 
|
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 |
152.163.100.7
In Reply to: Shure V15 vs Linn Adikt posted by magnetoman_2000 on January 2, 2005 at 15:45:49:
Not a fair comparison, the Linn should beat the V15 Type III especially on the Basik arm, although if its a Basik Plus is well suited for it. The Adikt is just a newer, more modern, fresher cartridge. A V15 Type V mxr would be a better comparison, but that cartridge is out of the market, so not much to do with them. Regardless you are having fun with two beautiful sounding cartridges that should work very well with the tonearms they are attached to.
Follow Ups:
If you are talking about performance, comparing audible results, it seems valid to expect the components to be somewhat evenly matched-fair if you will.As most people would agree the useful life of most audio designs is 25 years, comparing an old cartridge with a new cartridge, while it my be fun, will have often predictable results.
So I guess the question is ; is no contest really a (resonable or unbiased ) contest?
In any event if someone likes to compare stuff, go ahead, have fun.
How the comparison could be "unfair", based upon what "should" be the case, is completely beyond me. What we have here is a report of one user's subjective preference, fairness got nothing to do with it!
Yep, I agree....sometimes things just 'seem' better, then again some old things just are better...in the ear of the listener...fr'instance my unsilenced 1969 Triumph Vitesse 6 cyl sounds better than a Lamborghini....and that's from the Footballer owner of the Italian Supercar!
The test is unfair to the cartridges being meassured. When asking which cartridge is better we are compromising our answers. It is unfair to compare a cartridge that came out 30 years ago to one that was just released. That is what is unfair. Just trying to establish some perspective here, imagine comparing a 1975 Porsche to a 2005 model, many changes in technology would make the comparison moot. That is my perspective on the proposed meassurement. It is my perspective and, might be subjective, but is still my opinion. You can compare all you want and can, my believe is that the Adikt will kick the Type III, on the other hand the Type V might be a better subject to compare. Right now I am writing an article comparing various cartridges for a publication. In order for my review to be valid, the test parameters have to be controlled. A tonearm, the weight on the cartridge, the room and the media all have something to do on how a cartridge sounds. In all fairness to the results and for them to carry some weight we must consider all factors. Hope you understand what I am trying to impress here. Thanks for the coment.
I can't tell you how disturbed I find your perspective, particularly as you are a self-proclaimed 'reviewer'. You no doubt have some sort of belief in the concept of 'progress' but you need to know that if some user just happens to prefer the sound of a thirty year old design to a new one right of the blocks then that's just the way it is - period. As far as reviewing goes I would venture to say that having am open mind, uncluttered by preconceptions and biases, is an essential prerequisite for meaningful work.As a case in point perhaps you have noticed that this forum has a pretty substantial number of enthusiasts who just happen to express favorable views of some pretty old designs. For example the Denon DL103, the design of which is actually close to, if not more than, 30 years old, and also the OC9, an old basic design even if it has seen enhancements in material and stylus profile. Are you suggesting that these products should be ignored simply because of age of the design regardless of their apparent favorable performance.
I don't know what to say. I thought it was only certin engineers here that had a problem thinking outside the box. But to get this perspective from a 'reviewer' is just plain scarry.
No one is stating a perspective, You got this totally wrong, and if you knew me you will know they are not claims. My point is you have to take certain criteria into consideration, especially break in period if you are going to listen to a cartridge critically. There should be no problem with that, and shouldnt be. You should know that a cartridge right out of the box will never be close to the sound it will exhibit after a break in period. There should not be anything disturbing with that neither. I still say that the Linn cartridge will kick the butt of the Type III under similar conditions, I believe that might not be the case with the Type V, which you can get for $100 less. That is my point here, and about the fairness of the test. Im basing my statement on the fact that I KNOW BOTH cartridges, which was how this tread started, by the way.My point being that the Linn is better overall than the Shure Type III. Also the fact that you dont judge a cartride by its out of the box sound. If that is disturbing to you, sorry, as it being a commercial consideration, you must be kidding.
You should try to meassure something that you are going to live with for as long as a wife with extreme care. A cartridge is the initial link in the analog experience, you should be very serious in how you make a choice. Now, that it is out of the way? What is your point?
For one thing 50 hours comes out to about 100-150 sides of music, that's hardly straight out of the box, I wouldn't be surprised if that didn't constitute 6 months of listening for many listener. Myself I probably hit around 30 hours a month which is daily listening and I can tell you that waiting 3 months for a component to come around wouldn't exactly excite me. Moreover break-in is a gradual process not something where at hour 75.3 a component just transforms from one thing to another.But that's not the point either. The point has everything to do with subjective preference which you seem to deny, in fact you seem to sideline the very topic itself deflecting the issue to your sense of 'better'. If someone professes a preference for one sound over another your jumping in with claims of unfairness because, a priori, the new model must be superior to the old is nothing but a manifest display of hubris. As much as I enjoy your dancing around the issue this will not change.
Why dont you read Magnetoman second post as well as Arlequino's, it might be good to hear it from a different source. Dont take things so serious, there are more important things happening in the world, right this minute, than a discussion over a $325 cartridge. Enjoy the music man!!!!
Please stick with $325 cartridges. The thought of your contribution to serious topics is just to scarry to comtemplate. :)Now I leave it to you to have the last word, or two. Cheers.
LOL jejeje, I agree, you really are a contributor, still trying to figure out what you said outside of your dislike for my comments. LOL, Once again, enjoy life.
I give up, I guess I dont, sorry abouy my two cents....
I completely agree, unless the major variables are accounted for the
test is a meaningless excersize IMHO, btw one variable that I've found highly significant with MM's particularly Shure V15 is phono IC. capacitance. When I measured the capacitance values of the AQ IC's I was using I found them significantly higher that the Beldon 89259 Co-axial cable IC's I made up, and the difference in sound was
quite suprizing my VST-V opened up more air and detail, sounded a great deal more like a nice HO MC but with all the harmonic richness and musicality the V15's are known for, I'd always wondered why some V15 owners reported the V15 being dark, laid back subdued etc. I'd imagine any number of thiose opinions are based on using incompatible higher capacitance IC's, a simple change to a lower capacitance more compatible IC makes the V15 essentially a completely different cartridge.
Thank you Fred, I thought I lost my mind!!!!
More, from what is being asked, he is listening to two turntables one with a Rega tonearm and an Adikt, the other with a Type III on a Basik, which we dont know if its a Basik Plus.Also, the Adikt is brand new and needs a break in period, the Type III is old as molasses, the differences in sound now will settle and most likely improve as the Adikt gets more hours of play. That is another reason why it is an unfair comparison at this time.
It is not as simple as saying the Type III is mellow today while the Adikt is brash around the midrange and highs. In 50 hours the report will be different, in 100 it is a total different sound experience.
The idea here is that our fellow inmates get the best opportunity to enjoy the product they are playing. If you were to listen to these two cartridges today you might pick the Shure as the best sounding. In a month you would be very sorry, you did that, but, most important, you probably would not recommend the Linn product and might be turned off other similar products because of the experience.
That is why it is important that comparisons be as fair, to the product, as possible. The wrong experience can affect many people.
Sorry, but I have seen this time and time again. Again, just my very, very, subjective opinion. Stay well.
nt
God you guys have gone way out of the way here. There are no commercial considerations, it is just a matter of meassuring apples and apples in order to come out with something meaningful.I firmly believe that a better cartridge to meassure would be the Type V, which you can still get at $100 less that the Linn, with the Linn cartridge. If the sound of the Type V, which I suspect will give a run to the Linn at $225 vs $349 then you can make a valid recommendation to a consumer as well as an inmate. You have to allow a break in period for the new cartridge in order for the meassuremet to be fair.
I believe the purpose of this tread was to discuss--from experience-- the comparison between the two cartridges, somehow, we have gotten of the track here. If I ruffled someone, my apologies, but it surprises me that we have gotten this far off after all these years sharing information on this site. In fact I am still waiting for some light on the subject at hand.
But really, comparing a current production cartridge with the long extinct Type III does not make any commercial sense, whereas comparing with another current production cart does. I love Shures and I understand the reason for the original post. BTW, V15VxMR is not the best of the V15 series, its predecessor V15VMR is way better. As to subjective sonics of V15 carts, I like Type II the best, but otherwise they are all very similar.
good point and no offense, these forums are made to exchange information, sometimes they get loud!!! Stay well and enjoy.
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 © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
