+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36

Thread: Hana SL or ML Cartridge

  1. #21
    Join Date: Aug 2012

    Location: North

    Posts: 2,831
    I'm Steve.

    Default

    The Jelco 750 isn't the panacea people think it is. It is all dependent on good pairing. I had one on a Garrard 401 and found it dull as dish water using a myriad of cartridges. if you want to start using MC carts try a more appropriate vessel that the 1210.
    WEBSITE.... www.theprogmeister.com

    Golf, a good walk spoiled : M Twain.


  2. #22
    Join Date: May 2019

    Location: Spain

    Posts: 19
    I'm Alberto.

    Default

    There's a huge discussion about 1200... Anyway I don't want to change the TT for several reasons. In that case, according to your opinion I'd forget a MC cartridge? I've seen many technics with original tonearm or replaced with MC cartridges.

  3. #23
    Join Date: May 2012

    Location: London

    Posts: 419
    I'm Spartacus.

    Default

    It would help if you told us what MM you currently use and what you're hoping to improve. I use MM, MI and MC carts, including a Hana, on my three SL1200 decks. My Shure M97xE and Hana SH sound very good on the original (rewired) Technics arm. I also have a Stanton 688EEE (MI) along with an AT33PTG (Paratrace) on a Moerch DP6, each mounted on the correct mass arm wand.

    I can tell you the Hana SH on the rewired Technics arm is not embarrassed by the AT33PTG/Moerch DP6. So, to answer your original question, the Technics arm is very good, better than most people think, and certainly good enough for the Hana SH and I presume SL. I chose the SH because I wanted to run this directly into my Croft 25 valve preamp. Hope this helps.
    Cheers, Jeff

  4. #24
    Join Date: May 2019

    Location: Spain

    Posts: 19
    I'm Alberto.

    Default

    Thanks for your reply, Jeff.
    I had two MM cartridges (Nagaoka Mp-110 and Grado Dj200i) and finally I bought a Hana ML. It sounds very good with the original tonearm rewired and with the additional counterweight. So much detailed sound, separated, ... So nice, but I don't know if I could get more from that cartridge, I guess so. It has less than 50 hours of use.
    I think I'm gonna try a Jelco 750 or 850, it's an affordable tonearm, an upgrade (I guess) and very good reviews/opinions.

  5. #25
    Join Date: Nov 2008

    Location: North Down /Northern Ireland/ UK

    Posts: 18,553
    I'm Neil.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Floyddroid View Post
    The Jelco 750 isn't the panacea people think it is. It is all dependent on good pairing. I had one on a Garrard 401 and found it dull as dish water using a myriad of cartridges. if you want to start using MC carts try a more appropriate vessel that the 1210.
    The 1200 is a perfectly good vessel, if its issues have been addressed, platter, psu, feet etc. I run one with a mk7 Triplanar arm and VDH Frog Gold.

    The Jelco750 does suit the 1200 well, particularly with a Denon 103, and heavier head-shell.

    I was not that impressed with Hana, another flavour of the month product I feel.
    Regards Neil

  6. #26
    Join Date: Jul 2011

    Location: Northamptonish

    Posts: 1,648
    I'm Peter.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Souldust View Post
    Thanks for your reply, Jeff.
    I had two MM cartridges (Nagaoka Mp-110 and Grado Dj200i) and finally I bought a Hana ML. It sounds very good with the original tonearm rewired and with the additional counterweight. So much detailed sound, separated, ... So nice, but I don't know if I could get more from that cartridge, I guess so. It has less than 50 hours of use.
    I think I'm gonna try a Jelco 750 or 850, it's an affordable tonearm, an upgrade (I guess) and very good reviews/opinions.
    Having used several Jelco arms over the years (250, 750D, 750E and, now, 850L), I strongly recommend you go for the 850 if you can stretch financially. It's a clear upgrade from the earlier ones, and is much better imo. Ammonite Audio are doing a deal atm. They will also advise whether a 9 inch or 10 inch one is best for your deck.

  7. #27
    Join Date: May 2019

    Location: Spain

    Posts: 19
    I'm Alberto.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by petrat View Post
    Having used several Jelco arms over the years (250, 750D, 750E and, now, 850L), I strongly recommend you go for the 850 if you can stretch financially. It's a clear upgrade from the earlier ones, and is much better imo. Ammonite Audio are doing a deal atm. They will also advise whether a 9 inch or 10 inch one is best for your deck.
    Thanks for your advise. I haven't see online the mass of 850, so do you think will match good with a Hana Ml (10 of compliance, 9,5gr)?
    Anyone here has a Sorane or any opinion?

    Cheers

  8. #28
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Norwich

    Posts: 2,629
    I'm Hugo.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Souldust View Post
    Thanks for your advise. I haven't see online the mass of 850, so do you think will match good with a Hana Ml (10 of compliance, 9,5gr)?
    Anyone here has a Sorane or any opinion?

    Cheers
    The Jelco TK-850S has a quoted effective mass of 13.4g, with the supplied HS-25 headshell. That compliance figure of 10cu for the Hana must be the typical Japanese spec measured at 100Hz, eg an indication of trackability rather than actual suspension compliance. Assuming that the actual dynamic compliance at 10Hz is around 15cu, as is most likely, then you are looking at a fundamental arm/cartridge resonance of 9Hz, which is good.

  9. #29
    Join Date: May 2019

    Location: Spain

    Posts: 19
    I'm Alberto.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ammonite Acoustics View Post
    The Jelco TK-850S has a quoted effective mass of 13.4g, with the supplied HS-25 headshell. That compliance figure of 10cu for the Hana must be the typical Japanese spec measured at 100Hz, eg an indication of trackability rather than actual suspension compliance. Assuming that the actual dynamic compliance at 10Hz is around 15cu, as is most likely, then you are looking at a fundamental arm/cartridge resonance of 9Hz, which is good.
    In that case, the actual dynamic compliance at 10hz is 17, if I'm not wrong the resonance is:

    1000/(6,28*SQRT( (13,4+9,5)*17)=8,07Hz

    Is too low?

  10. #30
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Norwich

    Posts: 2,629
    I'm Hugo.

    Default

    Much easier just to use the resonance evaluator over at Vinyl Engine than resort to mathematics, but you have to be registered there to use it. Are you sure the actual dynamic compliance at 10Hz is 17? It's actually very difficult to apply a broad assumption to 100Hz specifications, to get 10Hz dynamic compliance. In any case, when Paul Rigby reviewed the Hana ML, he used an Origin Live Enterprise 12" to good effect, and that arm's effective mass is somewhere between 16g and 17g, so I would not worry about arm mass being theoretically a touch too high. And 8Hz is not too low.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast



 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •