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!

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)!

Shure M44-7 Stanton Pickering 380 Empire EDR.9 Harman Kardon Citation I

L: Empire EDR.9; R: Pickering/Stanton 380, pics borrowed from the web.

Old MM/MI Cartridges: Shure M44-7, Pickering/Stanton 380, Empire EDR.9

Review: Harman Kardon Citation I (with Overview of the tubed Citation Series), Part I

A Great Horn System
Talk Vinyl: Vintage Cartridge and Preamp Classics

HiFi Basics IV: Re-Visit The Past

Letter from NYC (62) 2017 (1)

!Addendum (10/28/17): Citation I, Part II and Part III had been published. These record recent, extensive action against other preamps.

Heard in NYC but article finished in HK. This is a major article, but it took so long because most of the article was accidentally erased just prior to publication and I had to re-write the whole thing. Ah!

As a result of my relatively recent re-discovery of Empire 2000 series cartridges (here), I have been experimenting with older-design MM/MI cartridges. As I had been a long-term user of Shure (V15II-V), I started with the SC35C (here), and now the M44-7. Concurrently, my analog guru Andy L had also embarked on his own old MM/MI cartridge journey (to complement his downstairs horn system; see below), which took him to the Pickering/Stanton 380.

Mind you, even more than me, Andy had been there (the MM/MI era) before! We share the similarity that we had been mostly MC users in the recent decades (exclusively for me; though Andy had always used the MI Decca).

Three Vintage MM/MI Cartridges

• Shure M44-7 Along with the Stanton 500, this must be the DJ cartridge of choice, and has been in production for the longest time. Quite the opposite of its stablemate SC35C, it tracks lighter (1.5-3 gm) and has much higher compliance. Mine is a vintage "gull wing" body. I then got an old original Mexican Shure stylus from the 80's and a Pfanstiehl 4759-D7. The output is very high at 9.5 mV, enough to overload some phonostages, so beware. The Shure M44-7 was actually what re-kindled Andy's interest in old MM design, though he now prefers the Pickering 380 (below). 

• Pickering/Stanton 380 The history of the Moving Iron Pickering/Stanton 380 is quite complicated, and it has a cult following. Info on the web is quite piecemeal; google and read the Audiokarma and Audioasylum threads for some basic info. Andy generously let me play with one fitted with a red stylus and I tracked it as per Andy at 4 gm. This is a heavy (14 gm) cartridge with a low compliance stylus and so will likely do better in a heavier arm, which I lack. Output is even higher than the M44-7, as high as a whopping 15 mV, so overload is even more of a concern.

• Empire EDR.9 While surfing Ebay for M44-7 needles I came across an immaculate specimen of this (with an extra stylus) and bought it on a whim. Google for a lot of scattered info (start perhaps with the vinylengine and audiogon threads). This MI cartridge was quite expensive in its days but the light body actually looks cheaper than the 2000 series; it looks like plastic but a French post says Carbon-Aluminum. This is a light cartridge which also tracks light (1 gm), and output is 4.5 mV. It can track Quad LPs but I am not into that. The engine is MI, and the LAC (large area contact) stylus is Shibata. The frequency response reaches an amazing 50k Hz.

Overview: Harman Kardon Citation Series (tubed)

Many moons ago (I think it was the early 90's; through the historic Audiomart) I started buying tubed vintage gears, like Eico and Citation. The Citation I to V were tubed products, designed by the legendary Stuart Hegeman just prior to the solid state era. I bought the Citation I and V in very good condition. A decade later in HK I chanced upon a cosmetically challenged but highly original II (which no one wanted). Have never had or heard the III (tuner) and IV (preamp, usually acknowledged as the lesser cousin of the I, but there are dissenters, like Jim Fosgate [see comment section below for link]). Here is a great original brochure on the tubed Citations. There is a lot of info on Citation "upgrades" and modifications on the net. As you know, I am conservative on this issue. I appreciate someone like Jim McShane (his classic and long running Citation Page) who keeps many units alive and offers selfless advice, but I don't think one should turn these classics into "super-units", as advocated by many other modifiers.

Citation I (original manual) This has always been regarded as top drawer vintage. No less a figure than Bob Carver used to service/upgrade this (see this very interesting cached link, particularly regarding the MC mod). This is a monster, built like a tank and with a total of 9 tubes (4 x 12AX7; 5 x 12AT7).

Over the years, I had fired up my bone stock unit from time to time. But, for some reason, I have never taken to it and preferred my modern preamps. This time though, things turned out a bit differently. It happened because Andy L wanted a vintage unit that could handle most of the pre-RIAA equalizations, and there are few units better equipped for this task than the Citation I. I fired mine up with CD and LP and was quite taken by the sound it produced in my current horn system. I didn't play with the equalization curves but I was instantly convinced by its rightness, even with the line input. Why the difference between now and then? Read on...

Citation V I bought this together with my I, and I have never regretted it. As a matter of fact, I regard the Citation V as one of my favorite vintage amps. I used the 7581 tubes and got really great sound. No, it did not have the ultimate bass control, nor the subtlety of Western Electric (or Motiograph), BUT it is certainly one of the best and most powerful 6L6 class amps that I have heard. It balances power and refinement, and it is suitable for amps from efficient horns to reasonably efficient modern loudspeakers. It is a little sweeter than its stablemate, the II. This is a sleeper. Go to the Jim McShane Page for more info.

Citation II In HK, in the late 90's, I chanced upon a cosmetically challenged but functionally great unit, which I bought for a song. It is utterly amazing, powerful and quite refined, even with Yugo KT90 tubes (haven't tried the current variants). If you want to use genuine KT88, Jim McShane has an easy resistor mod that will keep your valued tubes running longer. IMHO, this amp is absolutely tops and it is a shame that many boutique/garage operations had pilfered the world class transformers for their own (lesser) amps. Go to the Jim McShane Page for more info.

As an advice, don't buy an extensively modified Citation unit. Judiciously restored, yes; "upgraded", NO.

Equipment Used:
Analog: Audio-Technica AT-PL120
Preamp: Harman Kardon Citation I
Amp: Wavac MD-811
Loudspeakers: YL 4-way horns

Sonic Impressions

• Shure M44-7 From the word go, my old specimen performed flawlessly. The 80's Mexican stylus sounded just a little better than the generic Pfanstiehl. It is bold and dramatic, yet a little smoother (particularly at the top) than its stablemate SC35C (but with less grunt in the bass). It plays music of all genres equally well, and I cannot think of a modern MM cartridge that can do the same (Ortofon 2M Red and Black sound good, but lack drama). Overall, except for hard rock, I'd give the nod to the M44-7 over the SC35C, but I reserve the right to change my opinion later. It's that close.

• Pickering/Stanton 380 I tracked the red stylus as per Andy at 4 gm. It performed absolutely marvelously in my system. As Andy L had indicated, this is a cartridge that can play everything well. It has a unique smoothness allied to good resolution, certainly more refined than the Shure's, but with less perceived jump factor despite its very high output. The only drawback is a slightly reticent treble, which may actually be the character of the red stylus, as Andy's gold stylus seemed a little more sparkling (see below). 

• Empire EDR.9 This is a completely different beast from the two cartridges above. Although it retains the Empire smoothness (a la 2000 series), its sound is amazingly modern, closer to MC's. BUT beware, This cartridge is VERY sensitive to VTA. At first I got a very lean sound, but proper adjustment proved rewarding. Another Empire winner.

• Harman Kardon Citation I In contrast to my previous attempts, this time around this preamp sounded very fine in my horn system, partnered the above cartridges flawlessly, and revealed their different characters. This is what I call transparency. Its performance with digital is also beyond reproach. Why the difference this time? Read on.

Andy L's Wonderful Horn System

Andy's "Downstairs System", used for "casual listening" of old LP's, has remained much the same as last reported. Current Iteration:

Cartridge: Pickering 380 black body with D3807ATG stylus in gold color

Turntable: Walker Proscenium Gold Signature 

Preamp: Conrad Johnson Premier 2

Amp: Canary CA 300 w/Western Electric 300b reissued tubes

Loudspeakers: 4-way - JBL 075 ring radiators, JBL  2440 compression drivers with 2390 horns and baffled lenses, Altec 515b woofers in Altec A7 cabinet, Entec SW-1 active subwoofers.

Crossovers: JBL LX-5 and diy 7000Hz with L-pad

Interconnects: Monster Cable Interlink Reference A, Magnan Type Vi

Speaker cable: 16, 18 gauge zip cords, WE solid-core wires

With Conrad Johnson Premier 2 As reported before, the system was quite listenable and easy on the ears. Although I have not mentioned it before, I have always been bothered by something in the lower midrange/midbass - a lack of cleanness or resolution or perhaps speed. I suspect this had actually led Andy L to regard the system as "not good for classical", which I agreed with, UNTIL...

With Citation I We swapped in the Citation I and I was dumbfounded by the change. Whatever bothered me before with certain music just completely vanished. Not only did all the pop and jazz LP's retained their flavor, we even started playing one classical LP after another, and all were well rendered. My clarinet player friend Paul was mightily smitten by Richard Stoltzman's Tashi performances, now sadly neglected. The Stravinsky was my favorite, with bite and pizzaz. Hey, with one component change, this is no longer just an "easy listening" setup, but one capable of rivaling the "Upstairs System" (see link above) in classicals! I also felt Andy's 380 (with gold stylus) is a little more agile in the leading edge (than the red stylus in my setup), but this could also be a factor of his superior TT/arm (my Audio-Technica is not ideal, as detailed above). However, let it be known, with extrapolation, the difference is not that great and the red stylus is still a great one.

Thoughts on the Horn System with Altec 515 I confess to never liking the Altec 515. It does not go deep enough, but Andy ameliorates it with a subwoofer, which is exactly what I'd do, but that is what many "purists" would refuse to do. Despite its nominal efficiency, I have actually never heard it sound proper with a SET amp. Rather, the two previous setups which sounded better to me both employed higher powered amps: a full Altec system driven by a push-pull amp (McIntosh); and a rare successful 3-way electronic crossover, employing also massive PP amp for it. Andy's system (with the Citation I) is so far the only one I have heard that has the system driven well by a low-powered SET amp. Importantly, I think Andy's system taught me something about this famous/infamous driver. I think, what I have always disliked about this driver boils down to its cabinet coloration (I personally don't think the original A5/A7 cabinets are for home use; not much one can do short of draconian measures) and coupling with the midrange driver. The Citation I is obviously a great deal cleaner (less colored) in this critical crossover range than the massively capacitor coupled CJ.

Thoughts on Conrad Johnson I really cannot say much. I am going to do an Overview one day. I just think they are now on the wrong track. The Premier 2 is one of their older products, but I personally prefer their simpler and earlier PV series. Adding massive capacitors is not a solution (though one taken shared by other manufacturers, like BAT).

HiFi Basics IV/Food for Thought

• HiFi Basics IV - Revisit the Past Again and again, my re-visits to things I had once left behind taught me a lot. Don't over-interpret this. By leaving behind, I mostly mean putting aside - if it is really crap, I'd have sold it, not put it aside. This is much like life. Whether wisely or not, we take detours, and we learn from our meanderings. Fortunately, with hifi, we can easily "make up the lost years", whereas with real life, one more often than not cannot do that: there are loved ones who we only later realized we had under-appreciated; there were opportunities we missed that would never come back. We play the same piece of music or watch the same movie, or re-read the same book, over and over, and each time we learn something new - this is because we have matured and progressed. As some sage said, time is wasted on the youth. But I say, we are never old enough, or not given the chance to be. No matter how smart you are, the world is not really "at your fingertips", and we all make mistakes, even simple ones! So, while it is essential that we hone our ability to judge, we must also reflect back on the correctness of the judgements we had made in the past or in haste. I have seen a lot of audiophiles who have never kept a single extraneous component, because they are so sure of their A/B judgement, but who ultimately had to completely upend themselves. There is really not much progress and no single piece of gear is omnipotent, and some take time to reveal their secrets. I shall write much more on this in my HIFi Basics series. Watch this space.

• Vintage Preamp - A Reflection It is important to clarify what I mean by vintage preamp. The Citation I is actually a latter-day "vintage" that straddles the transition from tube to solid state. Perhaps for this reason, it has a neutrality that appeals to me now, particularly with my horn system. Citation I - My Feelings Now and Then So, why has my perception of Citation I changed? I mulled over this, and I can only come up with this: My previous use of the Citation I were with conventional, less efficient loudspeakers, not with horns. My super efficient horns brought out the best in the Citation I (and vice versa). I cannot remember clearly, but I know I never like to suffer slow vintage equipment. My YL horns are super-fast, and don't suffer from this. Vintage preamps are perhaps only for very efficient loudspeakers of their days, not for modern loudspeakers, which make them sound slow (they are).

2016 in Review

pic has distortion at the edges - the Pioneer loudspeakers are not trapezoids! Click to enlarge.

2016 in Review
Letter from NYC (58) 2016 (14)

A belated Season's Greetings!

This Blog is now over 8 years old. Due to family matters, my output (in terms of articles written) hit an all-time low in 2012/13. Since then, there has been a small but steady increase. However, since I am buying fewer things and the stuff I do buy in HK tend to be small "gadgets", there is less to report on "serious" current products. However, I now focus more on older products and my own things that I have neglected previously, a valid trade-off. A little more than a year ago, I started the "HiFi Basics" series, but due to my somewhat compulsive nature have managed only 3 articles so far. I hope 2017 shall see more entries under that label.

Most Significant Events

• Kondo System Re-Make In a coming article I shall detail my efforts at matching loudspeakers to my Kondo Ongaku. Mind you, this is at my present small abode in HK. There were quite a few candidates and the results were, to say the least, quite surprising! After I started this effort I acquired an old Audio Note (Kondo design) M7 with built-in Phono. Its smaller size allowed me to use it in on an IKEA shelf (see pic above). It would be a shame not to use a turntable, so I just managed to squeeze in the smallest that I have, the humble Pro-Ject RPM 1.3. Then I added a subwoofer!!!! I assure you the end-result was quite satisfying, earning the approvals of my music lover friends Seng and wss! Coming soon...

