Printable View
Yes, thinking back that was a replacement stylus I got for it. I seem to recall struggling to get it set up right (on the Pioneer) with it badly mistracking & giving up on it (it's still in the Pioneer headshell). Maybe I'll give it a try on one of my other decks (the PL112D was donated to my cousin's daughter when she got into vinyl).Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Yeah, the mistracking will almost certainly be down to the poor quality of most modern replacement styli [possibly also too low a VTF], and insufficient mass in the partnering arm and/or headshell. In terms of the latter, I reckon you'd need at least 15g on the headshell alone.
Sort that out mate, and I guarantee you'll hear something rather different next time!;)
Marco.
Thanks. I'll have a play when I get chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
No worries, if you get it right, I think you'll find the experience very rewarding...:)
The key to getting the best out of these old designs is in *fundamentally understanding* what 'makes them tick', as it were, then simply adopting it, and so failure to do so will almost certainly result in you not hearing their full potential.
Marco.
Ok, earlier on the thread I mentioned that I'd bought the above kit to experiment with and 'tune' the response of my Shure SC35C:
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/922/HxrWAN.jpg
Instructions for use:
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...924/dnrST1.png
Strangely, I guess, in my decades of using turntables, cables and phono stages, I've never experimented with adding capacitance to a MM phono input, as I've never felt the need to, happily using any MM phono stage I've had 'as is', in terms of loading, with many different cartridges, and considered the sound as being great!
However, little did I know that although the sound was great, there was still much more to come... And I'd probably never have discovered that, if I hadn't read comments elsewhere discussing the merits of the SC35C, mentioning that it 'liked' to see more capacitance over and above what existed as standard, via the usual loading of 47k Ohms, provided by the MM phono stage in my Croft preamp.
Yes, in the past I'd experimented with loading values with moving-coils, but never with MM cartridges, so I was about to embark on a voyage of brand new discovery! A what a discovery it's been.... Therefore, after having tried all of the above loading plugs (the construction quality of which is excellent), and assessed them sonically, I settled for the 'Brown' ones rated at 150pF. See here, in situ (fitted as described in the instructions above):
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...922/yDZUH7.jpg
Adding any more capacitance than that, by fitting the plugs with the higher values, tended to rob the sound of 'life', limiting high-frequency extension and vocal clarity, so the plugs with those values were fairly quickly rejected, but may well be used in other applications.
The goal it seems, of using these plugs is to 'tune' the optimal loading value for the cartridge, in order that the flattest frequency response is obtained, and when that's achieved, the subsequent benefits it brings, sonically, are very obvious: less 'grain', more openness/expansiveness throughout the frequency range, with sweeter highs and the removal of a slight 'spitty' quality and 'glare' to vocals [I suspect due to a more accurate treble response],plus a more textured and mellifluous sounding midrange, and cleaner more rhythmic bass.
In short, adding the loading plugs in question in my system has notably 'tidied up' the sound [and you simply won't realise that such may be necessary until you hear the effect for yourself], giving music more 'body', depth, poise and refinement, together with increased clarity and a greater sense 'effortlessness', such that there is now ZERO listener fatigue with any music played.
This results in the SC35C sailing through even the most demanding of material with consummate ease, thus promoting long listening sessions, exploring one's music collection, album after album!:)
In all honesty, loading plugs like these are absolutely essential, in terms of optimising the performance of any MM cartridge and really making it 'sing'... In that respect, I can say that they are vital in order to hear what any good MM can do, and also that the Shure SC35C benefits *SIGNIFICANTLY* from their use.
So if you've got one and think it sounds superb on its own, without the need for adding more capacitance, as indeed I mistakenly did, then *think again*...!
The truth is, you really haven't heard the SC35C at its best until the loading value has been optimally 'tuned', by adding, in my case, an extra 150pF of capacitance. It was good before, but my goodness, it's an even better cartridge than I thought it was, bouncing music along now with the most infectious joie de vivre and dynamic alacrity!:eek:
My advice? If you want to REALLY hear what the incredible (for the money) SC35C can do, or indeed any other high-quality MM cartridge, then I strongly recommend that your order a DBP-6 capacitor loading kit from Acoustic Sounds: https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/6...le_Accessories
Trust me, it'll be one of the best £30, or so, you'll spend on your vinyl set-up, and which will reward you tenfold, in terms of increasing the overall enjoyment of your favourite music on vinyl!:cool:
Marco.
