marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
Grado doesn't use a tie-wire. at the furthest back of the cantilever/generating ring is a fixed pivot point. (basically a unipivot, there is no moving mass beyond that point) The stylus can actually be pulled off the pivot. Beatcomber had that happen in a mishap, sent it to me and i "messaged" it back into place........plays fine.
Pio1980
AK Member
This is what I have from what I've seen:
Item 'H' is described as a fixed axial pivot.
https://www.turntableneedles.com/mobile/GRADO-BLACK1-Needle-527-DE-black1_p_1105.html
Sk8ter
Active Member
Hello again, just want to keep terminologies correct agreed? ya? ok
IMO Transit attack or rise time (speed) is going to be better in the workings of MC then MM/MI its designed this way ...remember how fast is a 20kc because thats all your going to luckly get out of a well tuned MM/MI now on the other hand MC do not suffer these FR issues and yes there is 100kc grooves recorded on some of my records a few instruments have harmonics in this range like the harp...or the trumpet! several others i cannot remember but you get the point...if your just going for mediocre I will bow out and watch on the sidelines but if your really trying to make a cartridge that will pass all the musical information in a dynamic coherent way (like music) remember real live music has not boundary's no FR limitations ..its just all there and we hear it...
Lawrence
marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
This is what I have from what I've seen:
Item 'H' is described as a fixed axial pivot.
https://www.turntableneedles.com/mobile/GRADO-BLACK1-Needle-527-DE-black1_p_1105.html
yeah, I know what they look like, I've had 'em apart. it's not a tie wire. the diagram is a bit misleading, or Grado never "upgraded" that cut away of the stylus assembly from the original F series to now.
marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
doesn't explain how MM/MI carts were/are able to do CD4. The only electrical advantage MCs have over most MM/MI carts is low inductance. Mine run anywhere from a low of 9mH to a high of 55mH
Sk8ter
Active Member
correct...inductance is where the bottle neck is in MM/MI...now if you can get away from it like MC does then IMO there will be no limiting factors like most MM do have...
marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
and those inductance figures I gave were for my MI carts. And I don't need to "bottleneck" them with the wrong SUT or gain stage.
Pio1980
AK Member
I have a relatively simple 2-chip RIAA
stage that allows me to drive a power amp thru a pot, without a line stage, from a LOMC of average output. It's the AD797 AK project. So it's a tossup between that and the 2 chip RIAA stages that allow same from a MM/MI for a simple uncluttered signal path.
neobop
Well-Known Member
This perception of inductance and high frequency extension is overstated. Carts with as much as 450mH were used for 4-ch. The AT20SS for example had 450mH and response to 50K, the same as a Lyra Atlas. One big advantage of HO carts is the use of loading to tune response. That's not possible with LOMCs.
There might be a resurgence, but I think coming out with a new HO cart might be a losing proposition. It took Soundsmith years to build up his MI business and he has a store and retipping service to keep him going. It seems to me that limited production has MC written all over it. There might be a gap in the < $1K area for something fairly accurate, but not analytical.
Good luck,
neo
There might be a resurgence, but I think coming out with a new HO cart might be a losing proposition. It took Soundsmith years to build up his MI business and he has a store and retipping service to keep him going. It seems to me that limited production has MC written all over it. There might be a gap in the < $1K area for something fairly accurate, but not analytical.
Good luck,
neo
marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
that's true, and it's also true that the lower the inductance the easier it is to get a flatter curve electrically out to the extreme frequencies. Was just trying to point out that MM/MI carts can run up in the frequencies that folks think only MCs can.
muovimies
Super Member
In my experience low inductance carts just simply sound better, no matter the high frequency extension. I don't really know why, but they just sound more dynamic and open to me overall, including the midrange. High inductance designs seem to sound 'stuffy' and slightly 'compressed' in a certain way in comparison, even when they have extended highs or even aggressive treble. It's hard to put the difference into words, but the first time I became aware of that sound signature, I thought maybe it was MM/MI "sound" and pursued moving coil, and the sound was gone. Then an old Glanz "moving flux" cartridge came into my possession, and it didn't have that 'sound' to the extent most MM/MI-carts have. In the pursue of finding out why I noticed it had inductance of around 100mH, which is considerably less than most MM-designs, while still high. So I though maybe what I'm hearing is because of inductance. Eventually got myself a Pickering XLZ-7500, which is a low output MM with an inductance of 1mH, and it doesn't suffer from that 'stuffiness'. There was also needledrops somewhere from both the high inductance/high output and low inductance/low output versions of that cartridge and the difference, while subtle, is there. Certainly not conclusive evidence, just my experience, and while it is limited, it certainly points me to the direction low inductance is the way to go, for me at least. Btw. that XLZ-7500 doesn't sound quite as dynamic as my MCs, but I'm using it with low quality cheap styli, so I'm inclined to think that might be the reason instead of the inductance, which at 1mH is still a lot more than most LOMC, which commonly have coil inductances like 20µH (= 0.02mH).
