1st Moving Coil Cartridge, FR-1 MK3 and Need Some Advice

Won't happen unless they own a IC fab plant, and where will laser units come from when no disc players get newly made, it will eventually mean no new lasers made for players either or new transport mechanisms either. Not things easily manufactured on a small scale. And there's no generic replacements for the above either. Common IC chips will be easier to come by. But some specific IC chips won't be available on their own. Not like a stylus which can be retipped on a small scale, and some of them having options.
 
malden said:
I happened across a nice but inoperable turntable in a thrift store which has a FR-1 MK3 cartridge. After listening to it for the past couple of hours, I now see (hear actually) what the fuss is all about.

Can someone recommend a pre-amp or step-up transformer that would work well with this cartridge? I have been listening to it through the phono section of my Nakamichi 410 preamp with the volume cranked past 12 o'clock.

What would it cost to have the stylus re-tipped? From what I have read, it's a nude .2 x .8 tip.
Click to expand...
Congrats on joining the FR MC world. I own a "F" version as well as a MC 201. Both are long term loves. Currently the F is stashed but I have the 201 running on one of my tables which is a similar low output to the F running using an Ortofon Verto using the 24 dB gain option. Makes very nice music :)

The Verto has Lundahl transformers which are utilized by a number of tube phonostage builders and our own forumite Rothwell, (they do additional tweaking in circuit). I have a home brewed w/LL1931 transformers set at 18dB (can also be 24dB, the Verto has a 30dB option too). 24-30dB would be what I would suggest you look for with the FR. Ratio as already mentioned 1:20 or a bit higher.

http://www.kandkaudio.com/moving-coil-phono-step-up-kits/ K&K is the importer of the Lundahl transformers and offers two trannie kits with options that you can build or have assembled. I have communicated with Kevin a couple times and he is very approachable and a straight shooter and provides help if needed. No affiliation. The Lundahl trannies are top shelf, if you want to go crazy they have the option for silver wiring for some of the better ones. I would stick with your Nak mm section and go with the trannie rather than buying a new/another mc capable phono. That approach imo would yield the most cost effective and sound effective approach. For what it costs you to add a transformer and utilize your Nak you won't get anywhere near the performance in a stand alone mc capable pre. There a are a few options for solid state "pre" preamps that boost the output usually using fets. Rothwell has an option. 100 Ohm loading would be good.

As for re-tipping many options. Most involve replacing the cantilever and the diamond versus a true re-tip of diamond only. Soundsmith does superb work I would look at the ruby or sapphire (new option) lc contact options. Peter can do diamond tip only but it will be more expensive and might not be recommended depending on evaluation. I have had a number of carts redone by SS.

Andy Kim has had mixed reviews by some of our members, some great based on what I've read I'd stick only to cant/tip option with him versus a diamond only retip.. Someone here can provide the link. No personal experience. A Paratrace rebuild/retip by the english fellow (ask needlestein) or Van den Hul
http://www.vandenhul.com/products/p...odification-and-re-tipping-available-services
are a couple options.
 
Thanks for the informative response. It's good to know that replacing the entire cantilever is more common and at the same time less expensive than re-tipping.
 
The potential drawback of changing the cantilever is the sound changing in a way you object to. You of course are altering the resonance unless the cant is exactly identical. Personally I've been pleased in the carts I've had done. In the case of the FR you have it is likely the results would be wonderful. WIth the non "F" version it wouldn't be terrible to change the cantilever since it isn't the preferred (by collectors) "F"
 
needlestein said:
The only issue I’m having with the extra weight is that stock antiskate compensation is not adequate. I’ll have to figure out how to attach a fishing weight on a line.


There will probably always be some geek with the ability to make individual units. Individual IC chips can now be programmed from programmable blanks from what I understand. I'm not sure yet that all IC's can be duplicated this way, but if not today, probably tomorrow. Who would have even imagined the 3D printer twenty years ago? I've got a few plastic parts for old cars that are unobtainium right now, but if I send them to my brother out in Silicon Valley, he can probably scan them, pattern them and print them for very low cost. I was going to buy a small plastic molding kit to duplicate them myself, but I might not need to now.

The parts that go into lasers these days cost nothing. I don't see it as a technology that will ever go away because it is just too useful. The use of lasers in industrial processes increases every day. DVD players might go away, but as long as cheap lasers are made, it will likely just take some person with a little know how to keep them going if there's any kind of demand--kind of like how the Cubans have kept Detroit iron going for half a century using whatever parts they can find and adapting Russian parts when they could.
Click to expand...

Old Detroit cars without computers are a lot easier to keep running and workarounds can be easier done than to do it to a modern car. Some of the more popular Antique/Classic vehicles also have comprehensive selections of reproduction parts available also. Some parts can be 3D Printed, but not all can reliably.
 
KentTeffeteller said:
Old Detroit cars without computers are a lot easier to keep running and workarounds can be easier done than to do it to a modern car. Some of the more popular Antique/Classic vehicles also have comprehensive selections of reproduction parts available also. Some parts can be 3D Printed, but not all can reliably.
Click to expand...

My older Ford F150's , 1978, 1979 and 1995 were all relatively easy to work on. I kept them running myself. My 2005 on the other hand, looks like a nightmare to work on. I've only popped the hood twice since owning it and that was to change the battery.
 
The point is the older cars weren't as heavily laden with electronics and computers. Simpler to repair and maintain. Not as simple as your 1950's US cars in Cuba, which were easier to workaround a problem with a part being not available. Try this with a modern car, some swaps are pure PITA easily. Point being made is older mechanical and electronic parts are easier to substitute than a laser for a digital disc transport or a special purpose IC in same unit. (the CD and Blu-Ray analogy posted earlier). Which was getting off topic. Cartridges and styli have alternatives save for a few proprietary items.

Getting back to the topic and post at hand. The Fidelity Research FR-1 MK 3 is a low output MC and tends to like higher mass tonearms with the ability to do it full justice. And it's a very excellent performer, a Japanese LOMC classic.
 
Muddywaters said:
In the case of the FR you have it is likely the results would be wonderful. WIth the non "F" version it wouldn't be terrible to change the cantilever since it isn't the preferred (by collectors) "F"
Click to expand...
Re-tippers offer different stylus/cantilever combinations. Among the materials offered for cantilevers is aluminum — that's what the F uses — and the stylus is a line-contact. So I think a full replacement would not alter the sound characteristics very much — aluminum + line-contact is also usually the least expensive replacement option.

Changing the cantilever to, say sapphire or ruby, would change the sound. It might be a great change, and I'd love to hear it. But if I were retipping my F, I wouldn't take the chance, I'd stick to the original — which fortunately is also the easiest.
KentTeffeteller said:
The Fidelity Research FR-1 MK 3 is a low output MC and tends to like higher mass tonearms with the ability to do it full justice. And it's a very excellent performer, a Japanese LOMC classic.
Click to expand...
This may be a bit nit-pickish, but I think Kent misspoke — it's a MC's low compliance which makes it a better match to higher mass arms, not its low output. But Kent knows a lot more than I do, and will correct my correction if correction is needed.

To his broader point, I've used the FR1-Mk3F in higher-mass arms (SME 309, Linn Ittok, Syrinx PU3) and he's right, it's great match (the Syrinx was my favorite, btw). But I also used it in a SME 3009 II Improved, considered a low mass arm, and it was still stellar. Moreover, it was the fixed headshell version of the SME, the lowest-mass version. (Because of the FR1's weight (10g), however, I augmented the counterweight, and this did change the arm's effective mass, though I can't say how much.)

As I wrote above, the Mk3F is not a "fussy" cartridge. My point is, if you have the chance to get one, don't hesitate — you don't have to worry if your current tonearm or preamp can "handle" it. (Unless you're using an ultra-low-mass arm like a Mayware, I've never tried it so can't comment.) Moreover, if you seriously upgrade your phono system, the Mk3F will just sound even better. It has no weaknesses.
 
bimasta said:
Re-tippers offer different stylus/cantilever combinations. Among the materials offered for cantilevers is aluminum — that's what the F uses — and the stylus is a line-contact. So I think a full replacement would not alter the sound characteristics very much — aluminum + line-contact is also usually the least expensive replacement option.

Changing the cantilever to, say sapphire or ruby, would change the sound. It might be a great change, and I'd love to hear it. But if I were retipping my F, I wouldn't take the chance, I'd stick to the original — which fortunately is also the easiest.
Click to expand...
It appears Soundsmith hasn't renewed their domain so I haven't been able to get on their site this morning but from my aging memory they didn't offer an aluminum cantilever with a line contact stylus in the past. That may have changed.

I have struggled with the potential change of sound too if I swapped cantilever material on my F (if/when). Changing the cantilever even if it is possible with a new aluminum version with a line contact has no assurance of maintaining the exact "sound" since the likelihood of matching the characteristics of the original cantilever are virtually nil I would guess.

Closest possible result leaves the retip only of a nude line contact stylus which still may be a different cut
 
Muddywaters said:
It appears Soundsmith hasn't renewed their domain so I haven't been able to get on their site this morning but from my aging memory they didn't offer an aluminum cantilever with a line contact stylus in the past. That may have changed.

I have struggled with the potential change of sound too if I swapped cantilever material on my F (if/when). Changing the cantilever even if it is possible with a new aluminum version with a line contact has no assurance of maintaining the exact "sound" since the likelihood of matching the characteristics of the original cantilever are virtually nil I would guess.