Surprised there's been no comments on the loading plugs, as some of you, Adrian included, had said you were interested in what they did!:ner:;)
Barry wasn't far off with the amount of added capacitance needed... Turned out to be 150pF, not 180. Anyway, these have just arrived from the US: https://theartofsound.net/forum/show...51#post1218351
So will be trying them out later, just to see if there's any difference between between them, sonically, and the NOS one already on the cartridge:)
Marco.
Hi Marco,hope you are well. Very interesting read this thread has been.Especially what you have written about the SC35C and the loading plugs. I'm also a big big fan of this cartridge, so any possibilty of improving what it can do always gets my interest and if adding the Funk Houdini changes the game, then i can only imagine how much better it can get!
I'll start small and order the loading plugs and see what that brings to the party.
Hi Marco,Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
thanks for taking the time to explain its virtues, as you say it should all become more clear upon listening . . .
I'm certainly looking for a way to divert some funds towards it right now, as compared to a lot of 'upgrades/tweaks' etc, it sounds like a leap rather than just a step.
Also scratching the surface of loading plugs myself but I will reply to your more recent post about them.
I'm super busy at the moment trying to sort out some unscheduled but necessary work on my new house (BALL ACHE!!) which is taking up my usual 'buggering about on AOS' time.
Typical, just when a subject directly relating to things I've been doing at the moment pops up, I'm at my least active.
Hopefully carve out some time soon, priorities!
Cheers
So, after reading a few comments regarding how beneficial it is to tweak/load the capacitance of most MM carts I thought I'd give it a go too. The cartridge in question is just a very humble Ortofon OM type with an OM10 stylus. The cartridge body remains the same however, all the way up to the semi-exotic OM40 so upgrades are incredibly simple and once the cart is perfectly aligned you can just forget about it and swap the styli in 5 seconds flat! Part of its appeal, anyway. . . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
I'd heard this particular cartridge really does like a few picofarads 'up it' (somewhere in the region of 400) so I came across these on the god ol bay.
https://i.ibb.co/TgMnKXn/s-l1600.jpg
They're basically just an RCA plug added to the circuit using a 'Y' splitter, so the signal travels through but the plugs add around 220pf. It has a resistor neatly soldered into the send/return lugs of the plug providing the capacitance. As the cable and phono plugs are usually around 150pf themselves, the approximate total brings it nicely into the carts 'peak' operating levels (by all accounts) around 370-400pf.
Not quite as versatile or indeed flexible as yours but they certainly do the job.
The chap actually included (at my request as they were on some of his other lots) some much better gold plated Y splitters, so that is what I received.
Like these:
https://i.ibb.co/qNxr4N7/s-l1600-1.jpg
I've got to say that everything sounds better. The technical explanation involves flattening out the cartridges response to more closely follow the RIAA standard (I think).
As I say I'm barely scratching the surface here, I've played around with the loading of MC carts before using dip switches and pots on phono stages that allow the adjustment, but my current phono stage (although having an MC input also) offers no such adjustment to either type.
Links below:
Loading plugs: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Phono-Car...72.m2749.l2649
Y splitters: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Gold-Plat...QAAOSwFJBZVit7
I'll be interested to see how things develop regarding the Houdini and playing around with the loading plugs.
Cheers
That's 'cos we've all got nice modern cartridges that don't need fudging...Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
;) :D :ner:
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Beobloke
Hi Darren,Quote:
Originally Posted by kininigin
Long time no hear, mate! Hope you're well:) I'm fine, just enjoying getting back into some hi-fi shenanigans after somewhat of a hiatus! No big reason for that, just other things to occupy my time.
Nice one on the loading plugs... Trust me, if you get the values right, you'll hear a significant improvement in all the areas I've mentioned. There a lot of latent potential with the SC35C waiting to be released once it's been loaded correctly!
