a Thorens 160 Super as a second TT back in the early '80's, an a
Marcoff Glassmat made all the difference in the world, with much the same
results.


I often hear people say that the platter has no effect on the performance of
a record player. That is totally wrong. Those who say that the mechanical
impedance of the record and the platter together have a lot to do with the
quality of the reproduction are quite correct. In my experience, every part
of the turntable, the platter, the suspension, the motor and how well it's
de-coupled from the platter, the platter bearing(s), arm bearings, arm tube
construction and material, how the counterweight is decoupled from the arm
tube, the rigidity of the head-shell, whether or not the head-shell is
permanently attached or detachable, as well as how good a match,
resonance-wise the chosen cartridge is to the arm being used, all contribute
(or detract) from a turntable's overall performance and ability to elicit
from a phonograph record all of the information that's embossed in those
grooves.

  #28   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Jun 29, 6:01*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Sonnova" wrote in message







On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:42:07 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):


"Sonnova" wrote in message

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:26:34 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):


"Jenn" wrote in

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


"Jenn" wrote in
...
In article ,


"Arny Krueger" wrote:


It's also unfounded, since I'm the only person in
this conversation (probably the entire forum) that
has ever done level-matched, time-synched,
bias-controlled evaluations of phono cartridges of
various price levels and
perceived quality levels.


Could you describe how you time synch these tests?


Precise adjustment of speed on identical variable
speed turntables. Bring the discs into synch by
braking the LP that was leading by dragging a finger
on the outside of the TT platter. Once the (hidden)
person who does the adjusting hears that they are in
synch, he enables the ABX comparison to proceed.


Do you remember what variable speed turntables were
used?


TD 125 comes to mind.


With or without the lousy Thorens *TP125 Arm?


SME 3009, of course. ;-)


That's better. At least the 3009 had decent bearings.


Of course I know that today it is fashionable to bash
both of these components. But in the day, they were
arguably SOTA. Not only that, *but they both measured
well and sounded good.

Thorens 'tables rang like a bell.


Only if you played the high end audio dealer game of removing the mat.

If the resonance of the turntable makes a difference, then it would show up
in some kind of objective test?



Please show us the objective test results that prove your assertions
that one needed to remove the mat to get bell like ringing.



I've done all sorts of measurements on turntables, and while the resonances
that are described in the technical literature of the LP are there, many of
the things that audiophiles have been *taught* to believe by high end
marketing teams masquerading as high end audio ragazines, are not.



Then you should be able to cite the actual data from said objective
tests and then corolate it to data from controlled listening tests.



There's a reason why almost *nobody does technical tests on turntables -
most of the things that people have been *taught* to pay the big bucks on
are figments of someone's overheated and/or greedy imagination.



Please show us the evidence that the reason almost nobody does
technical measurements on turntables is because people have been
taught to pay big bucks figments of someone's overheated imagination.



There does happen to be an archive of objective and material for blind
subjective tests of some very inexpensive turntables and one or two very
expensive turntables on the web. Given how crappy much of what was tested
is, one the better inexpensive turntables acquitted itself remarkably well.



Link please.




This *shows once again that audiophiles have been getting sold a bill of
goods. Actually, many bills of goods. Most of the technical problems with
the LP format are on the disk, and giving it a golden throne to squat on
does not make the bad smell go away. ;-)




Actually you have "shown" nothing but unsupported assertions.



* Mine had little bass

until I installed one of those heavy, 5 pound Naoka (SP?)
turntable mats which consisted of a rubber compound mixed
with ground-up lead.


Reliance on sighted evaluation noted.




Lack of any support of alleged control evaluation noted. Still waiting
for the names of the alleged four figured cartridges that you tested.



I had to re-adjust the turntable's
suspension to keep the mat from pushing the platter down
to where it touched the plinth, but the improvement in
low frequency response was simply astounding!


If that were true it would be measurable. Trust me, it most likely is not.




Sorry I don't trust you on that one. Please show us the actual
objective technical data to support your assertion.



The platter/arm substructure's resonance on the TD125 is already well below
the audible range. You did change that, *most likely. You changed it from
doesn't matter to a slightly different doesn't matter.




Please show us the actual measurements and the corolated controlled
listening tests that support this assertion.