Closest possible result leaves the retip only of a nude line contact stylus which still may be a different cut
Click to expand...

Soundsmith site works for me.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
Mister Pig said:
Soundsmith site works for me.

Regards
Mister Pig
Click to expand...
I can assure you it wasn't this morning and it wasn't user error but yes it is loading now. Possible domain addressing glitch I 'spose
needlestein said:
Not to nitpick, but there are all kinds of aluminum alloy cantilevers, too, not to mention shapes. Most cheap replacement styli are made of soft aluminum alloy. If it were pure aluminum, they would be as soft as aluminum foil. More expensive aluminum alloy cantilevers get harder and harder the more expensive they get and some will receive treatments like anodizing or some kind of mysterious "hardening" process. Anodizing chemically adds a layer of . . . sapphire! Also, some manufacturers will anodize, harden, and shape engineer into a tapered cantilever. Hardened, anodized, tapered aluminum cantilevers can sound just like boron and sapphire cantilevers, with the added benefit of being tough as a nail.....

In any case, whatever material someone chooses to have their cartridge retipped to is their own decision of course, but, the point I'm trying to make is that getting an aluminum cantilever change out by a retipper to another aluminum cantilever of different make and material content, and perhaps finish and shape is likely to be just as altering to the sound as going to a different material altogether, depending upon what you started with and what you will end up with. I think I was saying this in a much lower word count

It's all a gamble. It isn't a life or death situation regardless But I have to say that the retips I've gotten, the successful ones, have all improved the sound over what I had. I'd agree so far in my experience I did get one aluminum recantilever, but it failed. It was a total disaster, and never worked. The most sibilant tip I've ever heard, worse than a $5 cheapo stylus that sat out in the sun for a half a century with a hardened suspension--truly awful. But that had nothing to do with the cantilever anyway, just poor luck with a highly reputed retipper.
Click to expand...
I've been able to compare SS retips with stock and SS alum/elliptical, ruby lc, and their top option (at the time) ruby ocl and chuckle at times when folks opine they don't want their Denon 103 or 103R to lose it's "character" with no experience listening to a rebuilt cart.

It could be all be a Shakespearean (sp?) "As You Like It"
 
Muddywaters said:
I can assure you it wasn't this morning and it wasn't user error but yes it is loading now. Possible domain addressing glitch I 'spose
I've been able to compare SS retips with stock and SS alum/elliptical, ruby lc, and their top option (at the time) ruby ocl and chuckle at times when folks opine they don't want their Denon 103 or 103R to lose it's "character" with no experience listening to a rebuilt cart.

It could be all be a Shakespearean (sp?) "As You Like It"
Click to expand...

Well Peter distinctly says that a ruby retipped and rebodied 103 or 103R is not identical to his modified Denons. Those cartridges have had further tuning done to them. Which infers that there are differences that exist between them and a retipped one. Extrapolate that out further and that means the aluminum cantiliver fitted cartridges will sound different than a gemstone one.

I have owned a 103R with a Uwe ebony wood body and the ruby cantilever with the OLC stylus. It was a nice cartridge in most respects, but would not run with upper tier moving coils. Good value for the money spent though.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
Mister Pig said:
I have owned a 103R with a Uwe ebony wood body
Click to expand...
If I may ask... Were you able to hear any benefit from the wood body? I've always been skeptical. Twenty years ago I had an Ortofon MC I didn't like much — which surprised me, it had a Gyger 1 stylus on a beautiful thin tapered cantilever, should've been great, but it had no life, no soul, it just played notes, not music.

It had the typical Ortofon gold anodized aluminum casing, and I thought that might be the culprit, with its potential tin-can resonance. So first I nuded the cartridge. Not much difference, if any.

Then I replaced the casing with Ebony. I did it carefully, made sure the wood contacted every part that might be suspect and damped it — and it was a good job, I'm a skilled craftsman. But again it made little difference. That's why I'm skeptical of this current fad (and lucrative little business) for encasing cartridges in wood — because I did it myself 20 years ago and heard the unsatisfying before and after.

I have to add that the Ortofon was new. It had not "broken in" yet. Maybe that was the problem. But I've heard the effects of "break in" on several cartridges — it's never been a dramatic Omigod! transformation — and this Ortofon is like Lazarus, it needs a miraculous raising from the dead.

So I guess I'm asking you two questions:
1) Could you hear a benefit from the Ebony body you installed (I know you made other changes too); and
2) Drawing on your years of experience, do you think I should run the cart for 40 hours and see if it does a Rip Van Winkle?

I still have it, it has less than 2 hours on it so I can legitimately call it NOS, and just sell it. But if I play it for 40 hours and it doesn't transmogrify into a stunning music-maker I want to keep, it's not NOS anymore and the selling price plummets.

Any advice is welcome.

And of course if anyone reading this has an idea, it will be much appreciated. They say "Too many chefs can spoil the broth" — but they might fix the Ortofon.
 
Last edited:
needlestein said:
If I may, all I can say is that the ClearAudio mods to the humble AT95 make a HUGE difference. My "belief" is that 95% of the difference is due to the wood body. I don't know what else ClearAudio does, though, besides the wood body--perhaps potting.
Click to expand...
I don't want to be overly critical, but there are flaws in your basic reasoning. If you "don't know what else ClearAudio does" to the cartridge, how can you say "95% of the difference is due to the wood body"? If you have no idea "what else" CA does, you can't assign 95% of the difference, or indeed any percentage, to the wood body. The wood might be only 5%, or even 0% (as it was with my Ortofon MC).

I'm not saying you're wrong, you rarely are, and I don't even know the cartridge so I can't possibly have an opinion one way or the other. You may be right — but if you are right, it's just a guess, because as you admit, you have no knowledge on which to base a valid conclusion.

(I put your word "belief" in quotes for a reason.)
 
bimasta said:
If I may ask... Were you able to hear any benefit from the wood body? I've always been skeptical. Twenty years ago I had an Ortofon MC I didn't like much — which surprised me, it had a Gyger 1 stylus on a beautiful thin tapered cantilever, should've been great, but it had no life, no soul, it just played notes, not music.

It had the typical Ortofon gold anodized aluminum casing, and I thought that might be the culprit, with its potential tin-can resonance. So first I nuded the cartridge. Not much difference, if any.

Then I replaced the casing with Ebony. I did it carefully, made sure the wood contacted every part that might be suspect and damped it — and it was a good job, I'm a skilled craftsman. But again it made little difference. That's why I'm skeptical of this current fad (and lucrative little business) for encasing cartridges in wood — because I did it myself 20 years ago and heard the unsatisfying before and after.

I have to add that the Ortofon was new. It had not "broken in" yet. Maybe that was the problem. But I've heard the effects of "break in" on several cartridges — it's never been a dramatic Omigod! transformation — and this Ortofon is like Lazarus, it needs a miraculous raising from the dead.

So I guess I'm asking you two questions:
1) Could you hear a benefit from the Ebony body you installed (I know you made other changes too); and
2) Drawing on your years of experience, do you think I should run the cart for 40 hours and see if it does a Rip Van Winkle?

I still have it, it has less than 2 hours on it so I can legitimately call it NOS, and just sell it. But if I play it for 40 hours and it doesn't transmogrify into a stunning music-maker I want to keep, it's not NOS anymore and the selling price plummets.

Any advice is welcome.

And of course if anyone reading this has an idea, it will be much appreciated. They say "Too many chefs can spoil the broth" — but they might fix the Ortofon.
Click to expand...

Afraid I cannot give you any A/B experience on this subject. First of all, I do not care one whit for the Denon 103 or 103R cartridges. I don't like their lack of refinement and limited bandwidth, and therefore I never listen to them stock unless I am at a friends house who does like them. So the 103R I bought was already mounted in an ebony body and had a pranged cantilever. I sent it to Soundsmith for its Level 3 retip, and ended up comparing it to an Accuphase AC3 and a ZYX 4D. What the ebony body contributed besides mass, I cannot say with any degree of certainty. Also, I cannot isolate it from the retip work done, so no way for me to give you an answer.

Now I have owned a Denon 103M that I had Andy do a retip to. In the stock aluminum body I loved that cartridge. Now its an entirely different beast than a 103 or 103R, so nothing can be ascertained from my time from it. I also own a Denon DL304 that I appreciate, so I am not a hater of Denon cartridges.

As far as your Ortofon goes, I can't give you a certain answer. I would play it 40 hours to see what you got, at least that is my opinion. It is no longer NOS anyways, and therefore takes a hit in price. Besides vintage Ortofon cartridges do not command a prestigious price, unless is something like an MC 2000/3000. Heck I just paid $1200 for a Winfeld, and it retails for $4K. Is a person going to pay more for a MC 20/30 Super with 5 hours versus 40? Not significantly I would think. Now the Ortofon might awake with better loading or SUT than what you were using back in the day also. So it may just be more than break in holding it back. But there is only one way to find out.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
Good advice, Mr P, thoughtful, and I appreciate the time you put into it.

May I ask for another minute of your time? Specifically your experience with Andy. I spoke to him at length about my stylus-less Koetsu Rosewood and it was a good discussion. He's had some negative comments, but far more good ones. I'd appreciate your input before I make the decision. By the way, did his retip include a new cantilever?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom