The Marco-boy main system, as of August 2020

[Macca]

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 'bouncy' bass is defo a characteristic of both the Shure cartridge used and the EMT turntable and arm it was on

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!
.

Oh yes, quite agree. Although I wonder if it could be replicated with EQ?

I've got a couple of Stanton 500s that do a similar thing, big, rich bouncy bass that's ideal for that old chart stuff. But just a bit too crude if you want to listen to something more 'delicate.'

Having said that I just had a look for them and they aren't where I thought they were, so maybe I gave them away. I still have a 6881EEE which is sort of a halfway house between big and bouncy and detailed and delicate.

[Marco]

Oh yes, quite agree. Although I wonder if it could be replicated with EQ?

I've got a couple of Stanton 500s that do a similar thing, big, rich bouncy bass that's ideal for that old chart stuff. But just a bit too crude if you want to listen to something more 'delicate.'

Having said that I just had a look for them and they aren't where I thought they were, so maybe I gave them away. I still have a 6881EEE which is sort of a halfway house between big and bouncy and detailed and delicate.

Indeed... Although the difference with the Shure SC35C is the high-quality of the diamond profile on its NOS stylus, which allows it to do the 'bass boogie' thang and also delicacy and finesse.

I was playing a symphony recording with it last night, from Saint-Saëns, recorded in 1968, on the Decca black label [mint original copy], and it sounded stunning - every subtle musical detail and nuance was present and correct, and when the crescendos hit, it nearly blew me off my seat, such was the power and authority of the lower registers!!

Shame you can't find your Stanton (500AL). If you do, and it's a gold-bodied one with a NOS stylus, let me know and I'll buy it from you, as current production ones sound nothing like it.

Marco.

[Macca]

Actually thinking about it they may have been 680s not 500s.

The 681EEE is more like what you are describing with the Shure.

[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.

Yup, the latter is my main criticism with how most modern cartridges are 'voiced', which as you say, is to emphasise the 'hi-fi aspects' of the sound, often at the expense of a realistic portrayal of the music's natural tonal and timbre qualities. The best vintage cartridges (and also professional broadcast ones, such as the SC35C) don't do that, and instead get that right!

That's why I'm no longer interested in any modern cartridge that isn't 'voiced' to faithfully reproduce the above, as ultimately that's what is important to me and guarantees musical satisfaction from my vinyl listening

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.

I've heard countless different types of digitally reproduced music, some at a very high standard, including that in my own system, but NONE I've heard so far produce the 'elastic bass' (boogie factor) you're referring to. For me, it's a trait intrinsic to vinyl replay (and not a coloration either, but simply something naturally present in the grooves of vinyl records) that digital, as good as it is (at its best), simply by its very nature, is unable to replicate.

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.

Yeah, I know *exactly* what you mean!

I bought a Nakamichi BX-300E brand new in the late 80s [later upgraded to a DR-2], which was part of my early-20s bedroom system in my parents house, and used to use BASF Chromedioxid tape to record vinyl from my (then) Ariston RD-11S T/T, with Linn LV-V arm, fitted with an ADC magnesium headshell and Denon DL-103, through a Sondex S230 amp (MM phono stage)/Lentek MC head amp, and play the tapes not only on the Nak, but my uncle's superb Alpine car stereo system (in his Opel Manta, lol), and he was always shocked and stunned at how good it sounded!

He could never quite believe it was vinyl records he was listening to... There's defo a warmth, solidity and 'unfussy musicality' to the sound of compact cassette tape, done well, as long as you avoided playing the prerecorded shite sold back then, which invariably sounded dull and lifeless, primarily due to having the dynamics compressed by Dolby NR, during the production process [often together with insufficient recording levels/sub-optimal EQ], and also the poor quality of the mass-produced 'normal' tape used.

But if you had a top-notch vinyl or CD source and recorded it with quality chrome (or metal) tape, through any quality Jap tape deck of the day (without worn heads), got the levels and EQ spot on, and left Dolby NR off [a little tape hiss between tracks was nothing], then the SQ could be stunning! Used to have loads of fun doing that back in the day

Marco.

[Marco]

Ok, just a small update, regarding the loading plugs, which among possible others, Chris may be interested in...

I mentioned that I reckoned (thanks to Barry's earlier rough calculations) that adding 180pF of capacitance was probably the optimal figure in my system, but of course I currently only had access to either 150 or 200pF plugs (or higher).

However, I've discovered [via an email exchange with the manufacturer] that the short 'Y' adapter leads I was originally using contributed 70pF capacitance to whichever plugs I fitted. So... If I used the 'Red' 250pF plugs, a figure that represented the inclusion of 70pF from the partnering leads (and which I was told contained a 180pF resistor), then by not using the leads, just the brass jumpers, I would achieve the desired 180pF!

So that's what I've done... And the sound now is really STUNNING! Low bass seems subjectively deeper, with more gravitas, midrange airier and even more mellifluous, and the highs as pin-sharp and sparkly, as a very pin-sharp and sparkly thing, with no trace whatsoever of harshness or 'glare'.

Bloody hell, I'm genuinely shocked and stunned at how good my SC35C cartridge sounds now - it really has no right to sound THIS good!! Right, I'm off to spin a few more choons before bed, that is *if* I can drag myself away from my record collection!

Marco.

[Barry]

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

Marco.

A couple of years ago I bought an EMT TS-G headshell which came with a Shure SC35 cartridge (sans stylus). I gave the cartridge body to you Marco - did you dispense with it because it was made in Mexico?

There is an awful amount of unsubstantiated snobbery about such things. I'm sure Shure applied the same exacting standards and inspection to their products made in Mexico as they did to those made in Evanstone US. It's the same with Leica products - some of their lenses were made in Canada, and heaven forfend, in Portugal, all made, examined and tested to Leica's exacting standards, but some Leica snobs will have nothing to do with them: only those made in Wetzlar, Germany are good enough for them.

[Marco]

Hi Barry,

No I haven't 'dispensed' with it at all. It's in my spares box, fitted with a latest production Shure stylus.

I intend on fitting it with one of the NOS Shure styli [undoubtedly the most important factor in generating the best sound] I recently bought on ebay, and then do a comparison between Evanston and 'Mexico vintage' bodies, in the same headshell...

I suspect you'll be interested in the outcome of that!

Marco.

P.S Well done, btw, for coming up with the correct added capacitance figure for the loading plugs (see my previous post)

[Marco]

Another example of 'juicy' bass, only available on vinyl, again courtesy of a Shure SC35C:



Fast-forward to 20.54 and check out that intro to the Fine Young Cannibals!

Oh yeah baby... Deep, meaty and chunkier than a Yorkie bar...!

Marco.

[Marco]

In other news, my NOS Goldring G820 has arrived safely from Holland, with its NOS (conical) stylus... However, I've also managed to source a NOS version of the, rare-as-hen's teeth, elliptical (bi-radial) version, which is purported to sound the dog's bollocks:





So... I'll be able to try both styli in the same generator and see how the sound compares - should be fun! And also comparing the G820 (fitted with either stylus) with both the Goldring G800 and also my Shure SC35C, so look out that one, folks!

Marco.

[RobbieGong]

Get in there Marco, you're defo having fun arnt you