The latest corrector does everything better then SU2-834PT except one, very critical thing without which I can’t not fully devote my hart to it. Without doing into the detail I juts name that it has to do with certain aspects of upper bass reproduction. To elaborate on it would require writing many-many sentences that I would like to avoid at this point.

The Cat

C,

I very much agree about the benefits of spherical needle, partially on the older records and out of condition records, and this is one of the reasons why people have multiple arms on TTs. Yes, in many cases the spherical stylus “tracks better” 9more about it below) but does is mean that we have to name the benefits that we get out of the modern complex-shaped cartridges as “distortions? I do not think so.

First of all there are many schools of thinking about “what would happen under a microscope”. I know very credible people who would very scientifically, very reasonably, with evidences, graphs, formulas and calculation convince anyone that none-spherical stylus is a better grove retrieving mechanism then spherical one. I know also very credible people who would prove the opposite. I really do not know, or care about the truth on this subject. Also, I do not try to find a correct answer by examining the extraneous language of the process.

I always have two stereo arms in use: one is a contemporary complex-shaped stereo needle and one with an older spherical (this is how I ended up with my Denons). By flipping a switch on the preamp and by looking which record (label, pressing, year, record conditions, country and so on…) plays better…  the unexpected truth comes through. The truth that I’ve discovered is that ANY record if it’s in a mint shape plays very fine on a better none-spherical needle. As soon a record is worn, even very slightly buy previous play or has any other imperfection (off-centered for instance or dirt) then the spherical needle defiantly helps.

The spherical shape of the stylus is very forgiving. Considering that 70% of people out there play with non-perfectly set up analog, and that many people play used records that were brutally abused in 50-80 by “ordinary people” it is not secret why many audio-folks have “bias to the spherical needles” and why they “admire” the Denons

I have a wonderful album: Horowitz celebrating his 25th anniversary of his American debut playing in Carnegie Hall on February 25 1953. (RCA LM-6014)  Begin of 50s was good times for Horowitz and he played very fine. The recording is phenomenal, probably the one of the best piano recording I heard. You know those albums: oversized cardboard boxes, first non-breakable records, strong grooves size of the damn Everest and that staggering dynamic range…. The record is in very shape and plays very fine. In the end of the evening the banger-Horowitz went for his show-peace – his own interpretation of Liszt’s Hungarian Rhapsodies #2. Well, considering the Horowitz’s personal dynamic range, the dynamic recording, and the fact that the record was cut in mid 50s any other shape of needle besides a spherical was not able to handle it (and not only this track but the entire album). OK, now is the punch line…. A few months ago I bought the first pressing of the same album… only sealed (paid $60 - love Horowitz in the end of 40s begin of 50s)... and you know what? Suddenly the entire album could be perfectly tracked with the contemporary shaped needles. Moreover, because they have no tractability problems they do sound WAY better! Would I call it “the distortions”? If I do then I love each moment of those “distortions”!!! :-)

This all boils down to a rhetorical question: are we wiling to be right or to be happy? Many contemporary-shaped needles do sound better and particularly on the complex music and with the context of mostly unknown in audio full-range sound reproduction. Should we have records in better shape then we might play them with complex-shaped needles. But if you are not so lucky then we build for ourselves the theories that conus-shaped needles track better then the oval needles, and particularly if the record was cut by triangle-shaped cutter.

Rgs,
Romy the Cat

Looking at my site’s stats I find is ridicules that the thread about Denon 103 is so frequently referenced from others sites and that near 50K people have read it. People like to argue out there if was right or wrong about my concussions regarding Denon 103. Some point my (what they feel are) “mistakes” or some even quote my typical mistypings accusing me that if I cannot type them my conclusions about Denon are incorrect. It is amassing how creative the people might be out there.

I do not debate or defends my position about Denon 103. I do not like this cartridge. I do not use it. I hate the whole stiff reading character of it sound. I do not like the sound of the records that remind me the Denon 103, and there are plenty of them. I admit that I do not like rigid sound from many analog installations that I heard – I cannot explain to people how “soft” analog shall sound. Most of the people make LP to sound like CD and cold and “violet” sound is a definition of quietly for them. To Each His Own, why would I care?

However, there is a group of the people out there that have a very different reaction to my Denon 103 dislike. They read each page of the thread multiple times and then they conduce that… live is too short to worry about Denon sound.

Well, I have seen it many times and I would not argue that live is too short to wary about Denon 103 but what it has to do with YOUR curiosity about the subject? I did have my interest about the Denon 103 sound, I invested my time and efforts to investigate the subject, reach my own concussions… What the shortage of the live has to do with the Denon 103 sound? If you not willing to invest your time in negotiation with Denon 103 then it is fine – not one oblige you. How the fact the live is too short explains anything about 103. The alight the drivers, to clean records, to put the speakers out of box, and to plug an amplifier into the wall – they all activities are too primitive from the perspective “live too short”. I agree with it but live is also what we do and if you completely voluntary have chose for yourself that the sound of cartridges interest you then the justification “live is too short” is not an explanation but rather a capitulation of interest. Again, there is nothing wrong with it bit it has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of Denon 103 sound.

It truly amasses me when people with no sense of actions perform brainless activity and presume that anyone ease also are driven by senselessness and meaninglessness what the subject is very specific and very well-defied.

Romy the Cat wrote:

A few months ago I bought the first pressing of the same album… only sealed (paid $60 - love Horowitz in the end of 40s begin of 50s)... and you know what? Suddenly the entire album could be perfectly tracked with the contemporary shaped needles. Moreover, because they have no tractability problems they do sound WAY better! Would I call it “the distortions”? If I do then I love each moment of those “distortions”!!! :-) Romy the Cat

sorry to bring up this old stuff. especialy when its the moron fanboy topic thread. But what an outstanding find.  I will be looking out for a virgin copy.