• Vintage Cartridges Although this started 5 years ago when I re-tested my Empire 2000 cartridges (here), things didn't get serious until recently. Shure SC35C After initial failure, I finally got this "DJ" cartridge right (here)! Although my sample is current production, it is a replica of a vintage creation. I have yet to put this low compliance cartridge on a heavy arm, and it is already darn good. Warning: In some systems the treble could be just a little on the unrefined side. I rather think of it as a "monitor" type product, not the kindest to bad recordings. I just noticed its street price has gone up quite a bit to around $59. Still, quite a bargain! Shure M44-7 The ones currently sold are replicas of this vintage relic, beloved by DJ's. My sample just happened when I spotted a vintage body and NOS Empire replacement on Ebay, and so may not be representative. In any case, I just installed it yesterday as replacement for the SC35C on my cheap AT PL-120 and was absolutely floored - my cartridge of the year! Stanton 380 I heard this at my friend Andy's and took one back home to play. It has a very attractive rich hue and plays anything well. There shall be big article on these cartridges soon. Happy New Year already! Mono Cartridge Finally I got a mono MC, the Taiwanese Raos, and I am very satisfied. Unfortunately, Master Rao has passed away and these are not obtainable. Nagatron Ribbon Cartridge heard at Andy's was very impressive!

Vintage Loudspeakers Although in 2016 I have heard megabuck loudspeakers of the caliber of Magico Q7MkII, top-rated in any magazine, my kudos go to much older designs:

• Dahlquist DQ20 (reviewed here) was astonishing in how it made the music come alive, unequivocally leaving an expensive and well reviewed modern loudspeaker in the shade.

• JBL L20T Even this unassuming vintage JBL (reviewed here), which can be had for perhaps $200, is over-achieving. I was thinking of trying out Andrew Jones' new Elac B5/6 just for fun (I have a thing for inexpensive bookshelves), but after I got these JBL's I completely dispelled the idea (after all, I know his designs, as I have his recent Pioneer SP-BS21LR).

Headphone Stax SRS 2170 (my review here) is all I need in a headphone! Although this is a current product, both the design and the sound have been around for a long time. Vintage reproduction again!

Buffer Amp Though a niche product, the iFi iTube is just wonderful. If you need some bloom, give it a serious thought!

Cable The Gotham DGS-1 continues to gain my admiration. Although not the best in hifi parameters, there is definitely something that is very attractive to this simple cable - a fluency that just makes music come alive with great presence and PRaT (the best analogy is non-oversampling in digital conversion). More and more of this cable are finding their way into my systems.

Brief Mentions My 47 Lab 4718 Shigaraki Phonoamp is finally running in and providing solid support for my mono Raos cartridge. My resurrected EAR 509 Mk II dealt a coup de grace to unreasonably priced Conrad-Johnson. I also acquired a Naim Nait I - no surprise as I previously owned and loved a II and still have the III. Sound is in the same mould.

Happy 2017!

Shure SC35C, BAT P5, ARC PH1, Shindo

Review: Shure SC35C Cartridge, Part II
Letter from NYC (53) 2016 (9)
Review: BAT VK-P5
Vinyl Talk: MM vs MC, Part I
Phonoamp Shootout: BAT P5 vs ARC PH1 vs Musical Surroundings Phonomena II vs Parasound JC3

Note: At first I was perplexed that I got terrible results from the Shure SC35C (see Review: Shure SC35C, Part I), but I now know why. Read on.

Shure SC35C
Puzzling First Impression Almost a year ago, I read a Stereophile article by Herb Reichert, in which he (like others on the net) praises the evergreen $35 DJ Shure SC35C cartridge, used on a Pioneer direct-drive PLX-1000 (his review of the TT here). Now, HR is a seasoned reviewer (though now on the cheap), and the Pioneer he uses is almost the same thing as my AT-PL120 (I suspect they have the same OEM). As he got curious about the Shure, I did too. I bought one from Amazon and enlisted my idling Pioneer PL-10 for the purpose. As stated in my Note and the link above, the result I got was terrible. Frankly, I have never heard a worse sounding setup.

Rejuvenation/Culprit Revealed Still perplexed by the result, this time around I decided to shift the SC35C to my Audio-Technica AT-PL120 for a second chance. As I took off the cartridge leads on the Pioneer headshell, I noticed that they have deteriorated quite a bit, with clip barely hanging on. I installed it on the AT-PL120 and was immediately captivated. Yes, it was a little rough at first, but now I could hear the potential (more sonic notes down below). There! Cartridge Leads are easily damaged with time and during manipulation, and any poor connection adversely affects the sound. The degree of damage the leads did still amazes me.

