View Full Version : cart + arm = ok???
Plastic Spinner
04-10-2013, 23:39
Hi all
Need some advice please.
Walpurgis is offering his vintage ASC 26 cart for sale here on AoS (http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?27942-ADC-26-Cartridge-Good-Working-Order).
As a very high compliance cart am wondering if will be a good match for my (lowish mass, but is it quite low enough?) JMW-9 tonearm from a VPI Scout.
Anyone have any previous with either or both of these two, or have any thoughts to offer?
Many thanks
Clive197
05-10-2013, 09:53
I am unable to find a ASC 26 cartridge, so think you had a senior moment and meant an ADC 26 Induced Magnet cartridge. As you say this is a very high compliance unit at 50x10-6cm/dyne. The effective mass of your arm is 7.7g giving a resonance frequency of 6Hz.
This would normally be too low to be a good combination.
The 26 and early XLM's were so highly compliant that the arm mass needed to be negative to get the 'recommended' resonance point!
If the arm is around 6 to 7 grammes effective mass, and preferably offers a tad of damping, it should be a good match. Not sure how later 'hot' cuts would fare though, especially on sibilants - mine isn't too good sadly and with a NOS stylus too, but used in the likes of a vintage Transcriptors Fluid Arm or Mayware Formula 4, the results may well be excellent :)
I've always wondered about the ADC 27, of which I have little info. Was this a later version with updated suspension?
Clive197
05-10-2013, 10:18
The 26 and early XLM's were so highly compliant that the arm mass needed to be negative to get the 'recommended' resonance point!
If the arm is around 6 to 7 grammes effective mass, and preferably offers a tad of damping, it should be a good match. Not sure how later 'hot' cuts would fare though, especially on sibilants - mine isn't too good sadly and with a NOS stylus too, but used in the likes of a vintage Transcriptors Fluid Arm or Mayware Formula 4, the results may well be excellent :)
I've always wondered about the ADC 27, of which I have little info. Was this a later version with updated suspension?
The ADC 27 is a very different cartridge. It is a Moving Magnet cartridge as a against the 26 which is an Induced Magnet. The 27 has a slightly lower compliance of 40x10-6cm/dyne.
walpurgis
05-10-2013, 10:23
The ADC 27 is a very different cartridge. It is a Moving Magnet cartridge as a against the 26 which is an Induced Magnet. The 27 has a slightly lower compliance of 40x10-6cm/dyne.
That is not correct. The 27 is not MM it's a slightly lower compliance version of the 26. The styli are interchangeable.
Oldpinkman
05-10-2013, 10:25
The 26 and early XLM's were so highly compliant that the arm mass needed to be negative to get the 'recommended' resonance point!
If the arm is around 6 to 7 grammes effective mass, and preferably offers a tad of damping, it should be a good match. Not sure how later 'hot' cuts would fare though, especially on sibilants - mine isn't too good sadly and with a NOS stylus too, but used in the likes of a vintage Transcriptors Fluid Arm or Mayware Formula 4, the results may well be excellent :)
I've always wondered about the ADC 27, of which I have little info. Was this a later version with updated suspension?
There is about only one arm I can think of is going to be a proper resonance match for that cartridge - guess what? Geoffs favourite the Mission 774 at 5.5g - where assuming 6gm cartridge weight I make the resonance about 7Hz. Use very lightweight fixings! Or some damping.
Clive197
05-10-2013, 10:42
That is not correct. The 27 is not MM it's a slightly lower compliance version of the 26. The styli are interchangeable.
Information I got was from Vinyl Engine, but if you know better.............I will once again doff my hat.
I can only add that ADC were instigators of the induced magnet principle (Peter Pritchard), where a bloody big magnet was inset into the cartridge body (in this case) and the cantilever behind the rubber hinge/mount having a lightweight, but magnetisable material fitted, instead of a heavier magnet a la Shure and others. The main weakness in these ADC's was a heavy body (lightened significantly in the XLM) and super-high compliance (ADC and Empire especially seemed to have a race to see who could track lowest).
By the way, the 25, 26 and 10E IV models, as well as the mk1 XLM really need little more that 0.7g to work and nothing is to be gained on most by increasing this. if a 774 arm is to be used, may I suggest baby oil as damping fluid and the smallest paddle doing little more than stroking the fluid surface, rather than fully dipping into it.....
walpurgis
05-10-2013, 20:34
By the way, the 25, 26 and 10E IV models, as well as the mk1 XLM really need little more that 0.7g to work and nothing is to be gained on most by increasing this. if a 774 arm is to be used, may I suggest baby oil as damping fluid and the smallest paddle doing little more than stroking the fluid surface, rather than fully dipping into it.....
My ADC 10E Mk.IV's and my 10E Mk.II both work well at 1.25 grams in my 774 arm using STP as damping fluid with a medium paddle. The 26 does not seem to mind this level of damping, but only needs 0.8 grams downforce.
Plastic Spinner
06-10-2013, 10:30
Hi chaps
Thanks for all of this interesting info.
First things first. I wish I could blame Android's dictionary for the incorrect name but I suppose it still counts as user error if I don't check it as well.
:-)
Am learning here so plenty for me to chew on.
Sounds like I'm a tad too 'heavy' for the ADC. Am interested in how damping can help though in the case of a marginal match.
Can someone explain this or point me to a damping primer?
Many thanks
I'm quite happily running an ADC25 (same as the 26 in compliance) or an ADC10E Mk.IV in a Breuer Dynamic 5A arm (effective mass 4g). However before that, I ran the 26 and the 10E in an SME 3009 II arm (that is, the original non-improved version) fitted with the FD200 damper dashpot.
Secure tracking is obtained at 1.0g for the 25/26 and 1.25g for the 10E Mk.IV in both arms
I think all ADC designs are "induced magnet". The term "MM" (moving magnet) is a convenient way of saying "fixed coil", to distinguish these cartridge designs from "moving coil" types. It also is a convenient portmanteau term to cover: induced magnet, moving magnet, moving iron, vari-reluctance, flux shunting, and other fixed coil designs.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.