In your set up though, you may need to use a different plug value, as much will depend on the capacitance of your existing tonearm cable, but I reckon the sweet spot will be somewhere between adding a further 150-250pF.
Anyway, let me know how you get on with the plugs when they arrive. If you're getting them from the same source as me, tell them to ensure that the black 100 ohms plugs are included, for tuning MCs, just in case you get into that, as they forget to put those in with my order, although they've rectified that now.
Marco.
Excellent stuff, Chris. For the above and your previous post. I'm sure we can swap notes on our respective journeys with 'tuning' our MM cartridges!:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Opti-cal
So how would you describe the improvement you heard when fitting the plugs - was it along similar lines to what I've described? I've also ordered a set of those Y-adapters, as I like how they're made.
Marco.
Lol - very good!Quote:
Originally Posted by Beobloke
However, you're not seriously suggesting that there's no potential mileage in experimenting with loading values on modern cartridges, both MMs and MCs? Neither are immune from benefiting in that way, especially MCs! :exactly:
It's not only vintage cartridges that are likely to respond well to such optimisation.
Marco.
Hi Marco,
Your undergoing the same experiment I went through a new of months ago, in that your trying to correctly get the SC35C to "see" that correct amount of capacitance. My M55E likes to see 450-500 pf according to the Shure website. All connecting leads carry a certain amount of capacitance, I did a quick and dirty calculation based on an audit on everything that sits between your cartridge pins and the the RCA lead going into your Croft phono stage, which unfortunately has no facility to use RCA loading plugs. The components between your cartridge and the croft MM phonostage include :-
(These are the known values of my own systems personal components, yours will be different).
15pf per channel = 30 pf intrinsic wiring of the tonearm
10pf per RCA = 10 pf RCA
60pf tonearm cable = 60 pf tonearm cable
10pf cartridge tags+leads = 10 pf (SPECULATION)
20pf for tonearm connector = 20 pf (SPECULATION)
so this equals ~115pf of capacitance, so we are approximately 335 pf short, so you use two 335pf RCA loading plugs for the M55E to "SEE" its required 450pf. This will of course be different for the SC35C (I don't know what it likes to "SEE", pf wise), it will also differ because we have different RCA plugs, tonearm cables and intrinsic wiring of tonearms. You need to individually work out each components pf level and then deduct that from the SC35C's suggested "SEEN" capacitance. Your RCA values will be the difference between the two values. This is a more accurate way of "tuning" the thing by ear, of course you may prefer it that way. I hope this helps.
Finally, did you do your loading tests at the same time as trialling the Houdini? If so, how can you confidently attribute your experiences to the Houdini and not the optimal capacitance loading? Just a thought.....
Hi Andy,
All good (and useful) points, which are noted:)
Barry did a basic calculation for me earlier about how much capacitance the SC35C likes to 'see', which he roughly worked out as 180pF [on top of what capacitance already exists], and which in practice, judging by ear, seems pretty spot on.
At the moment I'm using 150pF plugs, but will get some 180pF ones custom-made, as I think that's where the sweet spot lies... 150 sounds fab (although could possibly be marginally bettered), and 200 is too much, including any figure over that.
This sort of experimenting though has been a real revelation, as it pretty much renders every MM cartridge I've ever used as not having been heard optimally!:eek:
No, I assessed the Houdini independently of the loading plugs, so I know exactly what both are doing/have done.
So when are you treating yourself to an 'H'? Your system definitely deserves one;)
Marco.
Ah that's great news, glad to hear your not far off what the SC35C needs to "SEE". I've only done this with the M55E so I will have to do it all again when the stylii arrive from the USA and JAPAN. Yes, it's an eye opener what these old MM carts can do. I had my EAR 834P clone modded to accept RCA loading plugs ages ago by Alan and It's the best thing I did, I'll not be turning back now. All MM's will be loaded and assessed this way. Good to see that you have been seeing positive increments with your system. I'm not sure when I'll try the "H", I want to assess the stylii for the SC35C and that may take some time and the additional optimal loading the RCA plugs. I've sent you a PM detailing another couple of tweaks that might interest you and which may add something further to your system. Additionally I notice your using a sorbothane modded record weight, I have some 10mm sorbothane in my garage and my well try to modify my current pure copper record puck to see if this gains any additional benefit. I have started to make provision to try a "H" in that I'm just in the process of making a new Panzerholz tonearm mount for my SME3012 with an extra amount of vertical height which should help out should I try a "H". Check you inbox!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
All good here Marco,
Just lost the post that i just wrote as i got signed out for some reason. How annoying.