I added the AT-PL120/Shure SC35C to my reference System II. As I have 2 Thorens tables fighting for the Shindo Monbrisson's 2 phono inputs, I needed to add a phono amp anyway, I used the opportunity for a little fitting.

BAT VK-P5
This is an older model, a super-bargain at current second-hand prices. As you can see from the pic, its battleship built and topology bears great resemblance to its current offerings, including the current flagship VK-P12SE (just rave-reviewed in the current May/June 2016 TAS). If you compare, the more expensive offerings differ little in topology, more in component grade and added options, like input transformers (I prefer my own) and output transformers. The P5 uses 8x6DJ8 and 2x6SN7. I have all old stock tubes in them.

The P5 is highly configurable. The maximum (high) gain of 56 db is a little low for very low output cartridges (like my Denon DL-304), but the low gain is a highish 50 db. One can further trim two pots to attenuate another 6 db (44 db). Two dip-switches allow for loading and capacitative adjustments.

For some reason, I have never formally written this up. Perhaps it is because I have previously only used it in balanced mode with the BAT VK-3i preamp, not my usual connection (RCA, as I use SET amps). My previous experience, with Air Tight PC-1 and with Koetsu Black, was very positive, and so is completely at odds with the surprisingly negative review on 10audio (usually this site is OK) and more in keeping with Toneaudio (summary only; more details in its review of the similar P6).

Compared to some other big names, BAT gears are less popular. I think this is due to their insistence on balanced topology. While the preamps have concessions to RCA's, the P5 phono amp does not; there is only a single pair of balanced output, necessitating the use of adaptors when used with non-balanced gears.

Audio Research (ARC) PH1 There is not much info on the net. For an introduction, see my previous experience.

Parasound JC3 Previously reviewed extensively (see here).

Musical Surroundings Phonomena II (see here).

System:
Analog Rig: Audio-Technica AT-PL120/Shure SC35C (and other after-market styli)
Preamp: Shindo Monbrisson (has MM stage)
Amp: Wavac MD-811
Loudspeakers: YL Audio 4-way horns
Phonoamps: Musical Surroundings Phonomena II; Parasound JC3; BAT VK-P5, ARC PH-1
XLR to RCA Cable: Gotham GAC-2/1 and DGS-1

Sonic Impressions

• Shure SC35C (new stock) Compliance This is a very low compliance cartridge, and my low-medium mass arms are theoretically not optimal (I added a headshell weight). You can press on the stylus and it hardly budges, maybe great for child-proofing? VTF Recommended tracking force is 4-5 gm, and I use 4.5 with no problem. Output As we shall see, the high output of 5mV proved problematic to my system with high efficiency loudspeakers. Initial Sound/Run-In As soon as I mounted the SC35C in the AT-PL120, everything just snapped into focus. Force, colour, everything just exploded. Initially the sound was rather coarse at the top, but it started to smooth out after 20 hours. Likely not fully run in yet even as of this writing.

• SC35C + Shindo Monbrisson Trying the other phono amps made me realize the presentation of Shindo's MM section - a somewhat softer presentation and narrower stage. But it was perfect for the rather long run-in period. The Shindo tamed the edge of the SC35C (it is important to remember my horns magnify such things) and for the initial period that was what I used. Unusually for me, but highly appropriate for MM, I played many rock and pop records. Even early on, the SC35C took well to rock and the male voices: Willy DeVille's Miracle, Leonard Cohen's Songs of Love and Hate, Dylan's Nashville Skyline and Pink Floyd's The Wall were all rendered with unforced dynamic swing, a fast, clean and powerful bass. On these rock/pop LPs the SC35C outperforms my MC's, and its ease of delivery is just admirable. Only when I played the period instrument Bach Violin Concerti (La Petit Bande; Proarte) or digitally recorded Linda Ronstadt For Sentimental Reasons was some residual upper midrange glare revealed. Of course, with MC's vocals and instrumental details are more nuanced, but the Shure is satisfying enough and rhythmically even more urgent.

• SC35C + Phonomena II Like before, I had no luck with this one. I tried the various capacitance valued but none was able to change the sterile sound. Nothing offensive and neat, but not inspiring either, and that is a no no for LPs. Abandoned again.

• SC35C + ARC PH-1 Now, this is more like it. The soundstage expanded in width and depth significantly. Bags of air was accompanied by a little over-the-top treble. To smooth out the sound, I resorted to an old Audioquest Ruby, a solid core cable. That did it perfectly. It shows once again that solid cores can sometimes work when stranded prove unsatisfactory. It also shows that one should consider what the vintage item was paired during its time. For the ARC PH-1, it was likely the era of Monster and MIT, old models that were not so transparent.

• SC35C + Parasound JC3 or BAT VK-P5 Parasound JC3 Previously I had only availed myself of its excellent high-gain MC stage. I was surprised that the (47 db gain) MM sound was equally impeccably detailed, quiet and smooth. Just like the ARC PH-1, as compared to the Shindo, the soundstage width and depth both expanded. Tonally and dynamically a very even performer. This is a full balanced design. BAT VK-P5 The sound is very detailed and with a wide and deep soundstage. Surprisingly for a tubed unit, the transient attack is very fast and dynamics superlative. The unit also needs an hour to sound its best. As this is tube, there is a little more harmonics, but overall the sound is rather neutral, with just a hint of tube bloom; hence I can see why some tube people may not like this. I tried all of the capacitance options but the basic sound remained the same. As the output of the SC35C is a high 5mV, I used the lowest gain of 44 db by trimming the pots all the way down (see above). Parasound vs BAT Compared to the Parasound (even higher 47 db gain), the BAT subjectively sounds like the gain is too high, and the sound becomes just a little wilder/bright with certain styli. I interpret this to mean the BAT VK-P5 is more dynamic than the Parasound. Part of this is also due to its fast transient attack, again subjectively faster than the Parasound. Put it another way, the solid state Parasound veers towards the warm of tubes, whereas the tubed BAT tends not to be tubey. For BAT, I think it is somewhat unusual to be in the position of having insufficient gain for very low output MC's but seemingly too much gain for high output MM's. Hum Like when I had the Raos mono cartridge (here), both the Parasound and BAT have a grounding issue that I could not get rid of. When the music is playing, it is low enough to be inaudible, but one can just hear it during quiet passages. Maybe the fully balanced phonoamp deos not work well with unbalanced downstream gears?

• Aftermarket Styli Old Stock 766-D7 (SS35C) I first tried this when the Shindo was used. The sound was somewhat veiled and too smooth. However, with the Parasound and BAT, the sound blossomed with a natural balance. It is a little more refined than the stock, but the stock has a stronger and more projected midrange (particularly evident with male voices). Pfanstiel 4766-D7 The box says Switzerland SS35C, 0.7 mil con., but the seller advertised it as N35X, which was why I bought it. Out of the box I knew something was different. The stylus is much more compliant. Indeed, at 4.5 gm, the belly of the cartridge was almost sweeping the record. I then tried 1.5 gm (like an N35X) and it worked very well, without tracking errors! The stylus looks conical, but it s behaving like an elliptical. Maybe the suspension has deteriorated? I don't know. In any case, the sound is very clear, more airy, extended and refined on top than the stock cartridge. Not withstanding the curious difference in compliance of the Pfanstiel, I have to say all three styli sound more similar than different.

Conclusion The SC35C is wildly good and cheap. It does many things better than even an expensive MC (like effortless bass) and makes one seriously wonder why one should spend more than $40. As a result of this, I have also embarked on a project of rejuvenating my Empire's (2000E/III and 2000Z) and I also took them to listen at Andy's setup. So more later as we delve deeper into MM vs MC.

SME 3012, Thorens TD-125, Pioneer PL-10, Denon DL-103, Shure SC35C

Letter from NYC (43) 2015 (5): The Long and Winding Road
Talk Vinyl: Saving SME 3012; Rehabilitation of Thorens TD-125 and Pioneer PL-10
Talk Vinyl: Turntable Setup
Review: Denon DL-304, Part II
Review: Shure SC35C, Part I

Attention: In the Later Shure SC35C, Part II I discovered something and reversed the finding in Part I.

Acknowledgement: I want to thank my friend and analog guru Andy L for his gift of 2 hex-wrenches for SME, without which I'd not have been able to setup the SME 3012.

Related Links from this Blog:
All my Turntables (Arms and Cartridges): A (Rambling) Overview for background material on Thorens TD-125 and Pioneer PL-10.
2011 Report on reactivation of my Thorens TD-124 (with SME 3009S2i/Denon DL-304).
Previous report of Denon DL-304 on the Thorens TD-125/3009S2i

Warning: Purists who lose sleep over setup precision need not read further. You have been warned.

A few years ago, my friend Mark gave me a Thorens TD-124 and a really beat SME 3012. In 2011, with help of my friend and analog guru Andy L we restored the TD-124 to use and it has become my mainstay in Reference System 2. Finally, four years later I managed to revamp the SME 3012 to working condition, but not before a lot of hard work!

Click pics to enlarge.

Saving "SME 3012"
This particular specimen of the SME 3012 is in poor condition. I wonder where the hell it had been before Mark found it, and if I can still call it an SME 3012 (therefore the brackets)!


Deteriorated Rubber The rubber coupler between the arm tube and counterweight bearing tube had deteriorated, with the latter drooping. It still holds and for now that is the way it will be.

Incomplete Counterweight The main part of the counterweight as well as the rider weight are missing. The small counterweight on it is not enough to balance even a light cartridge, and I had to fix some weight over it by blu-tac to achieve balance (see right pic). Andy L told me the rider weight is very important for balance, but until I source the rest of the counterweight (expensive no doubt) that is the way it will have to be.

Head Shell Missing This should have the traditional SME headshell with just two holes for headshell screws. Given my balance woes, I decided to use a very light and cheap retro-style head shell with screw slots that looks like a replica of my Pioneer head shell (see top pic and pic below). Looks good with the SME.

Headshell Collar Problem This almost caused me to give up! The collar had been messed up. It was rotated but getting it back in position was not hard. The real headache was inside: 3 out of 4 pins were sunken and frozen, not making contact with head shell pins when checked by multimeter. I wanted to remove the collar and clean the pins. Andy told me there should be a small screw underneath (like my SME 3009) but there is none, just a longitudinal groove. Perhaps this is a crimped version (could not find anything on the internet)? If anyone has info on this, let me know. I did not have pure alcohol and so applied a liberal amount of 70% rubbing alcohol and some aerosol, and repeated several times. No luck even after prolonged and rigorous probing with the leads of my multimeter. Finally, I resorted to WD40 (I know, it is oil based and not so good). After a few days, I was ecstatic to find 2 of the 3 frozen pins had popped out completely, while the last one did just a little, enough to make contact, perhaps? With the head shell installed, I used the multimeter to test continuity and discovered a fresh set of problems.

Pin-Out Mystery I tested for continuity between the head shell cartridge cables and the output terminals. At first, I got no continuity on all 4 pins. In desperation, and with the realization that everything is skewed about this particular specimen, I tested all combinations, and soon found the pin out at the collar to be all screwed up. All 4 pins have continuity, but not according to convention (that is, looking at the head shell, red is not top right). This is not a problem; I mapped it out and simply re-shuffled the cartridge clips. I know there are instances of pin out deviations, but this one matches with none I can found on the internet. Again, perhaps some reader can enlighten me.

No Connecting Cable Well, like many others I am not fond of the original SME cable anyway. With the connections sorted out, I decided to re-terminate in RCA's. I made a small board out of two small rectangular slices of expired credit cards and fixed the RCA terminals on it. It is a bit warped, emphatically not elegant but it works (see pics).

No Anti-Skating Assembly For a 12" arm, this should not be a problem. I shall do without. Note the Thomas Schick arm does not even have this feature.

Armboard for Thorens TD-124 Two years ago, I bought in the second-hand market in HK an unused acrylic armboard for the 3012, said to be from Singapore (if I remember correctly). I am not fond of acrylic, but it is better to get the job done than wait. I took it back to NYC last year but misplaced it. This year I found it and got down to work. Hell! The base plate screw holes were drilled too small for the screws to go in all the way. Anyway, the thing felt reasonably secure and I left it at that, for now. The base plate is missing one rubber grommet, so in lieu I used a little bit of paper to achieve leverage (you can see this if you enlarge the right pic). I know you are frowning!

Ditch the Plinth! Clearance Problem After all that, as I tried to affix the armboard, I realized to my great dismay that the bottom part of the arm could not clear the wooden plinth! Damn! I just had to ditch the plinth, for now. I rested the TT on a solid slice of kitchen counter top (apartment renovation leftover; IKEA; recommended for its solid sonic properties; see pic). The long screws were skewed, so I balanced the TT by putting small folds of cardboard beneath. Insecure? Not me, maybe the TT, or maybe you?

Cartridge Well, what better choice than the Denon DL-103? In the previous article, I just installed the variant DL-A100, so I decided on this most humble, and most over-performing, of cartridges. After all, this is what I am most familiar with, and still use in HK (here)

Alignment Lacking the SME protractor, and lacking the original SME head-shell, I used the Dr. Feikert protractor. I used the Stevenson favored by SME. I aligned the first point (step 1). After much fiddling, the end groove (step 3) still aligns much better than the start (step 2). Let it be!

Whew! Done!

Thorens TD-125 Rehabilitated
When I reactivated the Thorens TD-124, my SME 3009S2i, together with the Denon DL-304, was removed from my TD-125 (see link above) and so my TD-125 went MIA. Now, the 3009S2i was returned to the TD-125, together with the Denon DL-304 carrtdige. Welcome back, old friend!

Shure SC35C/Pioneer PL-10 Rehabilitated

The cause for resurrecting this first TT of mine was because of a recent Stereophile article by Herb Reichert, in which he (like others on the net) praises the evergreen $35 DJ Shure SC35C cartridge, used on a cheap Pioneer direct-drive PLX-1000 (his review of the TT here). Now, HR is a seasoned reviewer (though now on the cheap), and the Pioneer is almost the same thing as my AT-PL120. As he got curious about the Shure, I did too. I enlisted the Pioneer PL-10 for the purpose.

