On Headphone Listening Pt. II Sennheiser HD600/650 Stax SRA-12S ZMF Focal Audio-Technica

From mrgoodsound: Follow-up Thoughts On Headphone Listening

This is a Part II post. For Part I, please see here.

For this post, I would like to share some philosophy on what makes headphone listening engaging to me, and provide some context with my own headphone experience.

The X Factor

Before I begin, I'd like to state that I do experience 'goosebumps', 'shivers' or 'frisson' from auditory stimuli, including hearing the right music on a 'good' system. I open with this because from what I understand this physical reaction to sound is unique to each individual and not everyone experiences this, or experiences it the same way.

All audiophiles have individual 'sounds' that they are looking (listening?) for whenever they audition a system or individual component. These 'sounds' are more felt as much as they are heard, and the enthusiast knows if system Y or component Z has 'it', even if they cannot express 'it' in words their colleagues will understand. Often as their colleagues are listening for their own 'sounds'. To simplify, I will just call the presence of these 'sounds' the X factor.

I am not sure if there is any greater audiophile thrill than the discovery of a component or combination of components that contains your personal X factor, or if there is any greater disappointment than substantial investment into a system or component which does not.

I wouldn't be able to effectively communicate in words my personal X factor to the reader for multiple reasons, the biggest of which is the shared vernacular we audiophiles use to discuss sounds has some words so completely diluted by the mainstream press and the un-experienced that they have become meaningless. Instead my goal is to give some ideas of what I am looking for in a good headphone system, in order to achieve goosebumps. I think this is important to discuss, because I spent so much time, money and frustration trying to obtain the correct balance of these traits.

• Tonality/timbre: Unfortunately there is a disturbing trend in the high-end headphone market to sacrifice even response or natural timbre for lightning fast transient response and shoving macro-detail into your face (literally). Admittedly, it is difficult to begin with to get a driver smaller than your palm firing directly at your ear from millimeters away to produce anything resembling a linear response. In a speaker system, I can actually be more forgiving of vulgarities from metal domes and HF horns in exchange for liveliness and immediacy. With headphones, I do not feel the trade off is as worth it, and avoiding fatigue takes higher priority. Focal comes to mind as an offender, as I cannot listen their Utopia ($4000) or Clear ($1500) models for more than a few tracks without serious fatigue from metallic timbre and overemphasized leading edge transients.

• Imaging: In my opinion precision imaging is very overrated in all forms of sound reproduction. Of course with headphones the acoustic interaction of a listening room is not part of what reaches your ear-brain system, and we get a presentation similar to near-field monitors, albeit even more intimate. But who wants to focus with laser precision on tiny instruments on a tiny stage inside their head? My favorite headphone systems have generally been a bit diffuse or even 'smeared' with how aural images are spread out.

• Soundstage: Headphone listening can be described as intimate for a number of reasons. I will say that I dislike headphone systems that sound too 'in-your-head'. We are talking about a few millimeters here, but the best systems I've heard were able to project a sound-field slightly in front of my eyes, with a teeny tiny bit of front-to-back depth. This is in contrast to a flat plane of sound inside my head, behind my eyeballs. The latter is what is typical from even very expensive solid-state headphone amplifiers, the headphone outs of receivers, integrated amps, and CD players.

• Euphony: It is highly desirable for me to have a headphone system to lean towards 'euphony'. This is a cop-out descriptor I admit, a lot like 'musical', it doesn't mean much by itself. But to achieve a mouth-open-drooling-stupor listening session, I want music to be played through my headphones imbued with a bit of richness or saturation of tone, that I don't necessarily 'need' in a two-channel system to stay interested. So far I have only achieved satisfaction in this area with models from Sennheiser, AudioTechnica, ZMF, and certain vintage Stax (only with un-amplified acoustic material).

Practical Headphone Advice Based On Experience

Over the past few years I have squandered my fair share of money on headphones and headphone amplifiers trying to chase a type of sound I formulated in my head (that I never quite reached). I really don't want to present myself as any sort of expert, and I try in general to avoid dogmatic thought now more than ever. However I have formed very strong opinions after several years and the below encapsulates my thoughts (read: biases) on the various types of headphone gear available on the market, broken down by driver type/manufacturer.

Dynamic Headphones

I am heavily biased to dynamic driver (moving cone) headphones.

Sennheiser: For me, the undisputed king of the hill is the Sennheiser HD600/650 (doesn't matter which, I like them both equally). They win at linearity from the lower mids through the presence region, have above average resolving ability and as such service all genres of music. These models have been around for ages, can be modified to slightly improve performance past stock and are available at prices anyone can afford. Their high-impedance voice coils make them suited to what I believe is the ideal amplifier topology for headphones, output transformer-less valve amplifiers. I do not care at all for the HD800, which is perhaps the most overrated headphone of all time.

ZMF: Relative newcomer, as they have released several models that have become very popular in recent years. Also using high-impedance dynamic drivers, and besting the Sennheiser HD600 in several technical areas such as bass extension and cleanliness of transients. My opinions vary on their models from strong dislike (Eikon) to like (Auteur). Ultimately I find them to be too expensive for what they are and the approach of using wooden enclosures as a tuning mechanism not ideal, but novel. I really understand why they have a strong fan base though, it is deserved for at least having a unique approach which works to taste.

Focal: Strong dislike. All of their models retain irregular, metallic timbre with vulgar overtones on string instruments. Very comfortable and well built.

Audio-Technica: Unfortunately, only their discontinued models are worth the time of day, many of which are fetching collectors prices on the second-hand market now. They frequently have 'Japanese' tuning which is far from neutral but suites certain genres. The best models have emphasis on fast transient response and airy but warm sound. I really like AD-2000.

Headphone bonanza from 2017 Toronto meet-up.

Electrostatic Headphones

These are supposed to be the 'most advanced' headphones, using ultra-thin membranes which are electrically energized to produce sound. I had attended a headphone enthusiast meet-up several years ago in which I heard all the modern Stax models, many vintage units, and several expensive electrostatic amplifiers. Based on this experience, I had written off electrostats as wispy and limp sounding and unable to cope with electric music. This opinion persisted until very recently.

Stax: I dislike the SR-009 and SR-007 mkII based on my listening experiences at the aforementioned meetup and again at a dealer in Toronto with Stax's own recommended energizer units. I recently acquired from a friend three vintage Stax models, the SR-3, New SR-3, and SR-5; as well as the SRA-12S integrated earspeaker amplifier/pre-amplifier, which has changed my opinion. These very early units (1970s) have thicker diaphragms versus the ultra-thin modern models, and trade some transient response for a warmer sound with a bit more heft, a bit more euphony. I still find them largely allergic to electric music, but they impress with jazz and chamber music. I will write more on these models and the SRA-12S (a very interesting unit indeed) in a separate post.

Stax SRA-12S amp + SR-5 headphones. One of the best headphone setups I have heard.

Sennheiser: I had the opportunity to hear the HE-60, with its own drive unit and several electrostatic amplifiers. It is the real deal, too laid back for my taste but again absolutely charming with acoustic music. Unfortunately these are becoming very difficult to find in good condition and fetch collectors prices.

From what I understand speaking with individuals more experienced with owning electrostatic headphones than I, the real issue with building a 'good' electrostatic system is a shortage of 'good' electrostatic amplifiers/energizer units. From what I can tell, Stax themselves have manufactured a grand total of two amplifiers which were all tube-based from input to output. Their modern models are all hybrids, either with FET input and triode output or vice versa. The most popular 'high-end' commercial offerings are solid-state. There are very few all tube-based units, many of which are cost prohibitive and fewer still employing DHTs.

Orthodynamic (Planar) Headphones

To date I am wholly unimpressed with this category of headphones. I feel that orthodynamic headphones have too many compromises in vital areas of sound and tend to homogenize music more than electrodynamics or electrostatic types.

Audeze/Hifiman: These two companies are really two sides of the same terrible coin. They engage in anti-consumer practices such as price creep, product variation, silent revisions, terrible quality control and shoddy customer service. They release new models every few months with minuscule tuning differences, but slowly and surely increasing the prices. Two pairs of the same Audeze model can sound drastically different, with variations of up to a few dB in published, repeated measurements. Hifiman all follow virtually the same tuning, with a depressed presence region and bump in the lower treble that I do not like at all. Their most expensive models don't do much to distinguish from the inexpensive ones.

MrSpeakers: Very well built and very comfortable. Strong dislike. Completely dead, dull, lifeless. Frequently releases new models with minor engineering revisions for higher prices, ruining resale for existing owners who did not even have the latest model for 6 months. Has recently re-branded to Dan Clark Audio.

In terms of sound, I find all of the orthodynamics I have experienced thus far homogenize too much in too many areas of reproduction including dynamic compression, lack of micro-dynamic expressiveness and very colored presence to brilliance regions. Orthodynamics are also traditionally hungry for current and recommended to pair with solid-state amplifiers. They will not respond to output transformer-less valve amps. Their main sonic advantage is deep bass extension with low harmonic distortion, which is on the bottom of my personal priority list. The only plus side I can think of is that these two brands have extensive distribution and dealer networks, so most living in metropolitan areas can audition before buying. Perhaps the tuning or presentation will agree with you, or you primarily listen to electronic music where deep bass is a priority, and the pricing on an open box or 'demo' unit will make sense. I cannot really recommend these though for the reasons stated above.

A visual summary of the above paragraphs.

On Headphone Amplifiers

In the next article of this series on headphone listening, I will discuss my experience with headphone amplifiers and offer some practical advise. I will also discuss in detail the Stax SRA-12S integrated energizer/pre-amplifier which is a very high value for money unit, if you can find one used.

Until then, Happy New Year and thanks for reading!

Year in Review

Click pics to enlarge.

Year in Review, 10th Anniversary Edition: 2019

I started this blog in 2008, but did not add this feature till 2010, so this year marks the 10th anniversary of the Year in Review feature, which I think is a useful capsular summary for the year. A reader can read each one for what I liked most that year. This has been a stressful year for the family, so fewer acquisitions, but what I did get were of superb quality! Read on!

New Features This year marks the first that the blog has a new writer, and I am happy that it happened just like that! In the coming year, I may just solicit some more articles from friends. Andy, in particular, is a treasure trove, and has written a lot on various forums, but it is hard to tap him. I also thought to interview my friends on how they got into audio. Let's see...

Man of The Year
This category is a First! Of course, it has to be Kevin, who has acquired and done so much this year that this blog has worked hard to track him. I thank him for all the good time, the great food, and of course for making my Thorens TD-124 arm board! His DIY and restoration efforts are also deserving of praise. I am still amazed by his DIY Tonearms (bottom pic; feel my admiration? description here) and Cactus Cantilever/Stylus (left pic, click to enlarge, here). This man re-invents himself virtually every minute; watch this space!

Loudspeakers of the Year
What else! Infinity! Although the sound changes often, sometimes for the worse, Kevin's forever in-flux RS-1B system earns my Best Sound of the Year. No less a picky man than JBL horn user Simon said the Infinity is good enough for playing everything, and indeed that is what I think too (we maintain the same for horns too). Considering it has only been a few months, it is a miracle! Even more of a legend and housed in a larger room, Mark's IRS Beta is potentially even better (here) but I have heard them only once and am still waiting for another invitation. If you ever wonder why a horn lover would fall for a line source loudspeaker, read this article! Other types of loudspeakers are only also-run's. We have to thank our great leader Andy for inspiring these 2 to choose to go down this path, and if not for his experience they would not have mastered the sound so soon. 

Best Component of the Year
The Linear Tube Audio MicroZOTL 2.0 (MZ2) (here) is the hands down winner. It is a 1 watt amp, preamp and headphone amp in one. I have tested it thoroughly as an amp and it is a horn lover's dream. I have also tested it as preamp and headphone amp and it is equally great (more report to follow). Considering its multiple functions, it is actually a bargain.

Bargain of the Year
Given, in kit form, its ridiculously and improbable low price, it has to be the Akitika GT-102 (here). If not for the LTA, I'd have voted it as best component of the year, that is how fond of it I am. It works a charm with my LS3/5A and is now my go-to amp for that! It has actually rejuvenated my interest in the LS3/5A and more on that may follow. Mind you, I have heard the LS3/5A with all the greatest tube amps, and the Akitika can be considered in their company, with a quite different sets of virtues.



Cartridge of the Year, and More
The most gratifying thing to me is what VAS is doing, which is both re-tipping (repair) and selling modified cartridges (usually Denon DL-103) under the VAS name, like many others (Zu, for example), but VAS goes far beyond them in modification (not just a shell change, but tinkering with everything else). Repair This is a crazy business only for those simultaneously steady of hand and crazy in mind, two things that don't usually go together (like IQ and EQ). Some people want the original sound (like I for my Koetsu Black (here) and Denon DL-301 Mk II, which Steven delivered with a sure hand), and there are others who want a different sound. I personally think Steven has truly mastered his craft and has significant insights of his own. VAS Cartridges The VAS 103 series are impressive. While the stereo (here) is excellent, the 103 Ebony Mono scaled new heights (here) and is my cartridge of the year.

DL-301 Mk II Although mine is VAS re-tipped, since I compared it to the original (here) I am confident this is an excellent cartridge, a good buy in it price class. For those who want a even-handed approach, a sleeper. Of course, don't forget its more famous sibling, the even cheaper evergreen DL-103, for which I need to say nothing more!

Shure SC35C (and M44-7) Although Shure has ended their cartridge making (a despicable decision certainly made by executives oblivious of tradition), many good examples can still be bought on Ebay at prices that are higher than before but are still commensurate with the quality of these transducers. The SC35C has always been of broadcast quality (here), and the M44-7 I have always liked too (here).

Vintage CD Players
Not all vintage CD Players are good, far from it. But, many people (there is a huge subculture here) have long known a whole class of CDPs using early Philips chips, the 14-bit (TDA-1540) 4x oversampling machines and the later but ubiquitous cheap 16-bit (TDA 1543, non-oversampling) ones are very musical (my recent re-visit here). A disc like Shirley Horn's May the music never end (Verve, CD) is sparse and can be quite bland when played by a modern player, but her distinctive and instantly recognizable vocal style, with its inimitable pauses, silence and cadence, is poignantly cast by the old CDPs. Incredible. I shall be listening and writing more on this, one of my favorite topics.

And so do old CD transports impress. I have long used the old Theta Data and Basic, and more recently, firing up my old Meridian 200 just pleasantly surprised me (here).

Time to Collect CDs Funny thing is, red-book physical CD is now considered a thing of the past. Me? I don't think so. And, these old CDPs can really throw you; you owe it to yourself to listen to a few for beer money. Come to think of it, a couple of so-called craft-beer or even one of the more expensive newer "natural" stuff, can easily buy you a machine! As for used CDs, in thrift stores they are worth next to nothing; great time to collect!

Elekit Continues its SE Quest
Having been occupied by the LTA, I have not yet listened to it that much, but from just first impression the new Elekit TU-8800 (left pic; review here) is surely their strongest amp in a long time. The output transformers are beefy and the amp can use more tubes than any other pentode/tetrode tubes that I can remember, including my TU-8300 (which however is also a 300B amp). VKmusic, the American distributor, is in the final stages of developing an upgrade of Lundahl transformers, so those interested may want to wait a little. I'd definitely try it out with my favorite flea-powered 6V6, which most who buy this amp would not do. But my horns are 104 db, so I wonder how does it compare with its much more modest sibling, the dedicated 6V6/6AQ5 amp, TU-8150 (right pic, review here), which I personally enjoy a lot but would hesitate to recommend to others whose loudspeakers are not nearly as efficient as mine. Both let you choose between Triode and Ultralinear, but the latter also unusually offers a pentode option, which I prefer.

Re-Visits

As one's system improves (I sure hope this is your case), from time to time one should rotate in surplus gears for re-evaluations. Sometimes one is surprised, or reminded of certain aspects of audio reproduction. See, improvement is almost never all-encompassing. A gain in an area seldom comes without the cost of a loss in another. As we make compromises (we all do), we forget. It is good to remind ourselves. This year I have not done much revisits, but certainly re-visits to current amplification phonoamp AQVOX 2 CI Mk II (here and here) and Micromega MyDac (here) made me smile! I have also re-enlisted the service of the Fosgate Signature Phonoamp and Air Tight PC-1 cartridge (here). The PC-1, one of the first super-cartridges, sets such a high bar that others (even the Koetsu Black) struggle to come up against it. The Fosgate, which I have written up only in piecemeal fashion (but this is its third mention in Year in Review), is amazing in that it possesses the best virtues of both tube and ss, even if it is all-tube (I wonder about its newer Black Ice iteration). Hopefully, the coming year shall see a lot more re-visits, in the analog as well as digital realm.

Earphone
I was really surprised by the even-handed performance of the cheap Monoprice Bluetooth Earphone (here), a great buy!

What I Miss
It surprised me a little. In NYC, I have over 10,000 records and at least over 2,000 CDs (some brought over from HK), but on more than one occasion I yearn for a CD that I had in HK. It shows no library is too large! Of course, I miss many people and things in HK too.

I wish you a purposeful and fulfilling 2020!

Air Tight PC-1 Koetsu Black Goldline Denon DL-103 Ortofon LH-9000 LW-7N AQVOX 2CI Mk II Aurorasound Vida Fosgate Signature Mono Button

Click pics to enlarge. David and Goliath? In the US, David is priced at 1/50 the price of Goliath.

Talk Vinyl: Mono Button, Headshell, Cartridge Wires, Viennese Waltz
New York Diary (19-24):
Air Tight PC-1 Re-visited vs Koetsu Black Goldline vs Midas Denon DL-103
Aurorasound Vida vs AQVOX CI Mk II vs Fosgate Signature
$5 Ebay Headshell vs $240 Premium Headshell 
Review: AQVOX 2CI Mk II, Part III
Calibration of Analog Sources in System II

Revised 12/28: AQVOX tested with Midas Denon DL-103
Revised 12/26: Addition of Fosgate Signature Phonoamp

Mega Article on AQVOX, Parasound and Aurorasound (this older article features all the phonamps and cartridges in this present article, which can be regarded as a Part II of the older article).
Fosgate Signature Phonoamp as last heard

After I finished my long and gratifying session with the VAS Ebony Mono, and after brief flings with the Denon DL-102 and Shure SC35C (here), I reinstalled my Midas Denon DL-103 on the Thorens TD-124/Schick 12". This was all into the Parasound JC3 phonoamp, which has a Mono Button, which is fed directly into the LTA MicroZOTL.

One thing led to another, and this article snowballed.

Mono Button with Mono Cartridge
Whether with the VAS Ebony Mono or Denon DL-102, engaging the Mono Button produced no discernible effect. This is also true in my System I, where the Mono Button of the Aurorasound Vida phonoamp produced no effect with these two cartridges. This shows the cartridges are not picking up anything from the vertical plane, and are hence true mono cartridges. Nonetheless, I usually habitually engage the mono button anyway when I play mono records.

Mono Button with Stereo Cartridge
I really wasn't doing any critical listening and was typing away on my computer but, after listening to two stereo LPs, it disturbed me a little that the sound of the Denon DL-103, while good, was not open enough. I looked around a bit and suddenly saw the Mono Button of the JC3 was still engaged!! Pressing the button again immediately opened up the soundstage and distributed the instruments. That is to be expected but what was not was a smoothening of the treble and small loss of bass impact. I then went back and forth with the button and confirmed that with stereo records the Mono Button firms up the bass but also paradoxically makes the treble a little sharper (?focused). Of course, the Mono Button is designed to let one cancel out the vertical modulations of the stereo cartridge when playing a mono record. But judging from the above, it may benefit the playback of some sub-optimally recorded or non-RIAA stereo recordings (which a mono cartridge does too).

Headshell and Cartridge Wires
After a while, I got itchy again in trying to improve the replay with the Midas Denon DL-103. This cartridge was permanently installed on the only expensive headshell I have, the heavy magnesium-carbon fiber Ortofon LH-9000 (here) which was an impulse buy (always a wrong thing) in HK when I acquired the Schick arm in 2012 (in the pic in the original post). Somehow, despite its hefty price, or because of it, from the first sounding I have always been suspicious that it may not be the headshell for me.

See, for a start, I don't like the cartridge wires that come with this headshell (left pic); I frown upon the relatively thick strands. The wires are the LW-7N that Ortofon sells separately at an outrageous price. They are much thicker (lower in AWG) than the generic ones that usually come with my generic headshells. Ortofon actually sells all sorts of cables but they have never caught on with anyone, certainly not in HK and US. Almost all their cables are LC-OFC, 6N/7N copper, and all made in Japan, just like most of their tonearms and tonearm cables (basically Jelco). In my experience, these Japanese cables are smooth but lacking in dynamic expression.

It has always been my belief that thick cables sound worse than thin ones (as stated in this HiFi Basics article). So, 7 long years later, I swapped out the Ortofon for a generic Korean made perforated metal one that costs around $5 on Ebay, roughly 1/50 the price of the LH-9000 at established US retailers (cheaper on Ebay, at maybe half the price, which was around the price I paid for mine in HK)! In the case of the cartridge, the output signal is so small that a very small-gauged wire (high AWG) is enough to carry it; the larger the diameter (lower AWG) of the wire the more the delicate signal is going to be altered.

It has always been my audio belief too that one flat surface should not be placed upon another. This is true of smaller loudspeakers and their stands. For small loudspeakers like LS3/5A, one may get away with a little blue tac at the corners, which serves the dual purpose of securing the loudspeakers as well as decoupling. For larger loudspeakers, stands with flat tops are more often than not suboptimal. Two examples: The original Epos stand for their medium sized ES-11 and ES14 (great loudspeakers btw!) has an open-frame top, and they sound best that way; ditto the magnificent but voluptuous Spendor SP-100, which also sounds best on an open-frame stand. This is likely true of the cartridge/headshell interface too, particularly if both headshell and cartridge body are metal. I happen to like the look of these generic headshells, cool and retro. I also like the perforations, which should help resonances - witness Rega derived tonearms that have so many holes punched into them that they look like they are bullet ridden from an ambush! There is a reason why the open-framed Orsonic headshells fetch good sums on Ebay. For my cheaper plastic body cartridges I fuss less, but in my mind I don't like having the top of a metal-bodied cartridge right against a metal headshell (of course the metal screws unavoidably do bind them together at two points), and if the sound is not entirely satisfactory I'd insert a shim of cut expired credit card between them. I did that in this case (you can see in the pic; it helps with the VTA too). Note too that the Ortofon LH-9000 also has a thin strip of anti-vibration material taped onto its underside, so someone there was thinking along the same line.

Guess what, my worst premonitions all came true! The cheaper headshell was more to my taste - more air around instruments, a larger soundstage and a livelier and more subtle presentation. Whether it is due to the wires or headshell or a combination of the two I won't say. Of course I could swap the wires and try out all combinations, but I am not about to do that - one is just as unlikely to use an expensive headshell with generic wire than to use expensive wire with a generic headshell. Somehow, I just love the cheap package!

Which brings us to: how complicated vinyl playback can be! Aside from the turntable and the arm and the cartridge, even the littlest things, the headshell and cartridge wires, influence the sound greatly. In my experience, people who constantly tinker get bad sound (how can they not if they only concentrate on a few records for A/B); people who don't tinker can go either way; the best is to tinker less and concentrate on the music more - improvement comes with experience and in due time - there is no expressway to "heaven".

Unwanted Noise/Resonance/Vibration Control in audio has always fascinated me. In my experience, most of the time, the "solution" is worse than the "problem". Most, if not all, AC Line "Conditioners", Spikes and Cones, ridiculously expensive racks like Finite Element are just some examples that kill the liveliness of music, perhaps only suitable for those who use hot solid state amps and "state-of-the-art" loudspeakers. Those of us sympathetic to tubes seldom need these paraphernalia's.

Air Tight PC-1 redux

I then rearranged the positions of the 3 turntables in System II for some easy testing. For the first time in at least 2 years I played my Linn LP-12/Ittok/Air Tight PC-1 (here). I had looked forward to this moment ever since I got my Koetsu Black re-tipped by VAS. A comparison is in order.

For this part, as usual everything in System II went through the Shindo Monbrisson preamp, which drove the same LTA MicroZOTL 2.0 amp. Aurorasound Vida was the phonoamp for the Linn. I played 3 LP's that I had played using the gears in the above section, and the result was both spellbinding as well as instructional.

with Aurorasound Vida Henry Krips is almost forgotten today. He previously amazed me with his Suppe Overtures (here). This time, I got his Johann Strauss Favourites (HMV Concert Classics). Before, I thought it was well played but not quite inspiring. Not so with the PC-1: all of a sudden, the orchestra swinged and swayed, and Krips deftly applied to the English orchestra a Viennese lilt. The all-important upbeats acquired more emphasis, subtle retards became evident. Most delightful were the percussions, which felt purposeful, a sine qua non of good reproduction. In the Thunder and Lightning Polka, the rapid bass notes depicting the thunder were superbly resolved, no easy task. This LP is so telling that it is going to be my go-to test LP for cartridges. As amazing was Swarowsky's Saint Saens Symphony No. 3 (Urania). Despite excellent sonics, it was a straightforward account that bordered on boring, and the pickup Viennese orchestra had some weak playing. Again, not so with the PC-1: orchestral texture became more refined and colorful, and dynamics improved to the extent that it was actually not bad at all! Similarly, on Beecham's Ein Heldenleben (HMV Concert Classics) the Royal Philharmonic seemed like a much better orchestra with the PC-1, and combined with the subtle conducting (no bombast) of Beecham it deserves its reputation as a great interpretation.

vs Koetsu Black Goldline AQVOX As the Aurorasound Vida's MC input is now occupied by the PC-1, I first connected my Koetsu (on my Thorens TD-309 turntable, here heard with the Vida) to my AQVOX 2CI Mk II, and then played the same 3 LP's. Although better than previously with the Midas Denon DL-103, compared with the PC-1, it was evident the music was rendered with a broader stroke. I fiddled with cables, which did not help too much. Aurorasound A little piqued, I did the hard work of disconnecting the Linn/PC-1 so as to connect the TD-309/Koetsu rig into the MC input of the Aurorasound, which was how I played the Koetsu last time (here). Ah, the playback became more focused, and the Koetsu found more of what the PC-1 did (like the Viennese lilt). However, ultimately, the PC-1 was just more detailed and dynamic. The Koetsu Black is already a top-notch cartridge, but the PC-1 belongs in even  more rarified company. From this, I concluded that I wanted to use the Koetsu on the Aurorasound, so I recruited my Bob's Device SUT (here) for input to the MM input and the result was largely the same, perhaps with just an extra touch of force, which I didn't really need. Based on the Koetsu Black alone, it would seem safe to conclude that the Aurorasound Vida is better than AQVOX CI Mk II. Although there is no question the Aurorasound is formidable, but, as audio, particularly analog playback, is all about matching, I was not ready yet to draw this conclusion... Fosgate Signature The next day I connected the Linn/Koetsu rig to the Fosgate and, as they say, the rest is history. In this system, the Koetsu did even better than on the AQVOX, and perhaps even better than on the Aurorasound. The Koetsu did everything the PC-1 did, but at a somewhat smaller scale, but I feel it has been optimized. What amazes me is that the all-tube Fosgate yields not one iota to either the AQVOX or Aurorasound in the transient portrayal of the leading edge; every emphasis is microdynamically portrayed, no mean feat, with the additional benefit of a smoother sound.

with AQVOX I then connected the Linn/PC-1 rig to the AQVOX. The PC-1 was instantly everything it was on the Aurorasound, but with a little more grain. Remembering that I had bypassed the capacitors before (here), I switched them back in and now there was more warmth needed in this very high resolution system. I also adjusted the gain (front knobs; not = volume knobs) and experimented with cables (Gotham DGS-1 and GAC-2111 in lieu of the previous GAC-2) and got closer and closer to what I was hearing before. There were several thing that were amazing: 1) as some have commented, the current amplification phonoamps thrive on low-impedance or low-output cartridges, and the PC-1 vs Koetsu is 2.5 vs 5 ohm; 2) even with the gain turned way low, the AQVOX was even more dynamic and even faster than the Aurorasound, with either cartridge. Make no mistake, for my taste, because of its more refined nature the more expensive Aurorasound is still the better phonoamp, but the AQVOX would not be easily dismissed and I am going to explore more around the findings of today. For now, given that I had found a home for my Koetsu (i.e., the Fosgate), the PC-1 going back to the Aurorasound (the MM used for the Denon DL-102).

AQVOX with Midas Denon DL-103 With all of this, it is also apparent the TD-124/Schick/Midas Denon DL-103 needs some rejuvenation or upgrade. I went back to the rig and replaced the Parasound JC3 with the AQVOX. Surprise! With those 3 LPs I got back much of the quality missing before. In Johann Strauss Favourites, much of the Viennese lilt was back, and the bass notes in Thunder & Lightning Polka was surprisingly very well resolved. In Saint Saens, the brooding atmosphere was highly satisfying and the strings and winds had surprisingly sheen. And the Ein Heldenleben was positively luxurious, if a little lighter. How good it was can be judged thus: I was getting more than a little sick listening to the 3 LPs, but this round I wanted to hear entire sides and never lifted the needle mid-way, so pleased I was. What is a little surprising is that the end result rivals the playback by the Koetsu Black Goldline - in terms of tactility, the Denon was at least an equal, but perhaps the Koetsu was slightly richer from the mid-bass down. Again a great performance by this humble evergreen. However, it is also clear the PC-1 remains in a league of its own.

All of this is a bit exhaustive and exhausting - audiophile behavior. This article represents the biggest analog testing session lazy me have done in a long while, since the last big one linked above. But it is undeniably rewarding as I have achieved as much parity as I could have mustered. More rehabilitation of cartridges and phonoamps are in order.

Simple Lunch, Spicy Beef with Dried Bamboo Shoots

Lightly Pickled Cabbage as Condiment

Cactus Cantilever Stylus DIY Headshell Alignment tool

Click pics to enlarge. Top, DIY Cactus Cantilever/Stylus in action, on DIY 12" arm. Record Weight is DIY from Junk Parts too. Decca Gold on the armboard.

NY Diary, Christmas Edition (19-23): Analog DIY Fever, Decca Cartridge Galore

Our man Kevin called us in on Monday to show us more stuff. It was an eventful afternoon, so all the listening were "uncontrolled".

Cactus Cantilever/Stylus! The Cactus Cantilever is certainly not new, especially in DIY circles, and has gained in traction since its introduction. Some very expensive high end commercial models that use cactus as cantilever have been well reviewed (Miyajima Saboten; Soundsmith Helios and Hyperion). Our man Kevin's DIY effort differs from those in that he made a Cantilever/Stylus. We heard it briefly and it was very good! The pic below affords an even better glimpse on how it was inserted into the Stanton 500.

DIY Acessories The pic above also shows Kevin's prototype of a wooden SME type headshell. The pic below shows his DIY rendition of the very expensive Dr Feichert alignment tool. The plate makes use of a quarter of an LP, ingenious! I am sure we'll re-visit it when it is finished. Incidentally, the Sancerre in the background is not the famous white wine, rather a light colored and very refreshing red wine (thank you Andy)!

Decca Cartridges and Shure M44-7 Over the course of an afternoon we heard the Decca Gold (VdH tip) and Shure M44-7 on the Thorens TD-124/DIY Plumber 12" arm (more on the arm here). Sound was dynamic as hell. Although the Decca Gold is no doubt a little more refined, what really impressed me was the very good performance delivered by the lowly Shure M44-7 (my view of this cartridge here), inspiring enough to make me think of giving my M44-7 a spin on my Schick 12" arm.

Later, we sampled the 3 Decca cartridges Andy brought over (the Mk II and the 4RC are Conical; the SC4E is different from Kevin's in having been modified to have a Line Contact Stylus). All were lovely sounding and each had its own attributes. With the different stylus profiles and output levels it was hard to test thoroughly, even judge fairly, but I have already asked to borrow them for some testing (enjoyment) myself!

Digital Listening I brought over my Magnavox CDB-492 and Proton AC-422 CD players. The idea was to demo the non-oversampling TDA-1543 sound (Magnavox) that I like, and contrast it with the bitstream sound (Proton, with attendant oversampling), which I have not done even myself. Sabotaged! Unfortunately, there was a hiccup. The Magnavox simply would not work when inserted into the big system. But it worked well with the small Altec 604E system (pic above). Later when Andy arrived we discussed this and he told us that some equipment just would not work well with the PS Audio Power Plant, which was where the power came from when we tried it in the big system.

I left the CDPs with Kevin. Later in the night I received a call from him. He said he fixed the problem and compared the two CDPs, opining that he preferred the Magnavox for its larger soundstage and better sound. I have always thought the 16-bit chips have better hall sound, which likely accounts for more air and soundstage. When these get back to me, I am going to do some comparison myself.

A potpourri. The tonearm wand, counter- and rider-weights are all DIY.

It shall be somehow attached to the SME part (from Ebay).

I look forward to seeing and hearing this bastard 3012.

Thanks for the dinner. Mostly take-out food. Clockwise from the 2015 Chianti: The mis-named

Pork, Peking Style; Braised Tofu with Fish Fillet; Shrimp; Sauteed Cabbage;

Sauteed Choi Sum, Whole Chicken with Scallion Sauce.

 Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

On Headphone Listening LET US WELCOME A NEW WRITER!

Editor's Note: I am more than delighted to introduce you to another writer, mrgoodsound. It all started with comments on two of my posts. I sensed a kindred spirit and I asked him to email me. We talked a little and I was really surprised and excited when I found out he is 24 year old. That someone so young and passionate about music is already deep into the hobby bodes well for audio's future. I encouraged him to start his own blog but for a start he is writing here. I expect it to be a regular column. Not as often as I'd post because he has got a pretty demanding job. He basically has carte blanche, can write about anything he wants and is free to express opinions that may differ from mine. This is a first for this blog, and I am really happy about it! Let us welcome and encourage him!

From mrgoodsound: Introduction

Hi all,

Our host doctorjohn has invited me to contribute some articles for his blog. I am a 24 year old audiophile from Toronto, Canada who has been into the hobby for at least 5 years. I got into audio via headphone listening, and I quickly found I could appreciate the differences between equipment that others claimed they couldn't, or that shouldn't exist based on an incomplete 'objective' measurement. I got hooked, and I can easily state now that audio is my biggest passion in life. I 'graduated' in the past 2 years to two-channel audio and the wonderful world of possibilities that has come with it.

I can't say I come from a musical background but I have always appreciated music, now more so than earlier stages of my youth. My tastes range from rock/alternative/indie to jazz and classical. Since 'discovering' jazz about 1 year ago, it now encapsulates 80-85% of my listening. I just love hard bop and bebop. Listening to artists like Mingus and Coltrane now blows my mind like The Smiths or Oasis did when I was 17.

My current tastes in audio line up more or less with what content is already being published on this blog. I have a definite preference for valve equipment, analog sources, and highly efficient loudspeakers (preferably featuring horns). I may do a post later about the components of my system in detail, but here is a summary:

Digital sources: Sony CDP-X779ES, Philips CD-303, Mission PCM4000
Analog sources: Sony PS-X800, Lenco L70, Lenco L75, Thorens TD-124 mk I, Rek-o-kut B-12H
Pre-amplifiers: 'The Truth' line stage, 4P1L DHT line stage built by Radu Tarta
Power amplifiers: Sansui AU-717, 6550 amplifier built by Lance Cochrane, Eico HF-81
Speakers: JBL Studio 590

Probably like you, I have been reading this blog for over a year and especially appreciate the information about vintage equipment and concepts not frequently discussed in the 'mainstream' audio press.

Lastly, John asked me to pick a good name to post under. I wanted to keep it simple, so I chose mrgoodsound, because I love good sound.

I hope to post every few weeks and offer some sort of fresh perspective for readers. Please feel free to comment any feedback you may have.

On Headphone Listening

For my first articles, I decided to focus on a topic I could offer some perspective on, and that John has not covered in depth in his own writing. I am talking about headphone listening, or 'personal audio' as some in the industry are now referring to it as. I don't intend to make a case for one or the other, rather just share observations based on personal experience.

Why headphones? I am sure everyone has read some variation of a 'headphone versus speaker listening' thread on their favorite audio forum. These discussions are usually rather polar. One side admits that due to time, space, noise or financial constraints a two-channel system is not ideal and they get their music fix from a headphone system. Another party will claim that headphones 'just don't do it' for them and they don't understand why anyone would bother investing in a high-end headphone rig.

What gives? I will talk about the stereo enthusiast who has never gotten goosebumps from a headphone system next time. First, the individual who resorts to headphones out of necessity. There are a variety of socioeconomic and personal factors involved, but I will stick to those I have experience with.

From a financial point of view, headphone listening offers a low barrier to entry. Anyone can make a $20-100 investment into a pair of headphones and plug them into their smartphone and begin enjoying music. Even the most budget-conscious speaker system, short of purchasing total junk, will come out to a bit more than that. This factor mostly affects youth without the means to spend, but serves as an important distinction of how someone will get into audio one way instead of another. I see at high-end shows today efforts made to put together new systems for $500-1500. Valiant efforts, but even these amounts can be considered more than 'serious' investments for the average individual who is not yet 'committed' to audio, and just wants to better their listening experience.

As a slight detour, this happens to be how I started. My first 'serious' investment was a pair of Sennheiser HD598 headphones. I chose these because as an uneducated consumer I equated the Sennheiser brand with quality and this particular model had a history of good reviews. At the time I plugged them directly into my computer or phone and was content with the sound, but not as impressed as I would have hoped for the $200 expenditure. I haven't had these headphones for some time now, but I imagine in the present I would find this combination to sound totally unappealing.

I am sure everyone reading this now has their own memory of being Alice and chasing the white rabbit across the field and down the hole. Being tech-minded, I began reading enthusiast forums to see if I was missing anything. Here I was introduced to the idea of external amplifiers to make my existing headphones sound better, and external D/A converters to make the external amplifiers sound better. A lot of time and money was traded here, making purchases on the advice of the blind leading the blind, and only for lessons learnt from mistakes and not for good sound. I would consider a blood pact with the devil to recoup some of these funds and spend it instead on audio ventures I am only getting into now nearly 5 years later, with a deeper understanding of the sound I am chasing. Alas, life doesn't work this way.

In terms of space, I think everyone can understand the effects of urbanization and the move to apartment/condo living over recent decades. However, even those fortunate to own homes are not so fortunate. Modern floor plans and familial living arrangements leave little room suitable for a a high-end stereo system, and compromises have to be made. Most local audiophiles I have visited here in Toronto make do with a small section of a basement or the corner of a living room. Being at an age where I am beginning to save and look towards purchasing my first home, I have been seriously disappointed with how few local listings feature any sort of space a 'serious' audiophile would consider 'ideal' for two channel stereophonic sound. A headphone system only requires a little bit of space on a desk at most.

This ties right into noise, where the stereo may only be enjoyed at its fullest in brief windows where family members, roommates or neighbors are not disturbed. As real estate prices rise uncontrollably in cities such as Toronto, Vancouver and Hong Kong; families resort to generational living (grandparents, parents, children all under one roof) or renting apartments with neighbors to live within economic means. These last two points are largely why 'personal audio' as an industry has enjoyed a serious boom in the past decade in Asia. Headphones may be enjoyed without disturbing others, and some models allow you to shut out others from disturbing you.

The final factor is time. Let's consider the individual who has the finances and space for a serious two-channel system, or is dedicated to making one work, and does not need to worry about noise considerations. Many of my older, local audiophile friends meet these criteria. What most of them also have in common is that they are working professionals and/or family men, and find maybe 2-3 hours a week where they can sit down and enjoy music from their systems uninterrupted. This is a sad reality of life, and does not really score a point for either camp, other than to say headphone systems may be taken 'on-the-go' as portable solutions.

I think it is interesting to explore these factors and how they contribute to how an individual may get bitten by the audio 'bug' as well as the individual perception of how to go about getting better sound while still making decisions that work within the constraints of real life. I am not sure how much has been written about this topic to date as I haven't really looked into it.

Next time, I will write about how the listening experience differs with headphones from an audiophile perspective, and add some practical gear advice for choosing the right pair of headphones.

Posted by mrgoodsound

VAS Ebony Mono Denon DL-102 103 Shure SC35C Thomas Schick

NY Diary (19-22): 4 Low Compliance Cartridges
VAS Ebony 103 Mono
Shure SC35C, Part III
Denon DL-102, Part IV
Thorens TD-124 with Thomas Schick 12", Part II
Talk Vinyl - Mono Replay V
Talk Vinyl - 12" Arm vs 9" Arm, Low vs High Impedance

Shure SC35C, Part II
Denon DL-102, Part III
Thorens TD-124 with Thomas Schick 12", Part I

Evaluations in this article are largely based on a simple system (with one important detour): Thorens TD-124/Thomas Schick 12" arm into Parasound JC3 Phonoamp (mono button engaged) into Linear Tube Audio MicroZOTL 2.0 driving my YL horns. This article features 4 low compliance cartridges  that supposedly work best on heavier arms.

When I got back my Thorens TD-124 with Thomas Schick 12" arm I started to revisit the Denon DL-103 and derivatives (the VAS being one). This has been something I have been looking forward to, because the low compliance Denon DL-103 is regarded by some as only suitable for heavier arms (I happen to disagree, as I have always gotten great results on lower mass arms, Rega or even the ultra-light SME 3009i). But I suppose using a heavier arm in evaluation confers more legitimacy.

THE MONO SESSIONS

VAS Ebony 103 Mono Cartridge

I have previously written here and there about the excellent VAS cartridge rebuilds (here), including my own Koetsu Black and Denon DL-301 Mk II. I have also reviewed the excellent stereo  VAS Ebony 103 (here), which actually plays mono LPs extremely well. This time around, it is the stablemate mono version of it. It is the same exact cartridge as mentioned in the Official Info.

After briefly testing it out on my Pioneer PL-10 (light arm), to very good effect (better than my one-of-a-kind Rao's mono MC), I got sidelined by other projects and articles. But installation on the heavier 12" Thomas Schick arm was an eye opener. It simply played everything I threw at it superbly.

Jazz on a good mono cartridge is a given, and so it was with the VAS. I dug out my tattered copy of Garner Encores (Columbia 6 Eye, which I previously wrote about here) and it sounded simply fabulous, better than ever. It literally rolled on, and I played both sides. I have always not understood why Erroll Garner is not better regarded. In Johnny Hodge's Joe's Blues (Verve), the varied styles and colors of the brilliant personnel were superbly captured (more below).

The shorter cantilever means a sharper attack and fast transient time and good PRaT, but that doesn't always benefit classical's. No need to worry, the VAS played my mono classical albums magnificently. I have always regarded late period mono records as excellent sounding. Bruno Walter's mono NYPO recordings (Columbia) belong to this camp. Brahms Symphony No. 2 was alternately lyrical (those singing strings!) and majestic, not at all inferior to his stereo Columbia Symphony remake. Similarly, Julius Katchen's Prokofiev 3rd (Decca) was crisply detailed and the piano sound was a delight (Ansermet's partnership goes without saying). If a cartridge can get the best out of both strings and piano, it is in already in the top echelon. Even Furtwangler's earlier low-fidelity Berlin recordings had more air about them than usual.

Denon DL-103 Plays Mono Given that the VAS mono cartridge is a tricked out Denon DL-103, I decided to listen to the same records using the progenitor. Well, there really was no comparison. Immediately noticeable was how much quieter the mono cartridge is. With the DL-103, instruments were not as full bodied and strings and brass had less sheen, and sometimes just a little coarseness creeps in (this is after all a solid state phonostage). I didn't listen that long.

Denon DL-102 Mono cartridge
Swapping in the Denon mono cartridge proved quite illuminating. For a moment, it seemed I was listening to the VAS again. Blacker background and much steadier and full-bodied replay. But! The VAS was definitely a little faster in transient and this made for telling differences on Joe's Blues. The organist Wild Bill Davis had a distinctive style; he often made his phrases undulate wildly in dynamics; sometimes the effect strangely was almost like a portamento. VAS brought that out fully, whereas with the Denon it was less obvious. With the VAS, I think I could identify Davis in a blind test, but with the Denon I'd not be so sure (Jimmy Smith?), you see what I mean. The VAS also definitely made the colors of the horns and guitar more individualistic. This kind of superb microdynamic performance is uncommon, and it is what I really value as a listener, to feel the touch (or breathing) of the performer.

With the classical tracks, the differences were there, but minimized. In the Brahms, with the VAS the strings sounded more ethereal (important in this symphony), but the tutti were no less stirring with the Denon; as a matter of fact, I felt compelled to finish the record! On the Decca LP, it was apparent the voltage of the Denon was a notch down, but still very satisfying.

Detour: Onto the Technics SL-1200
I then wanted to get some insight into the contribution of the turntable. So I switched to System II, (see sidebar): The Technics SL-1200 Mk II is connected to the Aurorasound Vida phonoamp, then to the Shindo Monbrisson preamp, which then drives the same LTA MicroZOTL 2.0 amp and YL horns. I could have connected the phonoamp directly to the LTA but I could not be bothered as I know very well the system's sound and hi-end credentials, using the LTA or not (with LTA here).

Denon DL-102 As expected, the Direct Drive turntable upped the jump factor, but is slightly granier. The Decca disc gained traction and excitement and the piano tone was more chiseled, though here and there the scrawniness of the strings were somewhat exacerbated (they were present on the Thorens too; don't forget this is an FFSS record with a different curve from RIAA). The same increase in urgency also informed the Brahms and Joe's Blues. VAS Ebony Mono Exactly as on the Thorens TD-124, VAS immediately proved more accomplished. Just as with the Denon, there was more jump factor, but this different front-end revealed the VAS' virtues just as well as the other. Wild Bill Davis played in exactly the same inimitable way, wild indeed! In Brahms, the lyricism of the string playing was just as evident. Although the Technics was not as nuanced as the Thorens TD-124, it still managed to show to a considerable extent everything the VAS was capable of (the corollary is, the VAS played nearly as well on the Technics as the Thorens, no small achievement). I was so delighted I plowed on with other classical LPs. Edwin Fischer's Mozart's Piano Concerto No. 20 with the LPO (Pathe) is not quite as well recorded as the other two, but it was just as musically rewarding. The legendary Fischer's piano playing goes without saying, but the setup clearly revealed also his beautiful pointing of the orchestral lines as conductor - a little tug here, a little emphasis here that lifted the accompaniment out of the ordinary, even more potent than that provided by Philharmonia/Krips on the reverse side. The VAS made the musician's intent very clear, and there cannot be higher accolade. Even with much dimmer older material, the music was still engaging, as shown by Kreisler's Brahms Violin Concerto with Berlin Staatsoper/Leo Blech (from 78's; Dacapo), where Kreisler was just magnificent. This cartridge plays everything with insight.

Mono Appraisal

• The Subject of (MC) Impedance Before I begin my appraisal, I'd like to digress a little on the subject of impedance, as it'd have some bearing on how I judge things (down below). Currently, low impedance MC cartridges, in mono even more than in stereo, are all the rage. This is because the high end has been making stereo low impedance MC cartridges for a long time, whereas their mono counterparts did not emerge until the more recent Mono Revival. This makes the offerings in this article anomalies. Indeed, the two ancient Denon's qualify as cultural relics, which makes the VAS an updated relic. :-) The lower the impedance, the lighter the coil, the fewer windings, and a more powerful magnet, but also a lower output. But lest you think this formula automatically leads to good sound, I can assure you this is not the case. Most of the high end companies produce low impedance stereo MC cartridges, but many to me are just bland (ZYX, many Lyra, Clearaudio, even many of today's Ortofon's, to name a few). I do think in general modern low impedance mono MC cartridges do better, partly due to the simpler requirements and the richer and more focused sound of mono. Impedance is not everything, as cartridge design is the art of manipulation of a limited few parts; the choice of material influences the sound just as much. Going back to high impedance MC designs, don't mistake me for favoring this approach. It just happens that some of my favorites belong to this group. The Denon DL-103 certainly (but also the DL-301 Mk II and DL-304; and the lovely Benz Micro Gold also has highish impedance). Of course, the high-output MC's by nature have high impedance and some can be good (Denon DL-102; I am also fond of the Denon DL-110; and several high output Dynavector's have serious repute); let us also not forget the inimitable Decca cartridges (not MC, in its own category), which I love. But high impedance MC can also be a disappointment too: witness my recent experience with the Hana SL (here), so you can bet I shall never consider their mono versions. As they say, the devil is in the details, and good sound is all in the implementation.

• Mono Replay There is no question that, should you have a fair number of mono LPs, you should consider getting a mono cartridge - it makes a great difference. The much quieter experience is priceless. Contrary to the erroneous perception of most audiophiles, though mono the soundstage is wide and images are well defined and fleshy. With these modern mono cartridges you also get the additional benefit  of being able to play bad stereo records with aplomb! In these I echo the feelings of Philip Holmes cited in my Denon DL-102 link.

• VAS vs Denon The difference between the VAS Ebony Mono and Denon DL-103 is instructive, but not unexpected. The heavier coil of the Denon (around 10x the output of the VAS) and its conical stylus (VAS is hyperelliptical and shorter) could go some way towards explaining the difference in sound. The most gratifying thing is the similar way they serve the music. The most interesting thing is that the VAS has character traits (fast transient, microdynamics) that are usually associated with low impedance MC's! I shall greatly miss the VAS when it's gone, but I could live with the Denon, as it is like a VAS with a somewhat broader stroke, but with its heart in the right place.

• VAS in Perspective How does VAS stand in the crowded modern MC Mono field? Other than my venerable Denon DL-102, I have no modern offerings to directly compare. Although I can't tell you directly, I do have a bit of experience listening to some highly regarded ones in others' systems (Miyajima Kotetu and Zero here; Ortofon Quintet Mono here; both systems I know well and are good sounding). Let us first do some spec comparisons. Magnet I am not sure what magnets the Miyajima's or the Ortofon use, but the VAS (Denon) uses high quality Alnico, something usually found in more expensive cartridges. Impedance Miyajima's and Ortofon are all low impedance designs; in contrast Denon is high impedance. See my first bullet for more. Stylus Like Denon DL-102, both Miyajima's employ conical stylus, though interestingly more recent Kotetu's are now Elliptical (likely market demand outweighing designer's intentions, as even Ortofon SPU's now entertain all kinds of stylus profiles!). The Ortofon Quintet Mono is Elliptical and the VAS is Hyperelliptical. Sound? Well, if I have to extrapolate, I'd think the VAS Ebony Mono shall likely easily stand up to the Kotetu and Ortofon; in fact I suspect it as having more finesse and articulation. I cannot be sure about the Zero, but I'd relish a chance to find out! Some of you may object to this as an ungrounded wild guess, but I'd like to say it is an educated guess, so let me tell you my reasoning. The Miyajima's and Ortofon in question, being low impedance, of course did well in force and touch and certainly I heard that! The VAS does brilliance too, but it also does subtlety, and these two are not commonly found together even in expensive cartridges! I did not hear that aspect of excellence in the other two, but then they were not played in my system so I cannot be entirely sure. Even if based solely on what I heard in my own system, the VAS strongly merits consideration by anyone interested in a reasonably priced mono MC cartridge with truly hi-end sound. I (and a legion of others, including industry people, like the late Verdier, of Platine Verdier fame) have always thought of the unique, iconoclastic and idiosyncratic Denon DL-103 as an excellent cartridge with a sound of its own that is competitive with many more expensive cartridges, including the now-popular low impedance types. VAS, being a rebuild service, surely knows the sound of an unbelievably wide spectrum of cartridges, and, judging by its rebadged Denon offerings, certainly knows the evergreen classic Denon DL-103 inside-out. Some of its tweaks, like the shorter cantilever and hyperelliptical stylus to counter-balance the higher coil weight and impedance of the original, are, in my opinion, brilliantly applied, surely the result of many trials and errors!

STEREO SESSIONS

Shure SC35C Cartridge, Part III
Previously, I wrote about this wonderful and rather unsung cartridge (link above). What irks me, and Shure fans, is that Shure had regrettably ended their cartridge operation since then, sign of a company that does not respect its own tradition. Now, we can only pray for a resurrection, but don't get your hopes up. Meanwhile, prices for old stock and used items have risen quite a bit!

This low compliance cartridge also should (with caveats) benefit from a heavier arm, which I didn't previously have. And so, with great pleasure, I plugged it (with the stock stylus) into the Thomas Schick. The result? Very good indeed.

On the Schick, it showed its mettle as a studio transcriber. Absolutely neutral and even-handed, with a full but tactile bass. So, what was the difference from my references? On Ansermet's Chabrier album (London) everything was in place, but missing just a little the swagger the humble Denon DL-103 MC can bring on. Similarly, on Persuasive Percussion's Misirlou track (Command Classics), the sinuous quality was not quite there. For us classical listeners, this has always been the case in MM vs MC, no exception, no matter what a reviewer says. But, one of the best MM cartridges, for sure. I kinda doubt my various V-15's would sound better. This round, I didn't play with the various styli I have, but perhaps I should!

Denon DL-103 Initially, on the Thomas Schick, I was using a Midas (aluminum shell) DL-103 (see link above), but for this article I shifted back to the stock version. While the heavier shell and the heavier headshell it was installed in theoretically profer an advantage, somehow I still narrowly prefer the stock one installed in a generic light shell. And for microdynamic expression, particularly at the leading edge, it proved better than the MM Shure.

12" Arm vs 9" Arm
Previously, writing about the Thomas Schick 12" Arm (here) I made several remarks: 1) it is not "slow" as I have heard many 12" arm setups to be; 2) a good 9" arm is still faster. This round, even if I am not using a 9" arm, I still concur fully with what I wrote.

The Thomas Schick is a pretty neutral arm, and I don't hear colorations. Whether it was the Denon DL-103, Shure SC35C or the Denon DL-102, the tonal balance on the Thorens TD-124 is much the same as on my other turntables (Thorens TD-309, Technics SL-1200, Audio-Technica AT-PL120). The difference is in the background, a little cleaner and darker, not as dramatic as going from a stereo cartridge to a mono cartridge on mono replay, but is there nonetheless. Going from a 9" arm to a 12", no matter what cartridge, the music becomes a little less lively. I had a long talk with Andy, and he feels the same. Interesting, though we are in the same ballpark, he is a person who likes things a little smoother than I, but he does think there is not much advantage to the 12". Most of his arms are 9" (though heavier and of more repute than the humble ones that I have).

The biggest difference I think is found with the MM Shure SC35C. Previously I absolutely marveled at the sheer grunt of this cartridge, particularly with rock material (see link above), but on the 12" arm it kind of "grew up" into a respectable transcriber. For sure, whatever little grit it had in the treble when mounted on the direct-drive AT was now completely smoothed out, but the killer bass had also been trimmed a little, and I kinda miss a little the former excitable nature (Andy would definitely differ from me here). Part of it has to do with the turntable too, I am sure. Also, for my taste, from the previous proceedings, despite the heavy weight and high output of the MC Denon DL-102 (usually on my Technics direct-drive), it didn't gain from being on the 12" Schick.

On the other hand, the MC Denon DL-103 just may have benefited a little from the 12" arm. In stock form, or even with an aluminum shell, with lesser records it can sometimes still have a bit of coarseness in the treble. This is minimized, but not eradicated, by the 12" Schick.

All of this may lead me to install some of my other cartridges on the Schick. I suspect the 12" arm benefits MC's more than higher-output MM's. It is about time I listen to my various Ortofon's (MC-3000 Mk II, 5000; Kontrapunkt C) In due time, perhaps during the holidays?

The calming nature of the 12" arm should not be exaggerated. We are talking about quite subtle aspects of reproduction here! What I am talking here is unlike what I previously found in HK, where many 12" setups just plainly sounded slow (sometimes excruciatingly so), even staid, but I think that was because of the ancillary gear that they use. Many are vintage aficionados who use vintage equipment, which could slow down the sound if partnered improperly with a wrong front-end or loudspeaker. More, damaging is that, down to the last one, an Ortofon SPU is used. This (12" + SPU) is like a ritual in HK, probably in Asia! Certainly, in Japan, most phono setups use either the Denon DL-103 or SPU and most of the phonoamps are configured for them. I concede the SPU is rich sounding and pleasing on vocals in particular, but it is seriously colored and lacking at the leading edge, with subpar microdynamics. Used well, it could still be quite good. Setup skills is important in all cases.

In this hobby, balance is not what everyone seeks; some are addicted to having more and more of the same colorations. If we use Zero as the ideal, +/- 5-10, say, would be acceptable to me (Andy then will be +/- 2-5), but certainly not +/- 20 or more! But the holiday is coming up, and we all surely should relax our standards and enjoy more music, and the friednship of our fellow audiophiles (even if they deviated greatly from the norm)!