I tire of continually pointing out that the current audiophile lore of the
LP is heavily dominated by unsubstantiated blather, unless you call "Tell an
audiophile a bedtime story that he will drink it up like fine wine because
he is totally unlettered, uneducated and has suspended rational disbelief
anyway", substantiation. I don't!



Then lets see you substantiate *your* assertions and differentiate
them from the very blather you claim to tire of.

  #29   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Harry Lavo Harry Lavo is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 735
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message


I had a Thorens 160 Super as a second TT back in the
early '80's, an a Marcoff Glassmat made all the
difference in the world, with much the same results.


The 160 was a cheap joke compared to the TD 125. However, again we see
nothing but a sighted evauation by someone who invested in questionable
pseudo-technology. FWIW, my Rega has a glass turntable, and without its
mat,
it rings like a big glass bowl. At least die cast turntables provide some
eddy-current shielding for the motor's EM field.

But, I just thought of a great tweak for my Rega. I have a big sheet of
1/16" steel. I think I will cut a circle out of it with my diamond saw,
and
punch a hole in the middle. Then I can fend of complaints of what it is
said that Rega's do to Grado cartridges, one of which I commonly use. BTW,
I
took my own advice and scooped up on Amazon's $62 sale on Shure M97XEs.
If Harry or Sonova were up to it, I would challenge them to a
measurement/ABX comparison test with their choice of high end *treasures*.


The TD160 Super was quite different sonically from an ordinary 160, which I
agree was "ordinary". And the Glassmat was not just glass, but glass damped
by felt and specifically designed to dampen the ringing of Thorens
turntables. It helps if you know what you are talking about, Arny.

  #30   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
bob bob is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 670
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Jun 29, 9:01*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

There does happen to be an archive of objective and material for blind
subjective tests of some very inexpensive turntables and one or two very
expensive turntables on the web.


Could we get a link?

bob





  #31   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Scott" wrote in message



Please show us the objective test results that prove your
assertions that one needed to remove the mat to get bell
like ringing.


I'll do that as soon as you provide me with a TD125.



  #32   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message


The TD160 Super was quite different sonically from an
ordinary 160, which I agree was "ordinary".


Please provide evidence for that claim that is obtained by reliable,
unbiased means.


And the
Glassmat was not just glass, but glass damped by felt and
specifically designed to dampen the ringing of Thorens
turntables.


Please provide evidence for that claim that is obtained by reliable,
unbiased means.




  #33   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"bob" wrote in message

On Jun 29, 9:01 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

There does happen to be an archive of objective and
material for blind subjective tests of some very
inexpensive turntables and one or two very expensive
turntables on the web.


Could we get a link?


Cheap turntable tests:

http://www.knowzy.com/usb-turntable-samples.htm

Expensive turntable tests:

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/compo...7.html?start=1

  #34   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Jun 29, 7:17*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message





Please show us the objective test results that prove your
assertions that one needed to remove the mat to get bell
like ringing.


I'll do that as soon as you provide me with a TD125.


I thought you said you already did all these objective measurements
and controlled listening tests.

  #35   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Harry Lavo Harry Lavo is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 735
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"bob" wrote in message

On Jun 29, 9:01 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

There does happen to be an archive of objective and
material for blind subjective tests of some very
inexpensive turntables and one or two very expensive
turntables on the web.


Could we get a link?


Cheap turntable tests:

http://www.knowzy.com/usb-turntable-samples.htm



The link won't open/doesn't exist on my computer...and why would a test of
USB turntables be relevant to a high-end newsgroup anyway?



Expensive turntable tests:

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/compo...7.html?start=1



This is a test of cd vs lp distortion....it has nothing to say of the
differences between turntables.




  #36   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Scott" wrote in message

On Jun 29, 7:17 pm, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message





Please show us the objective test results that prove
your assertions that one needed to remove the mat to
get bell like ringing.


I'll do that as soon as you provide me with a TD125.


I thought you said you already did all these objective
measurements and controlled listening tests.


Yup, and that was some time ago. Since then I sold my TD125, which is why I
bought that Rega a few years back.

If I were to do LP-related comparisons today, I'd just compare needle drops.


  #37   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Jun 30, 2:07*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"bob" wrote in message



On Jun 29, 9:01 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


There does happen to be an archive of objective and
material for blind subjective tests of some very
inexpensive turntables and one or two very expensive
turntables on the web.


Could we get a link?