Btw. to me "the use of loading to tune response" is not an advantage but a shortcoming, ideally I'd want a phono cartridge that sounds right no matter what the capacitive or resistive loading. YMMV of course.
marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
how about that in a MI cart? .........1.5mv output 70ohm , 9mH motors FR 10-60K ave channel separation of 35db 20-20K
edit: Bobbins is playing one as we speak
muovimies
Super Member
I'm thinking the same body with, say, 3 stylus options, all of them high quality. From "top to bottom" a nude line contact of some sort with perhaps and 'exotic' cantilever, or whatever it takes to keep the moving mass as low as possible, then a high quality nude elliptical & nude conical with aluminum cantilevers. Probably wouldn't be much of a price difference between the elliptical and conical options, but a truly high quality conical stylus would be something that might find a market. The only really high quality conical at the market today is Denon DL-103 AFAIK, everything else seems bottom of the barrell.
muovimies
Super Member
I haven't heard a Grado in my system, would like to though someday. Their design seems to have some quirky aspects to it though, or at least that's what I gather from the fact they seem to be a bit of a 'love them or hate them' affair for most people. I also dislike the fact they don't really tell you what kind of stylus you're getting with their cartridges and prices seem maybe on the high side to me for what you're getting - but then again how do I know since they don't really seem to tell me what they're selling me as far as styli go
Sk8ter
Active Member
I agree completely but lets stipulate what hi quality is in a diamond....... They are referred to gem quality with min inclusions(carbon) or none as my fulton carts have no inclusions clean and clear see through.... these with what you call grain oriented mounted will be the longest lasting period!
good suggestions lets keep thinking in these ways ...why build mediocre that is everywhere lets build something special thats affordable
Lawrence
ripblade
Addicted Member
"Special" is seldom widely affordable. If OldADC is still taking votes, I want to restate mine for the low inductance/low output MM/MI type with high quality replaceable needles. Given that magnet strength has improved exponentially, how about utilizing it to reduce moving mass to the vanishing point, instead of increasing output? If it must be high compliance, so be it....it's time for ULM to make a comeback anyway.
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
I have you the ultimate custom cartridge challenge. Build me the best performing, most rugged, MI cartridge ever possible with a .7 mil conical ever. Must be rugged enough to take spastic me in stride and track from 1-3 grams force. It must also be capable of backcueing. I want the best bombproof cartridge man can design and make. Tough and audiophile at the same time. Are you up to this? Beat Stanton 681 A. And with reasonable output levels. Rugged and refined.
Well, when I was pointed to this conversation, I intended to bring up the old Technics cartridges, but the always-reliable JP beat me to it. Besides incredibly low effective mass, they also had low DCR, which (in conjunction with output not much reduced from normal MM) translates to higher signal to noise capability. This also means that, unlike the excellent AT 150MLX, the Technics were not compromised by moderate values of cable and input capacitance, and consistently delivered flat and extended frequency response. All in all, these were some of the finest cartridges ever made and sold, and their price ($400-500 in 1980) reflected this.
The Achilles Heel of those cartridges was the suspension, which had a lifetime approaching that of an ice cream cone on a July afternoon in Phoenix. Polymer science can do a lot better than that these days; there are whole new families of elastomers available now that were unknown then. A modern version of the EPC100C Mk4 would be a world-beater.
The Achilles Heel of those cartridges was the suspension, which had a lifetime approaching that of an ice cream cone on a July afternoon in Phoenix. Polymer science can do a lot better than that these days; there are whole new families of elastomers available now that were unknown then. A modern version of the EPC100C Mk4 would be a world-beater.