new cartridge question

Hi,

The answer is mostly "fashion".

I find often that in audio things are counter intuitive.

The "intuitive" solution seems that if we make the stylus as much as possible like the cutter we should be able to get the best possible result.

In fact, the intuitive solution is actually even true, however it is subject to a significant number of "if" and "but" which mean that the intuitive solution is true only under conditions virtually impossible to achieve in practice.

BTW, when I hear or read somone commenting that adjusting SRA/VTA and/or alignment makes little difference and they are using a line contact stylus then I KNOW their cartridge is substantially misaligned.

Back to why. A long time ago some manufacturers of cartridges started to promote hyperellipical stylus shapes as "the thing". As this particular "the thing" seems intuitively to make sense it was a very easy sell and since it has been practically impossible to sell a cartridge that does not feature a hyperelliptical stylus as "high quality".

Manufacturers will make what sells, if hyperelliptical stylii sell, they will make cartridges using them. For example, my next speaker design for commercial purposes will be a box. Not because I believe it to be the best solution, but because it will sell in ways more adventerous (and arguably better) solutions do not.

And I'm sure the Marketing Department will put enough spin on the "box thing" to make a Labour Spindoctor go green with envy. And maybe we will sell more than enough to fund the development of my pet project, the "variable pattern" loudspeaker codenamed "Saul of Tarsus" (after the later personae's Paul's statement "I am all things to all men").

BTW, I must also note that at least Jonathan Carr of Scan Tech (Lyra) is a real believer in hyper elliptical stylii, so some makers are not just cynical, but some others are definitly cynics of the highest degree.

I know of one who converts cheap Moving magnet Cartidge Motors into "MC" cartridges by winding the coils before and after the pivot onto the MM stylus carrier, thus combining the worst elements of MM and MC construction into one cartridge. And of course they charge huge amounts, have inflationary names for their pickups, use hyper elliptical stylii and even claim their cheapskate manufacturing methode as a major advantage.

So, I'll stick to "what was good enough for the BBC (Ortofon SPU) and NHK (DL-103) cannot be bad for me.". So far, subjectively this has been born out. I also note that Arthur Salvatore ranks the 103 highly (and the LP-12 lowly), to me a reliable indication of one who knows what he is talking about and is equally honest.

His cartridge file is very much worth reading (and it is worth noting that most of his experiences with cartridges are using linear tracker tonearms, where line contact stylii actually work well, if care with setup is taken):

http://www.high-endaudio.com/RC-Cartridges.html

Ciao T

 

ok.

I've decided on a Benz Ace.

Reason: Its got the innards (mostly) of a Benz Glider, and thats one of my favourites.

What I'm trying to get my head round now is:

Which output level to get?

It comes in: .4mv (low), .8mv (medium) and 2.5mv (high).

My 834P is both MM and MC.

Now, Ive read that you're better off into the MM stage - so you can bypass the transformer on the phono stage...

But are the compromises in the design of a high output cart instead of a low one (whatever compromises they are, and if there are any - haven't a clue!) of greater magnitude than going through a transformer?


I'm nearly there!

Cheers
Chris.

 

As far as the 103 v The World debate is concerned - simply listen. Take a modest MC with a decent tip like Denon's own 110 and compare on hot 'toppy' end of side tracks. The 103 is reduced to spit and fizz while the 110 remains largely clean. Alternatively, simply measure HF distortion. Fashion has nothing to do with it.

 

For all people say that, the only time I ever caught my 103 out was with the odd recorded violin or soprano at the very end of sides with a particularly long play time. I never however heard it 'descend into spit and fizz' some exageration there Rob, or perhaps the one you heard was set up wrong or worn out?
Some magazines seem to have it in for the Denon, mainly I suspect because they get no advertising for it.
For £100 it cannot be beaten, I reckon you'd have to spend£250/300 to significantly improve on it. I know I've tried.
I'll tell you what though the main place a £500 Lyra improves on it is in dynamics and separation. I'd rather have the Lyra, but I wouldn't be too upset with the Denon.
If anyone knows of a better £100 cart I'd be surprised, especially if you factor in a good phono stage, that can load MC properly.

 

No exaggeration Richard. I bought the 103 new about 5 months ago. Play something with strong vocals and plenty of sibilance on your 103 and MR tipped Lyra. The latter will be far, far cleaner.
I can post the distortion figures for the 103 and some of it's modern fine line brothers. Would you run an amp with 7-10% distortion at 10Khz?

Its ok on old vinyl, mono in particular but easily outclassed for a few £s more if you want something for regular use.

 

sooooo!! which is it then?

low output into a transformer based MC stage, or high output cartridge into the MM stage?

I really dont have a clue on that.

 

I have to agree with Rob. The difference between the 103 and a Dynavector 105 in my system was utterly enormous and the 103 was deemed unlistenable on a lot of vinyl. Maybe some are more susceptable to the distortion than others?

 

So long as it was a good transformer I would tend to pick the former on grounds of reduced mass in the cartridge's moving coil, but that's an opinion based on hazy memories and not a lot else, so maybe someone knowledgeable will come along soon.

 

Hi,

Good choice. I may not like "sharp" neddles myself, but Benz is together with Scan Tech one of the few among the cartridge makers in the main stream (add Shelter, Zyx, Myabi and of course Kondo outside of it) who take their craft serious.

With the stock EAR 834P transformers the medium one. The EAR 834P has a good deal more gain than most Phono Stages, so it needs less of a stepup but the build in transformer does 20db (making it overall 73db!). And the build in transformer is definitly build down to a price.

If you can, convert the EAR to using air capacitors for the RIAA (it is one of the few designs where you can actually do this).

If you can use the low output cartridge and get a better MC transformer. Of course, by that time you might as well have build your own one from scratch, hardwired and with better components.

Ciao T

PS, I personally do not use the air capacitor EAR in my own system, but three good friends do and it is really a question of personal taste if you choose LCR RIAA or Air Riaa. Anything else BTW is miles down.

 

Rob,

Right now, due to some work vinyl is down in casa von marienberg, but we'll fix that soon. Care to come over and bring a pre 1985 LP with strong (and unprocessed) vocals? If not, can a wide range of Decca Éditions de l'Oiseau-Lyre "authentic" recordings suffice?

Is that accounting for the inverse pre-distortion applied to most LP's post early sixties and at least well into the 1980's? if not the 2nd HD will be around 20db less using a spherical stylus but not using such will mean not just the stylus related distortion (which even an ideally aligned and linear tracked line contact stylus produces) but on top the pre-distortion now not cancelled come to bear audibly.

Ciao T

 

I would preferably buy the low output model. It's still relatively high in output, so if the EAR is low on noise, you won't have a problem. If th EAR has too much noise, take the middle one, it is designed for tube phono-pres (the low one for low-noise phonostages and the high output for MM stages).

 

brilliant stuff, thanks for the help.


I've found that I can get a discount (small, but worthwhile) if I trade in a cartridge.

The cartridge can be broken, and of any make or model - even something very cheap and old.

Just wondered if anybody has a scuzzy nacked up old cartridge they could part with? I'm loathe to give them my still working Kontrapunkt, as it seems such a waste! (and it will leave me record-less for a few weeks).

Happy to pay any p&p costs etc..

Thanks!
Chris

 

Hi Chris

I think I have an old AT cartridge somewhere about the place. I'll have a rummage this evening and get back to you.

 

Yes I'm up for that.
I'll have a good second arm set up on the TT soon so we could do the comparison at my place if you prefer. So long as we don't spend all day getting nerdy about cartridges and enjoy some music

My 103 is now up for sale though (will be gone within hours) and is making way for a mono Lyra Dorian to complement the stereo Argo.

I hear the effect of what I term 'blunt' styli with a wide scanning radius on many cartridges.

 

Could I ask you to set up a separate thread about this, or point to where you've discussed this? I have a spare LP12/Ittok and I was wondering whether to optimise it for older/mono LPs. Thanks.

 

FWIW My 103Pro wouldn't know how to spit to save its life. I have never, ever heard so much as a slobber from mine. And also, it walks all over a 304, in highs, in lows and all points in between.

 

That reads exactly like a badly mounted 103 would sound.

 

The arm or alignment always gets blamed for poor 103 sound.
There are good arms and bad arms - period

A 16.5um tip will produce high levels of HF distortion and will roll off the top end on inner tracks unless it has some magical way of defying the laws of physics. But lets wait for the 103 v the word bake-off as we are going round in circles.

 

I've never had one.. so my opinion can be safely ignored.


However, how is it feasably possible to build a world beating cartridge - (and sell it at a profit for the dealer, distributor and manufacturer) for £75?!

 

Hi,

I did not say world beating, merely really good so a LOT more needs to be paid to get significant improvements (not differences).

As for the how, I suspect Denon has paid off all the R&D, tooling etc. and is able to make the 103 (and other pickups) with industrial methodes, rather than cottage industry hand build.

I know a few cartridges I actually like better than the 103, but I cannot afford them.

Ciao T