Cheap turntable tests:

http://www.knowzy.com/usb-turntable-samples.htm


There are no tests there that I can see. There are samples, Samples
that have virtually no relevance to your assertions about vinyl
playback sound quality much less any corolation with sound quality to
objective measurements. IOW it is a link to nothing relevant much less
supportive of you many assertions.



Expensive turntable tests:

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/compo...e/427.html?sta...



Once again this completely lacks the very things you demand from
others, that being time synced, level matched bias controlled
listening tests. The objective technical measurements do not address
resonant frequenies of the platters of the tables being tested. You
have made many assertions about the reletive sonic merits of high end
cartridges and the Shure. You have made many assertions about high end
turntable design being based in figments of audiophile imagination.
You claimed that you did propper bias controlled listening tests and
objective technical measurements to substantiate all these assertions.
All you offer is other peoples' irrelevant data.


  #38   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Sonnova Sonnova is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,337
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:12:01 -0700, Norman Schwartz wrote
(in article ):

On Jun 28, 4:15*pm, Sonnova wrote:
That's better. At least the 3009 had decent bearings.


Thorens 'tables rang like a bell. Mine had little bass until I installed one
of those heavy, 5 pound Naoka (SP?) turntable mats which consisted of a
rubber compound mixed with ground-up lead. I had to re-adjust the
turntable's
suspension to keep the mat from pushing the platter down to where it touched
the plinth, but the improvement in low frequency response was simply
astounding! Before the mat the TD125 rendered the bass drum whacks on the
Frederick Fennell Telarc recording of *the Holst 'Suites for Military Band'
as an anemic thwack. After the mat, they were rendered as a startling, loud,
deep BANG just the way they sounded in the Soundstream demonstration room at
the NYC AES Convention at the Waldorf Astoria several years earlier! *There
is a reason why the better *'tables these days have platters made out of
more
sonically "inert" materials (such as machined acrylics, MDF, etc) rather
than
cast, machined aluminum.- Hide quoted text -

I find this interesting and/or questionable. Perhaps it's the
difference in listening environments or memory which contributed to
the effects you describe. Today this very day I use the TD-125 with
the original SME arm with detachable headshell. My cartridge is a
Sumiko Andante FGV with the Fritz Gyger I stylus configuration. It
resembles the Sumiko Pearls of today in output and shape. At 1.8 grams
it tracks anything and everything including the Telarc 1812 cannons
(first recording). I own both the LP and CD releases of the Holst
Military Suites. Using a hybrid Magneplanar system comprised of
Tympani IVa panels on the bottom end (powered by a Bryston 4B-SST) + a
3.6R on the top (powered by two Bryston 7B-STs) I hear no discernible
difference in the bass drum between the LP and CD versions. Age and
listening to loud music has taken its toll on my ability to hear upper
frequencies, but I'm thinking that the bass drum comes across as it
should.


First of all, my memory is working better today than it did yesterday, and
the company which made the mat was Nagaoka, not Naoka. I performed
measurements using a test record and a Hewlett-Packard model 400 audio
voltmeter. Starting at a 30 Hz and ascending to 100 Hz, I plotted the output
of my preamp at each frequency band up to 100 Hz both with the Thorens mat
fitted and then with the Nagaoka mat fitted. Without the Nagaoka mat the,
response fell off below 100Hz and was down about 6dB at 30 Hz. With the
Nagaoka mat fitted, the response below 100 Hz was practically flat with just
shy of a 1dB lift at 30 Hz. It's been many years but I recall that the test
record was an Emory Cook test record originally from the early '60's, which,
at the time (mid '80's), was being sold by Radio Shack undr their "Realistic"
trade name. IIRC, the Shure test record did not have a banded frequency
response "sweep" and neither did the then popular Orion test record (which I
still have). The arm I used at the time was an Infinity "Black Widow" and the
cartridge was a Signet TK7E.

