Toole Blind Cartridge Comparison

[JP]

In my experiments If there's no mistracking or geometry issues with the groove (like a .3 on an inner groove), once FR is normalized I've not been able to to reliably hear the differences in a DBT, and I'm not aware of anyone else that has either.

 

[watchnerd]

In my experiments If there's no mistracking or geometry issues with the groove (like a .3 on an inner groove), once FR is normalized I've not been able to to reliably hear the differences in a DBT, and I'm not aware of anyone else that has either.

Yeah, but the converse isn't true.

EQing the FR doesn't make all carts track equally well or solve mistracking issues.

This is easy to demo on torture tracks.

EQ does a heckuva lot, but it's not a silver bullet to all cart performance or set up differences.

 

[JP]

That's quite a different statement than your previous post.

Torture tracks can be interesting from an engineering prowess perspective, but for the majority of people are rather pointless as a reference to performance with typical program material. Outside of IGD due to well-known geometric issues I've never come across a cart that mistracked on outer grooves that wasn't broken in some way or horribly mismatched with the arm. I've no doubt that others may have due to pathological setup issues or truly awfully designed carts, but such things shouldn't be used as evidence.

I'm not aware of any evidence of audibility of, say, a .3 x .7 elliptical on an outer groove vs. an LC/MR, or a boron vs. aluminum cantilever once level and FR are normalized. I'd imagine there's something out there with truly horrible distortion or separation that would be audible, but I'd consider that to be unusual, and not necessarily directly attributable to things like stylus shape or cantilever material.

Unfortunately most of my tests were long ago and I no longer have the files, but there are a few scattered about. IIRC I sent you the 2M Blue vs. Kleos (8/18 Al vs. 3/75 B) with no EQ, but there's also a 740ML vs. OC9XEN EQd. It'd be great if other folks interested in the topic put together and posted their tests, or at least the audio.

We're just not that sensitive to distortion, and the bar for separation is also rather low, not that cantilever material or stylus shape is going to have any meaningful impact on the latter. With stylus assembly swaps I've seen similar differences with similar magnitudes when stylus shapes and cantilever materials don't change, so I find it troublesome to attribute such changes to those things in a categorical way.

If you've data/evidence on the matter, please share it.

 

[watchnerd]

That's quite a different statement than your previous post.

Torture tracks can be interesting from an engineering prowess perspective, but for the majority of people are rather pointless as a reference to performance with typical program material. Outside of IGD due to well-known geometric issues I've never come across a cart that mistracked on outer grooves that wasn't broken in some way or horribly mismatched with the arm. I've no doubt that others may have due to pathological setup issues or truly awfully designed carts, but such things shouldn't be used as evidence.

I'm not aware of any evidence of audibility of, say, a .3 x .7 elliptical on an outer groove vs. an LC/MR, or a boron vs. aluminum cantilever once level and FR are normalized. I'd imagine there's something out there with truly horrible distortion or separation that would be audible, but I'd consider that to be unusual, and not necessarily directly attributable to things like stylus shape or cantilever material.

Unfortunately most of my tests were long ago and I no longer have the files, but there are a few scattered about. IIRC I sent you the 2M Blue vs. Kleos (8/18 Al vs. 3/75 B) with no EQ, but there's also a 740ML vs. OC9XEN EQd. It'd be great if other folks interested in the topic put together and posted their tests, or at least the audio.

We're just not that sensitive to distortion, and the bar for separation is also rather low, not that cantilever material or stylus shape is going to have any meaningful impact on the latter. With stylus assembly swaps I've seen similar differences with similar magnitudes when stylus shapes and cantilever materials don't change, so I find it troublesome to attribute such changes to those things in a categorical way.

If you've data/evidence on the matter, please share it.

My previous post said is that while EQ of FR covers the major issues, trackability, distortion, and stereo separation matter, too.

"FR is the majority of the subjective experience (obviously), but there are still other factors like tracking, channel separation, distortion, and harmonic resonances that come into play, as well."

I don’t think we’re in disagreement.

 

[DSJR]

That 'Toole Test' was useless really, as the conclusions basically showed how subjective the results were... Why not reference to the master tape or file that produced the vinyl? The SME III was a 'soft-gentle-warm-bland sounding arm with many cartridges (too much plastic in the pivot end), although later 'wands' seemed to perform better, but I'd never have fitted an MC type in it, unless it was a higher compliance Denon 304 or similar.

I remember being told that many MC 'response resonances' at 10khz or so were more the tie-wire rather than tip/cantilever resonances, but I have no obvious proof of that other than UK reviews with measurements to show the response 'wrinkles.'

I rather liked the Lowbeats.de cartridge tests of old and now abandoned it seems. The cartridge was properly tested using as inert a tonearm as possible (Rega 9 at the time I think), for distortion and response and then some sound-bites were recorded and put on-site. I remember the differences in the Ortofon 2M and AT VM540/740 were easy to hear. These days, the reviews are purely subjective, so meaningless really in the wider scheme of things.

I retain an old low hours AT120E, which is the forerunner of the VM530 model. It was tested once in HiFi Choice I think and shows the characteristic hf peak of around +6dB at 10kHz. Subjectively in a lowish mass arm, it's not at all unpleasant, merely livening up some older dull-sounding pressings. I do acknowledge that their ML tips seem to 'sharpen up' the hf tones a bit and with some tweeter settings out there, no doubt this could be tiring. the 'SH' styli they make, seem to keep the detail while subjectively calming it all down somewhat I think, even/especially on the VM95 platform.

 

[Mojo Warrior]

I missed this article from 1980 but I have long suspected the results since the 1970s while working in a stereo shop. There was never any need to spend more than a V-15 or M95 or XLM. Heck, the budget priced Grado FTE ( under $10 IIRC ) back in the 1970s was adequate for most systems and listeners.

 

[Elkerton]

DSJR,
Useless to you perhaps, but for the rest of us hard data, based on carefully controlled double-blind listening tests. My guess is that any of the components could change, and the results would be similar- repeatability: proof of scientific analysis.

 

[AndyMorris]

Yes, it is sad these kinds of tests are rare. They are costly, and we have to thank the largess of Canada's National Research Centre and the admittedly self-interest of Harman for advancing such tests.

Also, it really pigs off advertisers

 

[DSJR]

DSJR,
Useless to you perhaps, but for the rest of us hard data, based on carefully controlled double-blind listening tests. My guess is that any of the components could change, and the results would be similar- repeatability: proof of scientific analysis.

Sure it's data, but what's the reference, other than a general preference for the nicest tone?

In many 80s systems, the preference was for a pickup with a response suckout in the mid kHz region - all the related Japanese bodied MM models (P77 derivatives in the UK and Australia, Rega R100 we loved so much back then, Supex SM100E, an FR MM or two and the legendary Grace models which I believe used the same basic body). These live on in the Sumiko range, most evidently in the Pearl elliptical tip model, which has held a good price. Today, I find the balance too heavy and dull (my hearing doesn't help a balance like this either and I try to take this into account).

Digital changed all of that and today, many pickups aim for a flatish lower kHz region, the response allowed its head further up where many listeners don't notice as much. I suspect the generally better quality of diamond finish helps keep the worst of surface noise under control - Vintage posters like me who knew the Shure M95-ED and so on - did you ever look at the stylus under a proper microscope? They were awful, dirty-diamonds roughly formed and finished - and don't think the V15 III got away with it either...

Apologies folks, I'm going off on one again. I just wish Dr Toole and his team had a proper master-quality reference to refer the three pickups (and any subsequent test subjects) to. Many listeners back then reacted badly to the 'sound' of CD, but that was because the playback systems were so often skewed towards a flawed vinyl balance back then. Today, these early CDs sound fine in my experience...

 

[JP]

That 'Toole Test' was useless really, as the conclusions basically showed how subjective the results were... Why not reference to the master tape or file that produced the vinyl? The SME III was a 'soft-gentle-warm-bland sounding arm with many cartridges (too much plastic in the pivot end), although later 'wands' seemed to perform better, but I'd never have fitted an MC type in it, unless it was a higher compliance Denon 304 or similar.

You call an objective test useless because it wasn’t designed to provide data on what you want, and then go on a purely subjective and non-sensical critique of the tonearm used? “Because plastic”. Come on.

 

[DSJR]

You call an objective test useless because it wasn’t designed to provide data on what you want, and then go on a purely subjective and non-sensical critique of the tonearm used? “Because plastic”. Come on.

You forget what I was and how far back I go I used this goddamned arm on many turntables at the time, believe me, and speak from some experience of its obvious character compared to its peers. Had Dr Toole used the Mission 774 arm instead however (this in the days before the SME V, Rega RB300 series or Alphason HR100S), the arm wouldn't have played any part at all in the listener's preferences, especially if a reference music source was used. The use of so much plastic always caused concern and not just from me, I can assure you! If one's tastes were orchestral and chamber music with no percussive dynamics as rock and jazz has routinely, maybe the subjective blandness wouldn't be noticed as much.

The SME III was a bland toned arm (ask any of my compatriots of the time), seemingly compressing any music played using then popular medium compliance pickups, this in direct comparison with other tonearms and deck combinations AS WELL AS MASTER RECORDINGS which always had better dynamics anyway, but which emphasised the issues. The SME IV, V and later, the 309, never had this sonic issue and really do deserve their excellent if pricey reputation! SME did some slight changes to the wand and made the headshell slightly deeper, and this helped a bit, but it was never a fully dramatic 'sound' irrespective of the deck it was fitted to or really, pickup used. The Ortofon Concorde wands did help a bit and made excellent sense at the time, but obviously for us young bucks, not altogether suitable for the rock music we played and the rise and rise of a certain Scottish turntable (we did have other good UK made alternatives too in fairness).

For a more in-depth objective take on the SME III, take a look at the early 70s HiFi Choice 'Tonearm' objective and subjective tests on 'worldradiohistory' in the UK section. the III was used on a lot of the turntables tested it appears.

I'm trying not to be tribal here. I knew this arm (and many colleagues and associates at the time knew it too and agreed on it's added sonic 'flavour.'

 

[JP]

I’m not reading all of that, but a glance tells me you’re just digging a deeper hole. Where are the actual facts?

 

[Elkerton]

To be fair, the Mission 774 was a better arm with fewer resonances, and I can provide the data if needed, but that doesn't diminish Toole's results much imho.