|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
122.60.95.190
In Reply to: RE: Pickering UV-15 D2000-Q (pics) posted by user510 on January 09, 2017 at 11:03:55
Sorry, it only just hit me, but I think I know where you got the "1.3g" from!! The sheet SHOULD be read as "1 - 3g"!! The printing is terrible and Stanton/Pickering often have typos and inconsistencies in their manuals. Trust me, the nominal is 2g. Try again at 2g (on a non-critical record!!).
If you get a stylus box, they quote a tolerance around nominal rather than a range (and a smaller tolerance at that) - hence I wrote 2 ±0.5g. In general, I find that Pickering and Stanton generally perform best at nominal or higher. I discussed this with John Kuykendall back in the day and he said that they wrote the spec for the 681 as 1 +0.5 0-0.25 specifically, because the performance was calibrated at 1g even if the compliance and tracking ability would allow you to go lower. He advised me never to go below the nominal.
The D2400Q is the same animal but with a slightly wider frequency response range to 50kHz not 45kHz for the D2000Q.
The UV15 was the first CD4 cartridge (the Stanton equivalent was the 7804DQ) but was significantly bettered by the XUV when that was released. The XUV (for which the D4500Q was made) has a nominal of 1 ±0.5g for VTF.
With Stanton/Pickering, the suspension is a tie-wire so you will always be able to deflect the cantilever. The damping elastomer is the part that hardens and you will see the effect of this in restricted tracking ability and a very curtailed frequency response (it will sound quite dull).
Do you have any test discs for setting VTF? The dead give away for a hardened elastomer is if you get no improvement in tracking ability as you increase VTF. You should be able to get to at least 60um (+14dB) within the VTF range.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Follow Ups:
fwiw, it was better at 2g vtf...but I still had mistracking at high modulation passages within the groove that I dared to play with this one.
I do have a few test records. HFN001, is among them. I'd rather not expose that record to this stylus.
I noticed that Jico lists a replacement stylus assy for the 2000-Q. Theirs is not quadrahedral, but Shibata. I presume the cantilever is low end tubular aluminum. Perhaps it is comparable to oem... Their list price is slightly under $140.00 at the Jico website. Too bad there isn't a SAS listing for this cartridge.
thanks for your input.
-Steve
Anecdotally, the JICO Shibata replacements have not been considered unfavourably. Personally, I would not consider an OEM replacement at that price. Kevin (KAB) bought some to test and he mentioned that initially tracking was poor but after breaking in that things improved considerably.
At the price though, apart from sentimental reasons, I would seriously consider whether it is still economical to resurrect such an old cartridge especially since the JICO and other OEM replacements do not implement the tie-wire suspension design of the original so you would have to expect that the performance of the original (when it was fresh!) would not be achieved.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
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: