 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
137.110.61.179
If the AT-33EV falls on the warm/smooth side of the spectrum, and the OC9/MLIII is considered bright, lean, fast, and bordering on harsh in some systems, where does the AT-F7 fall? I've searched the archives but didn't get a feel about how the AT-F7 sounds in this regard. Any thoughts?
Follow Ups:
The F7 really likes a good pressing. That's where you get the smooth top end. On played/used, it can be more revealing of previous wear. It really shines in bringing out texture, and has good, fast transient response. I would be happy to pull a needle drop and share. I don't see that on this forum, so shoot me a PM and I'll put something together.
I made a new protractor my myself based on the inner groove DIN 57.5mm dimension, which gives a bit more leeway on the inner grooves, and that has been a very good move. This cart is stupid good for $250.
So, FWIW, I am hearing deteriorating performance as I cruise past the 300 hour mark. I must say I had hoped to get more life out of the stylus. Thought I would add this to the thread.
Hi Jupiterboy,
Thanks for the comments. What VTF do you use with the F7?
Also do you notice a rise in overall distortion with a 57.5mm inner grove setting? I assume you did this to compensate for some inner groove issues you had with the F7?
Thanks again.
On paper, yes. The reason is that, to me it seems lots of prog, jazz, and classical tends to run right up to the label, so the modified inner radius is an experiment. Second side of Wire, Chairs Missing worked pretty well last night and that goes right to the label.
As mentioned, the cart has no issues on clean pressings, but on previously played records, it is not as good as a microline like the 440MLa.
I have a Rega 300 series arm, and I use the 1mm spacer. That's as good as I can get the VTA, and I'm currently doing 1.8g VTF, a little lighter than recommended.
Actually Jupiterboy and I were discussing this cartridge a few weeks ago!
The frequency response of the F7 is very similar to the OC9 in tonal balance and in my system has an impressively flat response.
However, the elliptical stylus and higher effective tip mass make for a good but not outstanding cartridge that trips up on hot cuts with a lot of HF energy - you may have sibilance issues. In other words it can sound a little coarse when stressed. I bought one out of curiousity, but will be replacing the cantilever and tip to bring it more in line to what I require - the generator is fundamentally good and I think very similar to the OC series.
The stock version on "normal" LPs should sound pleasing. However, I prefer my Denon DL301/II for musicality and overall presentation and I think represents better value for similar money. It also tracks at a lower VTF (1.4g) than AT-F7 so won't wear out as fast...
Unless you really prefer AT as a brand, check out the Denon DL301/II.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Thank you very much for your insightful reply. Yes, I did see your and Jupiterboy's discussion which were some of the most informative discussions I have seen on this cart. If you don't mind me asking, which speakers are you using in your system?The reason for my interest in the F7 is that I have used a Denon 103 (on a rather heavy ~20g tonearm) for some time and while I find the mid-range of the Denon to be nothing short of spectacular, for my next cart I was looking for something that had a greater level of high-frequency refinement. I had read that the F-series ATs (F3, F7) had a less course, smoother HF response than similarly priced MCs. That said, given that the 103 and 301 have a similar sonic signature, seems like you're suggesting that I should look beyond F7. Is that right?
BTW, in your sig, isn't it: "Beauty is truth. Truth is beauty."
Edits: 05/23/15 05/23/15
Hi
It sounds like your requirements are for a lower compliance cartridge than even the 103 given the high mass of your arm, so the DL301 is out of the question. In fact, the OC9 and F7 are probably not suitable either. What is your price range? You may have to look at the Ortofon Quintet or Cadenza range for a more suitable match or even Clearaudio. The DL301 in a medium mass arm (12g) has a LF resonance of just under 8Hz which is a borderline match. Even the F7 gave a LF resonance of about 9Hz. I use fluid damping to ensure a good performance.
If you are getting a dulled HF performance, that could be related to the spherical stylus, but check the arm height. The "tail down" recommendation you often read about is just plain wrong!! Assuming the stylus has been correctly mounted, correct alignment for VTA for the design *should* be achieved with the top of the cartridge parallel to the record. Manufacturing defects are usually responsible for requiring a deviation from this. The other possibility is that the mass of the arm is too high even for the DL103. I'm assuming the arm is not something you want to change!
My speakers are MartinLogan Summits on the end of a Bryston 4BSST and I have selected everything to be as neutral as possible. I'm not after warm, detailed or whatever... I just wanted it to be accurate!
My signature is extracted from Keats' poem "Ode on a Grecian Urn" (last verse):
"....
When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe
Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say'st,
'Beauty is truth, truth beauty,-that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.'
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
How many dB of noise do you see in your trace? Looks like it could be > 5dB at high frequency.
The reference signal used is (lateral cut) white noise which is band limited to 23kHz. Being noise, the envelope is dependent on the duration being averaged and the FFT length. However, it is the "average" value that I use as a guide and the response is within (roughly) ±2dB ref 1kHz. As far as tonal perceptions of "bright" "dull" etc, that is affected by the relative amplitude in the presence band around 8 to 12kHz. Changes beyond this frequency range are less obvious if the response up to 12kHz or so is reasonably flat. Subjectively (according to Ortofon), a rising response up to 20kHz is preferred. AT certainly appear to follow this guidance as well.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Hmmm, while the plot is interesting and does give you a sense of gross error and response trend, one needs to be careful in extrapolating evidence or neutrality or linearity from the curve you show. The *best* error is a discernible ±2dB at one of the most sensitive hearing points and the noise in the data seems to be more that double that between 10-20kHz. This could mean an absolute shift of > 8dB between frequency points in the upper treble... and we have yet to include systematic error.
For sure, a lot of what is considered bright or dull happens in the 8-12 kHz range, but I want to point out that the tonal perception of these characteristics extends beyond that range. I know these ranges are ill defined and sorry for pointing this out it its obvious, but if you look at the frequency profile of a bass guitar, for example, the attack of a percussive slap is right around 4-6kHz. You remove that band and boost 12kHz 10dB, it will still sound dull and thuddy. The brilliance the we associate with cymbal crashes starts around 5kHz which also assists in forming our opinion of brightness.
I was unaware that Ortofon uses a rising response. I will look at my frequency charts for my Denon and other carts to see if they follow this trend. Thanks.
Hi Anthony,You are absolutely right in that with that arm weight, I need a low compliance cart. The Denon 103 shows a resonance in my system around 9Hz. As you note, this is on the low end of what is desirable. However, I did not mention that I am running a rather heavy headshell (and am using a dampener) picked out to work with the Denon. Going to a very light headshell makes the arm compatible with carts that have a compliance upwards to about 15x10-6 cm/dyne.
Not to go into the issue too deeply, but my problem with the Denon is that the HF can get a bit tizzy/splashy. Clearly, additional arm loading would not be helpful (which is why I mentioned the arm weight.) I've played with alignment, loading and component swapping quite a bit, and don't have this issue with MM carts I have used, so I'm fairly sure this character resides with the cart (or possibly is a product of how the sound of the cart synergizes in my system as a whole.) I am using rather bright and resolving speakers (Focal Electra 906s), so any issues with the HF are easily heard.
My budget is around $250-300. I considered the Quintet, and the Red is in my price range, but I generally prefer a nude stylus... and personally have a bit of an issue paying several hundred for a bonded stylus. Unfortunately, the Blue is out of my price range.
Anyway, any suggestions are appreciated. Thank you for the very complete reply!
Re: Keats - ah, I've usually seen that adapted, not the direct quote. Thanks again.
Edits: 05/23/15
Hi
From your description of tizzy/splashy, the first question that comes to mind is how many hours you have put on the cartridge?
At the best of times a spherical stylus already has an inherently higher level of FM distortion introduced to the signal due to the large scanning radius and this becomes worse as you move towards the inner grooves.
In addition to this, as the stylus wears, as you are probably aware, you get flats worn into the scanning surface and this increases the distortion even more. This occurs after only about 150 hours or so. In other words you don't really get many hours on the tip before the distortion at 15kHz starts to increase above 3%. In my personal experience, I can hear degradation out of ordinary (non-jewellery grade) elliptical styli after about 250 to 300 hours after which I reject them.
The other question relates to the records you play and their "vintage". The VTA requirements of new pressings (and those going back to the late 80s and early 90s) are much higher than those from the 60s through to mid 80s. VTA mismatch with respect to the cutting head can also account for the distortions you hear even if you have a "perfectly" aligned playback system with correct VTA as defined by the DL103 since the mismatch in VTA causes significant IM distortion and the worse the mismatch the higher the order of the IM distortion components.
I therefore have cartridges of differing ages with different VTA settings to match the pressing "era".
RE my signature, I'm impressed that you paid attention to it! Most people don't bother to look at them.... I capitalised the second "Beauty" so that it would be read in the correct "sense" of the original and to emphasise the symmetry..
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
RE: Keats - thanks, I always look at the sig as it gives an insight into the person I am conversing with.
My cart has between 500 and 1000 hours on it, though the issue has been there since day one... if anything, it's gotten better (or I have become more used to it) over time.
"I therefore have cartridges of differing ages with different VTA settings to match the pressing "era"."
So you do a full set-up each time you play an album from a different era? Your dedication to accurate playback is remarkable. I can't imagine retiring or refurbing a cartridge after a few hundred hours. I think I'd have to retire vinyl playback as the cost of maintaining that exacting level would have me living on the street in no time.
Hi
I would say that your DL103 is probably due for a retip! If you are truly nearing 1000 hours, there is a strong likelihood of damage being done!
However, since you say that you have been experiencing the tizz issue since the beginning, this points to the fact that you are either sensitive to the distortion created by the spherical stylus or there is some setup problem with tonearm geometric alignment or antiskate. Regardless of the opinions of some that no antiskate is preferable, the laws of physics indicate that you should use it.
Since you have the option of using a low mass headshell, perhaps an OC9III might be the best option. I agree that the Ortofons are not exactly attractive based on the price. The low compliance and elliptical stylus will be causing significant wear on the records for the low end models. From what I read in another thread, the quality is not great either with significant azimuth errors. Having said that my F7 wasn't perfect with about 3° error.
"So you do a full set-up each time you play an album from a different era?"
Not quite!! I have two decks set up with appropriate cartridges - one for 70s and 80s, the second one more suited for current LPs, and an ELP laser turntable for the really old stuff. In the 60s, VTA wasn't quite so well defined, but as long as you are within 5 degrees or so, it is hard to notice.
However, my problem is that I am constantly swapping things out to experiment - For me that is the fun of this hobby...
My latest experiments with a Shure V15V/JICO SAS show that even with nearly 100% error in VTA, the records can still be played to an acceptable level, but the result is clearly not quite the same as using the correct cartridge VTA. However for transcription purposes, it is important to me to do the most accurate transfer possible. I kept my late father's old cartridges (including a late 60s Stanton 681EE which has a VTA of around 15 degrees).
All of the important recordings that we have on LP have largely been duplicated on CD so that is what I listen to "recreationally". The turntables are for transcription of the rare recordings and recordings that have not or will not be released digitally.
Before transcription, each record is carefully measured for thickness for 16 measurements which tells me what shims I need to get to my reference SRA. The record is carefully washed and then the recording and mastering process begins.. The problem is finding the time!! I am quite proud of the results - my mum was certainly shocked to hear what her LPs could actually sound like once cleaned up!
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
"Before transcription, each record is carefully measured for thickness for 16 measurements which tells me what shims I need to get to my reference SRA. The record is carefully washed and then the recording and mastering process begins.. The problem is finding the time!!"
No doubt when you are meticulous to that level! Very, very interesting read and thanks for the suggestion. Not surprised you saw that the large error in VTA wasn't a deal breaker. I don't typically adjust VTA between my thinner and 180 gram records: there is sonic degradation as you deviate from ideal VTA, but when you play albums a few hours a night, you could go mad making those changes each an every time.
Thanks again.
Don't want to get too far off topic, but IMO the OC9 family has been unjustly criticized. Not sure how it got it's reputation, but follows are my observations after about 20 years or so owning OC9 family cartridges.I never considered the OC9 II or III to be bright, lean or harsh. In a good arm with a good phono stage, the OC9 family are particularly good performers capable of equaling or bettering cartridges many times their modest price.
I'm using an OC9/II in a JMW-12 arm on an original VPI Aries extended table into a Herron VTPH-2 with excellemnt performance. Not lean, not harsh, not bright. Well-balanced, honest, extended in both directions, clean, reasonably delicate, open and airy without being forward.
Edits: 05/22/15
I'm on my second OC9-ml/II.It is definately not warm, but I wouldn't call it bright either. It is very detailed and extended in both bass and treble and has excellent dynamics.
I tried the 440-ml and didn't care for it. The AT 95 that came with my TT was very good for a budget cart.
If it helps, I'm using Von Shweikert VR-2 speakers.
enjoy,
mark
I've had two incarnations of the OC-9 and did not find either of them bright.
I think its a system dependent (isn't it always) and a matter of opinion (isn't it always) thing.
I'd welcome one back.
Dean.
reelsmith's axiom: Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it.
I agree! The OC9 MLII is my reference as it gave the flattest response in the HF range of all my cartridges and sounded a very close match when comparing to a digital version of the recording. I guess when people complain that it is too bright, it is possibly due to expectations based on previous system components or a setup fault.
I have verified the RIAA accuracy of my phono stage and matched the RIAA EQ components in the phono stage to ensure the greatest accuracy so the response you see is what I get from the cartridge. What I do now is to digitally equalise my recordings from other cartridges to match this response.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
The reviews on the OC9 certainly seem split. Assuming everyone is setting up their OC9 correctly (I know, a big assumption) I'm guessing the difference comes down to: 1. associated equipment, and 2. personal sensitivity to HF information. If you don't mind me asking, what speakers are you using? Thanks.
"The reviews on the OC9 certainly seem split. Assuming everyone is setting up their OC9 correctly (I know, a big assumption) I'm guessing the difference comes down to: 1. associated equipment, and 2. personal sensitivity to HF information"
I'm in the "like" catagory. I've been using a III version. Referencing 2 popular 1k MC carts I used-Benz Glider/Sumiko Blackbird, the OC9 in my system has enough positive traits of both carts for HALF the price. It still suffers from "sizzle" now and then depending on whats playing, but overall a great value.
I would guess the presence of the occasional sizzle is likely a deal breaker for some no matter how good the cart otherwise sounds, which goes back to: 2. personal sensitivity to HF information. Especially true when that happens on your one or two of your favorite recordings.
I seem to recall reading someone's comment somewhere on the net about the AT-F7 being also warm and smooth. I also wonder about the new AT-F2. IUt looks interesting as an entry-level MC for $200.
Thanks.
I knew about the F7's little brother (the F3) but I didn't know about the F2. Thanks for pointing that out.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]