Hi guys. I'm recently getting back into vinyl, and cleaned up my JVC QL-Y5F. It needed a cartridge, so I opted for a Audio Tech AT120E. [mainly because of price] I'm reading the threads here, and I must say, they're eye opening. I wish I would have known about this site BEFORE I made the cartridge purchase. Now I'm completely confused about which cartridge to use with what tonearm. Did I screw up? Are there better choices, for compliance reasons. I don't really know if I have a low or high mass tonearm. If there's anybody out there with some JVC experiance, I could sure use the help. Thanks
Cartridge help with jvc ql-y5f
- Thread starter georod
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
I don't think my Sansui 5000x can support a m/c cartridge. I'm using almost the same receiver as I brought back from Viet Nam. Actually I owned a 5000 back then, and if I remember correctly my turntable was a Dual 1219. So I've upgraded some since then, but I don't think that the Sansui has the circuitry for anything except a M/M cartridge. I may be wrong......
A couple of things..
1) The "perfect" arm for an AT120e is a low-mid mass arm - a true low mass arm is too low and a mid mass arm is too high.
2) The QL-Y5F is far more versatile than most TT's due to the servo damping - the issues with resonance get controlled electro magneticaly by the servo arm!
As a resul, although the AT120e would perfer a slightly lower mass arm, it will work superbly in the QL-Y5F.
In fact I have run the highly inappropriate ADC SuperXLM (Compliance 40cu !!) on my QL-Y5F and it sounds great!
Would it sound better in a lighter arm - yes it would
Would it sound better in a slightly lighter arm, but without the damping - no it would not!
The damping does the magic, and you can pretty much run any cartridge from 54cu (Jico SAS) to 12cu (My Empire/Benz MC1) - with fantastic results.
Few and far between are the arms that have this level of flexibility - enjoy the AT120e.... :thmbsp::thmbsp:
1) The "perfect" arm for an AT120e is a low-mid mass arm - a true low mass arm is too low and a mid mass arm is too high.
2) The QL-Y5F is far more versatile than most TT's due to the servo damping - the issues with resonance get controlled electro magneticaly by the servo arm!
As a resul, although the AT120e would perfer a slightly lower mass arm, it will work superbly in the QL-Y5F.
In fact I have run the highly inappropriate ADC SuperXLM (Compliance 40cu !!) on my QL-Y5F and it sounds great!
Would it sound better in a lighter arm - yes it would
Would it sound better in a slightly lighter arm, but without the damping - no it would not!
The damping does the magic, and you can pretty much run any cartridge from 54cu (Jico SAS) to 12cu (My Empire/Benz MC1) - with fantastic results.
Few and far between are the arms that have this level of flexibility - enjoy the AT120e.... :thmbsp::thmbsp:
I measured my V15VSAS twice using the same method and got consistent results....
I will be going back and using a couple of completely different methods to cross check this result.
But it appears that the SAS is a very high compliance but very well damped design - so although it is very high compliance, it is more versatile than it first appears, and when mated with a Shure damping brush in addition, it becomes a very versatile stylus indeed.
But like I said - I've measured it, I am slightly suspicious of that measurement, and I plan on re-measuring using a completely different method to confirm.
I will be going back and using a couple of completely different methods to cross check this result.
But it appears that the SAS is a very high compliance but very well damped design - so although it is very high compliance, it is more versatile than it first appears, and when mated with a Shure damping brush in addition, it becomes a very versatile stylus indeed.
But like I said - I've measured it, I am slightly suspicious of that measurement, and I plan on re-measuring using a completely different method to confirm.
You use a low frequency sweep track with frequencies from 3Hz to 20Hz
Record this and then analyse it for what frequency gets the highest amplitude - that one is the resonance.
If you have a real time analyser, or spectrum analysis software (lots of audio software has this built in) then it is very easy...
Record this and then analyse it for what frequency gets the highest amplitude - that one is the resonance.
If you have a real time analyser, or spectrum analysis software (lots of audio software has this built in) then it is very easy...
Had to run half way through the explanation!
Once you know the resonant frequency, you then need to know the effective total mass of the arm & cartridge with fixings... - either read this from the arm specs, and then add cartridge and screws weight, or use LuckyDog's spreadsheet to calculate the actual mass... http://www.luckydog.demon.co.uk/images/EMC.xls
For this, you will need to weigh the counterweight, the arm tube and the headshell if it is removable.
Then plug the values in the relevant formula to get the compliance....
Formula is:
Compliance = [(159/F)^2] / Mass
Compliance in CU
Frequency in Hz
Mass in g
So to summarise - find the arm mass, find the resonant frequency, plug the figures into the formula and you have the compliance...
bye for now
David
Once you know the resonant frequency, you then need to know the effective total mass of the arm & cartridge with fixings... - either read this from the arm specs, and then add cartridge and screws weight, or use LuckyDog's spreadsheet to calculate the actual mass... http://www.luckydog.demon.co.uk/images/EMC.xls
For this, you will need to weigh the counterweight, the arm tube and the headshell if it is removable.
Then plug the values in the relevant formula to get the compliance....
Formula is:
Compliance = [(159/F)^2] / Mass
Compliance in CU
Frequency in Hz
Mass in g
So to summarise - find the arm mass, find the resonant frequency, plug the figures into the formula and you have the compliance...
bye for now
David