Grado Reference Sonata V2 thoughts?

I have a Reference Sonata1, a Statement Sonata1 and a Statement Sonata2.

On my table/tonearm (Thorens TD124/SME 3009 S2 non improved) and phono preamp (Audio Research PH3)...The Statement Sonata2 is my favorite.

Everything is a perfect match.
 
Not everyone loves them. They are smooth, nice mids. I had one for a while. I found that I prefer the clean and accurate Dynavector sound. There are a lot of cheaper euphonic cartridges. For euphony with better accuracy I would go with a Shure V series with an exceptional stylus, like a high end Jico.
 
More importantly....what cartridges will mate well with that arm? That's where I would begin my search.
 
More importantly....what cartridges will mate well with that arm? That's where I would begin my search.


yep. that jelco 250ST variant will be in the 10gr effective mass range. I've ran various Grado, Shure, AT, on them. generally clocking in the 8-10hz range on my test album
 
I have liked all the Grado woodies I have tried, but all were the original version. I haven't tried a V2 yet. They definitely do get better as you climb up the range. I can't keep track of which ones I have because I find Grado's model lexicon to be tedious. I'm pretty sure I've got a Reference Platinum (pretty good for $300); Reference Sonata (really great--$600) and a Statement Sonata (better than the Reference, but low output so you need a step up device). I've also got a VPI model that needs a retip--supposed to be fantastic.
can you give the coil readings from that VPI? They also had a 'prestige" VPI line also which suspiciously looks (electrically) like the re-issue of the MCZ-TLZ-XTZ bodies
 
Sure! Do you want me to report in this thread or just to you in a PM?
might be pertinent to this thread, if that particular version is still available. as a 1.5mv cart ( if it's what i think it is) will play into a standard 37-40db gain phono stage. The statement series wont
 
Do Grado's fare well on a 12g eff mass tonearm? thx

V1 woodies were around 8gr if I recall correctly and the new ones, V2, are about 10gr. PL-630 or XA or 1200G? If V2 on your XA you will need a heavier counterweight (@flasher1 can help) and should be in the green zone or very close per the VE calculator. Don't know about the PL-630 or the G's CW.
 
That's what i thought. that would be the MCZ-XTZ coils. Nice body. The rest of the data on that sheet is in error of course. 9mH of inductance.
My MCZ and 10MR get a whole lot more playing time than my Reference Sonata-1
Do Grado's fare well on a 12g eff mass tonearm? thx
12 grams is fine.
 
I have lots of carts, a couple of boxes full of MC's, a Decca super gold and a bunch of MM and MI and amongst them I have a Grado platinum, a grado statement reference and just bought a Grado gold2 with the idea to retip it when I bought it.. Now first of all the platinum wood, I could not get it to sing, the bass was ok, but a bit loose, mids were lovely, but highs were muted, so I put it in a box and forgot about it. Next bought the Statement reference, lovely extended highs, sweet mids and great bass with lots of clean air that you only get with top MC's. BUT only due to me making a mistake setting it up, I set it up arm tail high, level it is still nice but highs are not correct. Move on the the Gold 2.. Again I set it up tail high and this made a huge difference, I also forgot to turn off my MC head amp (volume was low thankfully) but it loaded the cart to 180 ohms not 47k and it sounded terrible really sucked out and flat. Pressing bypass on the head amp and the cart sprang to life so it might be worth messing with resistance loading with Grado carts as they are clearly very susceptible to loading.
Anyway googled arm height and rake angle and found a lot about Grado, apparently 92 degrees is correct not 90 as instructions say at 92 most elliptical will track the groove better. That extra 2 degrees will require the tail of the arm to be 8mm higher, but most 9 inch arms wont allow this so 6mm will have to do and this will allow for thick records too. Set up like this looking at the stylus with magnification to see when it is vertical, then dialing in the extra arm height will transform Grado carts and fix that rolled off top end. I tried again too with my Platinum wood set up in this way and it too sounds amazing.
Chris
 
I just got my grado reference sonata v2. Am I the only one who thinks that these cartridges are way too big? Seems like that they got a lot of wood but for no obvious gains. It becomes to hard to align these as the front head of the wood is so elongated and the stylus tip is almost recessed to the lower back of the cartridge....

https://photos.app.goo.gl/xPNMkJBj5rpq5cdm7
 
I just got my grado reference sonata v2. Am I the only one who thinks that these cartridges are way too big? Seems like that they got a lot of wood but for no obvious gains. It becomes to hard to align these as the front head of the wood is so elongated and the stylus tip is almost recessed to the lower back of the cartridge....

https://photos.app.goo.gl/xPNMkJBj5rpq5cdm7

Not sure they stick out front any further than the previous model, just don't have the two bevel cuts.....i could be wrong and they are longer. The "obvious gains" may be similar to the longhorn modification in reducing polar moments about the arm bearings by induced polar moments around the business end of the cantilever.
 
Not sure they stick out front any further than the previous model, just don't have the two bevel cuts.....i could be wrong and they are longer. The "obvious gains" may be similar to the longhorn modification in reducing polar moments about the arm bearings by induced polar moments around the business end of the cantilever.

My apologies as I couldn't embed the image, but in the link you can see that the stylus tip is around the halfway point of the wood body. While trying to align the cartridge it was really difficult to even see the stylus tip set on the alignment points. It just seemed exaggerated to me. I appreciate your inputs though. The polar momentum theory sounds plausible. I am not familiar with the benefits, can you please elaborate more? (I know how it relates to the handling of cars. i.e. hatchback vs sedans carrying extra weight over the rear wheels).
 
My apologies as I couldn't embed the image, but in the link you can see that the stylus tip is around the halfway point of the wood body. While trying to align the cartridge it was really difficult to even see the stylus tip set on the alignment points. It just seemed exaggerated to me. I appreciate your inputs though. The polar momentum theory sounds plausible. I am not familiar with the benefits, can you please elaborate more? (I know how it relates to the handling of cars. i.e. hatchback vs sedans carrying extra weight over the rear wheels).
for the explanation, you might look up the history of the longhorn modification, or in lieu of that work by Pierre Lourne. The longhorn "brief example" is like a tight rope walker and the long balance pole. Looking at my Sonata 1, and pics of the 2 series, there is an extension in the 2 series. The 3 grams of mass difference looks to be almost 100% located in front of the diamond
 
FWIW, I have done the longhorn mod to my Grado blue and I'm a believer. Plenty of hobbyists don't seem enthralled by the mod, but I can say with absolute certainty that if nothing else, I've never seen any hint of the Grado dance in this cartridge, ever. It tracks very, very well, and I think it sounds better too.
 
My Sonata2 is just In my system, less than 2 hours in. Currently it's lodged on a Sansui XR-Q5 TT feeding into the Kef LS50 wireless though the emotiva XPS-1 preamp. It replaced the audio Technica Series VIII cartridge. After painstakingly aligning it (the oversized wood body makes it a chore to align as I can't see the darn null points on the protractor!!!!) I feel slightly underwhelmed. Yes the Sonata2 sounds good, but compared to the AT series VIII, I don't hear a dramatic step up. Either the Sonata2 needs to break in or the audio Technica is still a darn good cartridge!!!
 
Back
Top Bottom