The PL-10 has no VTA adjustment, but it was designed in an era for Shure cartridges, and sure enough VTA looks to be correct. Alignment was easily achieved too.

Associated Gears (Reference System II):
-Preamp: Shindo Monbrisson (MC input used for Denon DL-103; MM for Shure SC35C)
-SUT: WE 285 for Denon DL-304 (into Shindo's MM input)
-Amp: Wavac MD-811
-Loudspeakers: YL 4-way horns

LP's Used for Testing Same as in my recent big phonoamp report.

Sonic Impressions/Comments

• Thorens TD124/SME 3012/Denon DL-103 I bet the SME 3012/Denon DL-103 combo is seen on as many decent TT's (certainly Garrard's and Thorens) as anything else! Tried and true, for sure. On the TD-124, compared to the SME 3009S2i/Denon DL-304 (see link above), the sound is richer, and background is darker. Compared to my Thorens TD-309/Denon DL-A100 (cartridge also new; see here), the sound is more solid and effortless. From memory, compared to my Garrard 301/Thomas Schick 12"/Denon DL-103 "Midas" (see here), the sound is crispier, with faster transient, but here I think the characteristics of the TT influence the sound greatly. However I look at it, even in barely restored condition, the venerable arm is a winner and deserves its reputation. Although I am not necessarily a fan of 12" arms, considering that I have used a large number of SME arms in the past, including the 3009, 3009R, 3009S2i, 3010R etc, this fills in the gap and is long due! Even if the arm is incomplete, I am a happy man! Andy L though does not think too highly of SME and uses none on any of his many TT's.

• Thorens TD-125/SME3009S2i/Denon DL-304 Given my long familiarity with the Denon DL-304 on the SME 3009S2i, would this return to ground zero disappoint? Not at all! The SME3009S2i/Denon DL-304 gives a slightly lighter sound on the TD-125 than on the TD-124, but it is more similar than different. Excellent by any means, and welcome back! This also re-affirms what a great TT the TD-125 is!

• Denon DL-103 I have continuously used this cartridge for almost 2 decades, and can claim long familiarity. On the Rega RB250/300 arm it has always sounded very good (I know there are detractors). For my priorities, it has almost always performed miraculously on innumerable combos. It is the drama queen, and even much more expensive cartridges usually fail to approach its human touch. On a 12" arm, it certainly has more composure, but even if you only have a shorter/medium mass arm, you should still try out this classic. Like it or not, one of a kind. I should tell you Andy L thinks the cartridge, though otherwise fine, to be lacking in full range deep bass.

• Denon DL-304 Despite being from the same family, this cartridge is way different from the DL-103. Its low output demands the best from partnering gears. Optimally set up, the sound is very different from the DL-103. It has less drama, more refinement. The DL-304 is cheaper than a decent Ortofon MC, but I think just as good (if you can handle it), and this is coming from a long time Ortofon MC user. Given its low output, SUT's are recommended as an option.

• Shure SC35C In the 70's and 80's, I have used almost all incarnations of the V15, from the II to the V. I have always liked their neutral and natural sound. Alas, the V15 is no more (I seriously don't understand why), and the closest you can get is a 97ED, which is a damn fine MM too. I had used the V15 to fine effect on the Pioneer PL-10, but the SC35C disappoints. It is not run-in, but the performance was so bad I was literally taken aback. The sound is veiled, without resolution at either end of the frequency spectrum. Never had I tried something praised in the mainstream press to such dire results. In desperation, I substituted the transistor iFi iPhono or Nagra BPA (report here) and the result was better than the tubed MM of the Shindo due to more extended frequency extremes. This kind of result was completely out of my expectation, and has never happened before! Still, despite the improvement the result was not what you'd call great. I also briefly tried the SC35C on my AT-PL120 direct drive, to better but still not great effect. Failure, round one. Maybe it takes a long time to run in? (!ATTENTION: I later found out the reason for the bad sound: see SC35C, Part II)

• Setup Precision We try, but we don't always achieve precision. Sometimes, it is not our fault and it is ridiculous to lose sleep over it. A great setup (such as the TD-124/3012/DL-103) will triumph no matter what. The corollary is something inferior will still be inferior even if perfectly set up. Andy L seems to share my kind of philosophy. No matter how much you align, adjust SRA, VTA etc, analog is still inexact. As Andy says, setting up for a given LP doesn't mean the next one will sound as good. Sleep well! I do.

Now, in NYC I have 7 turntables running, rivaling Andy L in quantity, but perhaps not in quality (his are the likes of Goldmund and Versa Dynamics)!

Article finished in HK