BTW, today, I use a JA Michelle Gyro SE turntable (with no mat of any kind
-just a record clamp) fitted with an AudioQuest PT-9 tone arm and, at the
moment, a Grado Reference Master cartridge. I still have the Frederick Fennel
recording of the Holst "Military Suites" album. Also, I have the CD of the
same performance. The record has mighty bass drum whacks that one can
actually feel, but on the CD, they are quite attenuated, anemic, actually. I
originally heard these two pieces played back from a Soundstream recorder
into a pair of large Westlake monitor speakers in a special listening room
set up at the AES convention at the Waldorf Astoria in NYC either in 1979 or
1980 ( I forget which). The bass on the record (played back on a well
designed table) sounds much more like the digital master (or a copy of same)
that I heard at that AES convention than does the CD on any player or any
outboard D/A converter that I have ever played it through. I'm convinced that
this is another instance where the vinyl record definitely has it over the
CD. Other examples of this phenomenon are the Classic Records single-sided 45
RPM release of the Mercury recording of Stravinsky's Firebird vs the latest
CD release of the same title, or the the original RCA Red Seal pressing of
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" With Reiner and the Chicago Symphony vs the latest
BMG SACD pressing. I might add, with regard to the latter example, that RCA
has re-issued this performance many times under many different guises as both
LPs (Victrola, RCA Gold Seal) and CDs (under the RCA label in the late
eighties, the "Red Seal" label in the 'nineties, and as an SACD Red Seal in
the 2000's.) None of these later releases, either vinyl or CD reproduces that
opening sustained low C , 32' pitch, on the double basses, contrabassoon and
organ like the original LP pressing played on a well designed and well
adjusted turntable!

  #39   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"bob" wrote in message

On Jun 29, 9:01 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

There does happen to be an archive of objective and
material for blind subjective tests of some very
inexpensive turntables and one or two very expensive
turntables on the web.

Could we get a link?


Cheap turntable tests:

http://www.knowzy.com/usb-turntable-samples.htm


The link won't open/doesn't exist on my computer.


You apparently need some onsite service for your computer. I just
double-checked the link and it opens as expected.

..and why would a test of USB turntables be relevant to a
high-end newsgroup anyway?


Help educate people to understand what new technology has wrought?

Expensive turntable tests:


http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/compo...7.html?start=1



This is a test of cd vs lp distortion....it has nothing
to say of the differences between turntables.


The intent might be that you compare the USB turntable performance with that
of a high end turntable.

One problem is that needle drops from high end turntables seem to be hard
to find. Apparently, it requires expertise that some people don't have.

  #40   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Opinions on phono cartridges......

"Scott" wrote in message

On Jun 30, 2:07 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"bob" wrote in message



On Jun 29, 9:01 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


There does happen to be an archive of objective and
material for blind subjective tests of some very
inexpensive turntables and one or two very expensive
turntables on the web.


Could we get a link?


Cheap turntable tests:

http://www.knowzy.com/usb-turntable-samples.htm


There are no tests there that I can see. There are
samples, Samples that have virtually no relevance to your
assertions about vinyl playback sound quality much less
any corolation with sound quality to objective
measurements. IOW it is a link to nothing relevant much
less supportive of you many assertions.


I guess you didn't notice the reference samples taken from CDs.

Expensive turntable tests:

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/compo...e/427.html?sta...


Once again this completely lacks the very things you
demand from others, that being time synced, level matched
bias controlled listening tests.


Right, they are technical tests, which support my claims about the fact that
no way can an expensive turntable provide vinyl playback that is even within
an order of magnitude as clean as digital can.

It's not my fault that high end turntable owners lack the wherewithall that
it takes to post relevant samples. It is surely not up to me to waste my
money like they did.

The objective technical
measurements do not address resonant frequenies of the
platters of the tables being tested.


You don't need expensive turntables to make that point.

You have made many
assertions about the reletive sonic merits of high end
cartridges and the Shure.


Prove me wrong.

You have made many assertions
about high end turntable design being based in figments
of audiophile imagination.


That's apparent to anybody with a little bit of knowlege about mechanical
engineering.

You claimed that you did
propper bias controlled listening tests and objective
technical measurements to substantiate all these
assertions.


Yes I did, but much of that information has never been placed on the web.

All you offer is other peoples' irrelevant data.


Wrong again. I'm not responsible for other people's inability to interpret
relevant technical data, or do their homework for them. You've got a
turntable, a PC asnd all of the resources to do your own tests, don't you?

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Opinions about phono cartridges...... MOSFET General 2 June 21st 09 05:18 PM
What to do with old phono cartridges? Colin B. Tech 10 January 1st 06 05:03 AM
WTB:USED MOVING COIL PHONO CARTRIDGES< TONEARMS Sonnysound Marketplace 0 December 14th 03 07:09 PM
Audioquest Phono Cartridges Ken High End Audio 2 October 22nd 03 02:41 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:45 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"