So quick reply, tonearm cable is a silvercord plus with 35pF. I did order from same source but before i had seen your post, so will double check on the 100 ohms plugs as i have recently bought an SPU.
Looking forward to playing with loading.
Well to summerize without using too many subjective superlatives (which people seem to jump on with criticism, even if they know EXACTLY what you mean), there is definitely more air right through the frequency range. This does not mean there are gaps in the sound, just that the music has a lot more room to breath. In comparison to before the loading was optimal, you can tell that the sound was a bit congested. Not having this reference to work from I didn't really think too much was wrong, until I heard the difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
That's key here, the reference that experimentation can provide. It really helps you judge if something is worth persevering with or not. Result good or bad, then go from there.
The plugs are useful actually as a lot of phono stages which do offer adjustment, often have the switches/jumpers located either on the underside of the stage or indeed internally. With the RCA sockets being loaded with plugs, its a 2 second job, no need for screwdrivers or reading glasses!
It's slightly liberating that I've recently gone 'back' to MM carts actually. I have an Audio Technica AT-OC9XEN on my LP12 and its a lovely cart but I find myself choosing to play most records on my LP5 (direct drive) with the OM10 and loading plugs on at the moment. Not because it sounds better (although the gap isn't huge), but because it provides me with the most 'bang for buck' enjoyment factor.
I'm not exactly counting the hours on the OC9 (although I have a rough idea to within 10 hours+/-) but with the OM10 I'll happily just let it play grooves all day (and all night) long, then replace it once a year or less often. For £50 I can more than live with that.
I've certainly learned to cut my cloth accordingly regarding hifi (among other 'interests') recently, another reason I'm afraid I will just have to hold fire on the Houdini (for now). Reason being I'm not quite sure how some building work will pan out and can't justify it to myself this minute (I may feel differently at any time though!). Can I afford it? Yes, can I also wait for and appreciate it in time? Also yes. Wow, my 20 year old self is shaking his head in disbelief, 'what happened, you used to be cool man' . . . .
Anyway, also interesting what Andrew (REXTON) has to say there, clearly done a lot more experimentation in the area, so fair play! I too have an 834p clone fettled by Alan but the addition of the loading plug RCA's sounds very intriguing. Seems there is a lot more to be squeezed out of a lot of MM carts.
Will be interested to see if any more 'developments' are in the pipeline Marco, got anything planned??
Chris
I'm really surprised Steve (Pygmy Pony) hasn't commented on this, maybe too technical a thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
It's just your colour Marco :laugh:
great reading through this thread.
I have just been in contact with Arthur and placed my order for a Houdini to fit to my Funk Firm LSD with Funk F5 tonearm. I'm eagerly waiting on delivery now. :)
Chris, I did a lot of lateral thinking when conducting my experiments. I gained more enjoyment seeing how things could be done cheaply but retaining maximum positive sonic impact. I'm also quite happy spending money when needed. Currently I'm evaluating the my vintage MM collection with 5N pure silver cartridge leads, Orsonic head shell + vintage NOS and latest JICO stylii. I don't think we can do any more to push these vintage masters anything, well perhaps the "H" as well?Quote:
Originally Posted by Opti-cal
Nightmare, mate. Wee tip, well two, actually... Firstly, always ensure that you tick the "Remember Me' box when signing onto the forum, as that way your posts won't time out, and secondly, just as an extra precaution, COPY your posts before you hit the 'Reply' button;)Quote:
Originally Posted by kininigin
Nice one on the SPU! Which one did you get?:)
Marco.
Hi Chris,
Yup, I completely agree, as I heard the same effect. For me, it's all down to achieving a cleaner/more accurate treble response, thus reducing distortion, and the lack of that happy situation (due to incorrect loading/insufficient capacitance), ably reveals itself on 'hot', or 'hotter', recordings, where the top-end can get a little 'spitty'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Opti-cal
Yup, I know exactly what you mean. You also tend to forgive any failings there are more when you haven't spent a fortune on something, and the overall experience therefore just tends to be more fun! Also, quality MMs often have a weightier, more secure and 'grounded' sound than many MCs, which can often sound too 'delicate and airy' or subtle [lacking 'balls'] for their own good, and of course be rather fiddly to set up!Quote:
It's slightly liberating that I've recently gone 'back' to MM carts actually. I have an Audio Technica AT-OC9XEN on my LP12 and its a lovely cart but I find myself choosing to play most records on my LP5 (direct drive) with the OM10 and loading plugs on at the moment. Not because it sounds better (although the gap isn't huge), but because it provides me with the most 'bang for buck' enjoyment factor.
I'm not exactly counting the hours on the OC9 (although I have a rough idea to within 10 hours+/-) but with the OM10 I'll happily just let it play grooves all day (and all night) long, then replace it once a year or less often. For £50 I can more than live with that.
You should try a Shure SC35C, as fitted with a NOS stylus and correctly loaded, it'll see off pretty much any MM on the market (I kid you not), and in the areas where it excels, many MCs! It really is THAT good, providing you can supply it with sufficient mass and facilitate tracking at 4.5g (with appropriate levels of anti-skate).
Lol... I get all that. However, what I could comfortably predict is that once you try one a) you won't be able to live without it, and b) wonder why you didn't get one sooner!:D:trust:Quote:
I've certainly learned to cut my cloth accordingly regarding hifi (among other 'interests') recently, another reason I'm afraid I will just have to hold fire on the Houdini (for now). Reason being I'm not quite sure how some building work will pan out and can't justify it to myself this minute (I may feel differently at any time though!). Can I afford it? Yes, can I also wait for and appreciate it in time? Also yes. Wow, my 20 year old self is shaking his head in disbelief, 'what happened, you used to be cool man' . . . .
Yes, I'm waiting on a new/NOS MC (Denon DL103GL) cartridge and SUT, plus a new headphone amp, coming from Japan, so looking forward to that, especially getting the cartridge singing with a Houdini!:cool:Quote:
Will be interested to see if any more 'developments' are in the pipeline Marco, got anything planned??
Marco.
Lol... You can beat a nice wee 'skid-mark brown' one!:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Firebottle
Marco.
Nice one, Steve. Be prepared to rediscover your record collection! And report back when you try it:)Quote:
Originally Posted by carruthersesq
Marco.
Remember what I said, Andy and the Houdini rendering the sonic signature/'flavour' of the arm and headshell virtually redundant...Quote:
Originally Posted by REXTON
Therefore, in terms of your above statement, try it the other way round, as in reality you will find the influence of the 'H' on your enjoyment of music to be far more significant than any of the other items you mention, trust me...;)
Marco.
I mentioned earlier on the thread that I was going to try some Furutech 'La Source' headshell leads, with the Denon DL-103GL, when it arrives, and I may still do eventually, but for moment I've pulled the trigger on a set of these, which I obtained from David Brooks (MCRU) at a very attractive price that was too good to say no!
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/923/Ce9WvH.jpg
I already use pure-silver Litz wire in my tonearm cables, and Kondo/AudioNote silver wiring is very highly regarded by the most discerning of audiophiles, as being the best, so I'm looking forward to hearing what the SL-115s do with the Denon!:cool:
Marco.
Those look quality Marco, As you know I use Ortofon's LW-800S, pure silver headshell lead wires and find them excellent.
Good silver lead wire brings that bit more clarity and information, instruments sound real ie: piano lines sound like a piano being played, bass has bass note and texture rather than boom/wool/fluff/muff , if you get my gist.
Hi-hat, cymbals shimmer, again with a more realistic/natural tone.
I'm sure this is in some part down to how the nature of pure silver transmits the signal IMO.
Those must be seriously top quality Marco at more or less double what the Ortofon's pure silver offering goes for.
Cheers, Rob, I've also used the AT ones before, and they're great, but like you say I think these will be another level. It's all in the purity of the silver and annealing process:)
This is what I like doing though, and my approach to audio: mixing the best of the old and new, and knowing exactly where to put both in a system, in order to get the most lifelike sound and musically addictive result;)
Marco.
A question, is the Shure SC35C really better than a Technics EPC-205, or a AT20SS? Both are top end MM carts.
Is the SC35C voiced differently to the M55?
1. Never heard either of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by CageyH
2. I'll let you know when I've a stylus to use on the SC35C!!
:exactly:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Defo, bruv! Link to lheadshell eads in question: https://www.mcru.co.uk/product/kondo...rtridge-wires/
:cool:
Marco.
Hi Kevin,Quote:
Originally Posted by CageyH
I'll answer your question later (busy just now), as it deserves a proper response:)
Marco.
:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Ok... Firstly, as ever, "better" is entirely subjective. I'd put it simply that the SC35C isn't better than either of the above *in the areas in which they excel*, particularly the Technics, as that's a very special cartridge, and there are others still currently produced, such as the Nagaoka MP500, which would 'best' the Shure in certain areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by CageyH
However... The point I'm making is that the 'lowly' SC35C [I mean, before it was recently discontinued it was sold as a 'DJ cartridge', FFS:rolleyes:] is most certainly NOT in any way lowly, and largely misunderstood by both audiophiles and DJs alike, and so given its sonic prowess, was just stupidly priced (selling for around £60), I suspect rather like Denon and some AT MCs, due to economies of scale, coupled with decades of experience of making stereo pickups, which a company like Shure had, the SC35C was able to be produced cheaply and sold in its 1000s to radio stations and broadcasting studios around the world.
And *that* is how the SC35C should be judged: as a very well-engineered and reliable tool for broadcasting purposes, ably recognised for its sonic abilities by the BBC and used in their dedicated (high-mass) tonearm, designed specifically to partner it, and fitted onto the Gates, Technics and EMT turntables that graced their studios, from the 70s to the late 90s, together producing top-notch sound for their various music broadcasts.
I still remember with great affection, as a teenager in the 80s, listening to the Radio 1 Top 40 chart show on Sunday nights, hosted by Tommy Vance (and others), and marveling at the quality of sound [through the rather nice Sony tuner my dad had in the lounge back then], a show that like most youngsters then I'd record onto tape and play on my stereo or 'ghetto blaster' later - and a sound that still sticks in my mind to this day, which was bold, weighty, detailed, punchy and dynamic, and conveyed with palpable authority, such that the likes of the intro to Madonna's 'Crazy for You' would come thundering into the room through the speakers, with such gravitas!:eek:
Plus, tracks such as The Corgis 'Everyone's Got to Learn Sometime' sounding just simply magical:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjfvSXclFlI
...in an really 'sparkly', hugely atmospheric way that gave you goosebumps, especially when that synth-violin kicks in! And other tracks such as Kate Bush's 'Babooshka' [shown below], sounding simply magical in a 'rhythmically adroit' and organic way that completely eludes the reedy sound produced now on radio stations, using digital technology, and which in comparison sounds thin, unconvincing and a-musical... Just a VERY poor relation to what once was!
https://youtu.be/8R-M4Ov8M3E
That is one sexy woman... Only she could make dancing with a double-bass look mesmerisingly erotic!:eek:
And so here's the point:
If you want to create a snapshot of that solid and weighty, 'unflappable' broadcast sound I've just described, which used to grace our airwaves back in the day, then a Shure SC35C (fitted *only* with NOS stylus), to a high-mass arm/headshell, and either a quality idler-driven or direct-drive turntable, plus phono stage, loading it correctly, will provide that experience. It's not a 'hi-fi sound' in the truest sense, although all the necessary traits are there, but just a lovely rich, big-boned, dynamic sound you can 'relax into' and enjoy, and which no matter the music played never fails to put a smile on your face!
In essence, therefore, *THAT* is what an SC35C is all about, and which simply isn't found in any other cartridge I've heard, modern or vintage, save the Denon DL-103, and certainly not a Shure M55, as good as that is in its own right. I hope that successfully gets across what I like about the SC35C, and what it does so well when used and set-up optimally:cool:
Marco.
Ok, I've been looking for one of these for YEARS, but they are super-rare, usually more than double the price and located in Japan! So it was refreshing to see a minty one for sale in the UK, and for such a good price:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NAGAOKA-G...72.m2749.l2649
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...923/7SOsmM.jpg
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...924/oVWKEi.jpg
It will partner my Nagaoka crystal glass mat:
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...923/IIWW8K.jpg
The mat on its own sounds superb, so it'll be interesting to hear how it works as a combo, as indeed it was originally designed to work:)
Honestly though, I've seen the stabiliser alone sell for upwards of £200, and ditto the mat, as both are very rare and sought after vintage classics! So I'm well chuffed at scoring the stabiliser for £85!
Also, and this is particularly exciting... Arthur has sent me an improved version of the Achromat to try, and which looks great but I haven't yet assessed. I'm hoping that it'll not only be the best mat I've heard (perhaps trumping the Nagaoka), but also form a synergistic partnership with the Houdini, as both have been designed to work together.
Full report on all of the above in due course!:cool:
Marco.
That gets your point across quite nicely, and gives me a good reason to avoid it, as I don’t have a high mass tonearm, so would not get the best out of it. I will stick with the two I mentioned.
Yups, you wouldn't really hear the best of it in your system. Pretty much every cartridge I like is low-compliance, so needs a high-mass arm:)
Marco.
Just a 'shout out' for Chris, who posted earlier about the above Y-splitters. I ordered a set (and how nicely made they are), as it's a neater solution than the wired connectors that came with my set of loading plugs, and I thought potentially might sound better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Opti-cal
And I'm pleased to report that they do! Not 'night and day' better, but definitely they produce an overall 'tidier' and more solid sound, subjectively 'quieter', too... The reason for that I'm guessing is due to the difference in capacitance between the short run of cables I was using and the 'hard-wired' gold-plated brass splitters, using the same 150pF loading plugs.
Anyway, for £8 it's a nice little upgrade and I'd recommend others experimenting with loading plugs to invest in these splitters, as they offer a very solid, good sounding and reliable connection:thumbsup:
Marco.
Very exciting cannot wait!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Yes indeed, and all will be revealed soon!:)
Marco.
You're such a tease! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
This is the sort of thing I was on about:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
https://youtu.be/KsZ17taBNgs
Turn the volume up and have a listen to that.. Now I know it's compressed to buggery on YouTube, but despite that I still think it sounds fab, and if you've got any kind of 'ear' at all, even through this compromised medium [although the chap in question has preserved a good recording], you should be able to hear the type of sound I've described produced by the Shure!:)
I suspect during that era, a Gates CB-500 was used, with the SC35C strapped onto a Grey Research 108-C tonearm:
https://youtu.be/dGPoz6WXfgc
The above video must be watched directly on YouTube.
https://youtu.be/poQ1SZJmkco
Now that tank-like thing is defo what you call 'high-mass'!!:eek::D
Yup, that's the combo you were likely listening to spinning the tunes on BBC radio, during the 70s to mid 80s!:cool:
No way does Radio 1 (or R2) sound like that now, SQ-wise, with the streaming shite they use to play music...:nono:
Marco.
As its a rubber stamped recommendation from the horses mouth, its become a priority. I think I need to hear one . . . . likewise on the Houdini . . . . I'll be selling a few bits and pieces in the near future so that will offset the cost somewhat (or at least that's what I'll tell myself to justify it!!).Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
No problem Marco, glad they do the trick for you too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
I subscribe to the explanation regarding the removal of extra capacitance of the cable etc (now being just a solid plug rather than any actual cable involved). I've actually often wondered if a 'male to male' (ooo errr Mrs) plug of similar construction would bring sonic benefits when used straight from a DAC or phono stage connection into the pre-amp in. If you don't need to see the front of your DAC or phono stage it kind of makes sense assuming you have a shelf/space to facilitate such a configuration.
Anyway, I digress, keep sharing your findings as it looks like we're on the same page regarding sonic attributes and also our 'aims' regarding equipment. I appreciate all the little tweaks 'can' work in some systems. To a more or lesser degree and sometimes not at all, but its fun to try and super satisfying when you do pull them off, especially when they don't cost the earth!
Cheers
Hi Chris,
Nice one on the Shure and Houdini. I'm SHURE you'll be delighted with both, lol!:D
I also agree with you about the jumpers. I thought I'd have to choose a different value of loading plugs, after having 'lost' the capacitance of the leads, as it were, but the 150pF ones I'd been using were still fine. Sound is defo better, though:)
Did you listen to the YouTube video I posted of the Top 40 chart show in 1982, and the quality of the sound that was produced then? If you did, hopefully you can hear where I'm coming from about the SC35C, used within the 'infrastructure' it was intended to be used.
Here's another clip, this time from the same show in 1987, when the Beeb were using EMT 950s, with the same cartridge:
https://youtu.be/MjSx6-SAqH4
Fast forward to 1.04.30 and listen to Jelly bean's 'Who Found Who'?...
It may not be your type of music, but just listen to that lovely weighty, solid and rhythmic bass line! That's something that digital struggles to achieve in comparison (and a trait of the SC35C)!
:dance:
Marco.
Well clearly it doesn't since your example is itself a digital transcription....on the other hand I do agree about the decline in sound quality from radio, thin and a bit scratchy nowadays compared to what it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Just had a listen to that Marco,Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
that juicy, full bodied sound comes through regardless of playback system I think. It just fills the frequency range very, very nicely. I think sometimes (and I've been guilty of this myself on occasion) people are just listening out for cues and nuances which they know 'should' jump out of the mix and impress them. Maybe they've heard the track on playback systems which (over) emphasizes a certain sound/instrument/voice and any which don't reproduce what they expect to hear are deemed inferior.
Fact is if it boogies it boogies, I get more boogie factor with vinyl/analogue playback. The detail and transparency achieved using my digital components can be very enjoyable but swapping to my vinyl rig and playing the same song is (nearly) always no contest. To be honest I've never done a comparison of digital vs vinyl and thought 'oh there's some detail missing there from the vinyl', although technically likely true, the vinyl just has that bounce and boogie factor.
Maybe I haven't come across the right DAC/streamer setup (and the DAC I'm currently using is on the very budget end) to compete with the vinyl on this front at least. Where the digital does win however, is separation, instrument placement and ultimate sub (20Hz and below) bass. Although its certainly not as 'rich' sounding and ultimately, enjoyable.
Nothing wrong with those tunes, good music is good music. I often reference a lot of my electronic, ambient stuff on the threads here but I have a firm grounding in all the good stuff.
Flashbacks of chucking a cassette in my dads Nakamichi (BX2?) I think it was (the twin head though, not the triple bad boy) and being consumed by its analogue 'tapey' sound. Slightly akin to an old skool 'loudness' button being on, everything just sounded a bit bigger an beefier.
Lol - I can hear through the digital transcription and still readily identify the sonic characteristics of the vinyl source, just like I do with the 'needledrops' I produce - not a problem - and that lovely 'juicy' and full-bodied bass is defo a characteristic of both the Shure cartridge used and the EMT turntable and arm it was on:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Macca
If the music had been reproduced via a digital source, the bass wouldn't have sounded like that. Yes, the digital process can faithfully reproduce the qualities of the analogue source, but not PUT them there in the first place - that's my point!
Totally agree with you on the 'thin and scratchy' nature of the sound on commercial radio these days, and much of that is down to them simply playing computer files on not particularly good equipment. If it was CDs, through the likes of the BBC Technics player you've got, it would be a different ball game!
So it's not that digital music is crap [you know that's not my view anyway], but rather how radio stations are choosing to reproduce it these days... However, it still sounded better when it was turntables and vinyl, and 'DJ' (DISC jockey) actually meant something!:cool:
Marco.