Koetsu

[J.R. Boisclair]

13% of all cartridges or 13% of cartridges sent to you that the user may think there is an issue?

Over the past 25 years I have used from new Dynavector , Ortofon and Lyra and all carts to me have worked very well.
I have had multiple dyna XV-1/s and Lyra Atlas after I wore out the originals and to my ears the consistency of build quality and sound is there.

13% of cartridges sent to me for analysis. I can’t claim anything other than what my dataset tells me.

In a small number of cases, the client “felt something was wrong” with the cartridge And they turned out to be correct. However, in most of the cases the client had no idea they were living with something that was out of spec. Further, most of them were quite happy with the cartridge as it was, but were even happier when they heard it returned to them fully in spec and optimized.

 

[tima]

mtemur is right that the corrective shim will influence the sonic results, no matter what the material is made from. What I do not agree with is that it will always make things sound worse. If the angular correction required for a given cartridge can be accomplished with the tonearm, then the user is free to use the single bladed WallyReference to accomplish those angles and not use the corrective shim at all. Unfortunately, in more than 50% of my analyses, the cartridge requires more correction for SRA/VTA than the arm will offer. The owner then needs to make a choice to use the corrective shim and get the full angular correction or live with less in order to have a direct union between cartridge and headshell.

I"m curious if you have information on or samples of many tonearms to establish a given arm as unadjustable for SRA/VTA with a given cartridge? I don't mean this as a challenge -- I'm curious how you know a shim is needed and how do you know the correct shim shape for the pairing at hand. Once a shim is created, do you mount the cartridge with it on a tonearm to confirm 92° is achieved? Or is done with math alone?

More interesting than that, to me anyway, is cartridge-tonearm matching such that adjustability of setup variables is achievable along with an optimal sonic result for the pairing -- without requiring a corrective. ((I realize this may be contra the creation of corrective shims for "mismatched" combinations. I"ll speculate given a mis-match rate of 50%, youl have plenty of work to do. )

The topic of physically matching cartridges to arms is a realistic question facing vinylists. I'll also speculate that given the number of cartridges you've seen that if you know that 50% are mismatched to tonearms, there are 50% that have a compatible match. Given that is a product of your work, do you see a way to share that information in a way that is not detrimental or contrary to your business? I'm not questioning business or the value of the excellent service you provide -- cartridge-arm matching largely has been left to anecdotal forum exchange or dealer recommendation. I would think this could be publishable information from a knowledgeable source with sufficient data to recognize good matches. to help arm-cartridge customers .

 

[J.R. Boisclair]

I"m curious if you have information on or samples of many tonearms to establish a given arm as unadjustable for SRA/VTA with a given cartridge? I don't mean this as a challenge -- I'm curious how you know a shim is needed and how do you know the correct shim shape for the pairing at hand. Once a shim is created, do you mount the cartridge with it on a tonearm to confirm 92° is achieved? Or is done with math alone?

More interesting than that, to me anyway, is cartridge-tonearm matching such that adjustability of setup variables is achievable along with an optimal sonic result for the pairing -- without requiring a corrective. ((I realize this may be contra the creation of corrective shims for "mismatched" combinations. I"ll speculate given a mis-match rate of 50%, youl have plenty of work to do. )

The topic of physically matching cartridges to arms is a realistic question facing vinylists. I'll also speculate that given the number of cartridges you've seen that if you know that 50% are mismatched to tonearms, there are 50% that have a compatible match. Given that is a product of your work, do you see a way to share that information in a way that is not detrimental or contrary to your business? I'm not questioning business or the value of the excellent service you provide -- cartridge-arm matching largely has been left to anecdotal forum exchange or dealer recommendation. I would think this could be publishable information from a knowledgeable source with sufficient data to recognize good matches. to help arm-cartridge customers .

Hi @tima,

There is a LOT to your questions. Will do my best...

I do not document cartridge/tonearm pairings of my clients either for determining the question of whether they have enough tonearm height adjustability range to suit the needs of their specific cartridge nor do I "watch out for" their cartridge/tonearm resonant behavior. Here are my reasons for doing so.
1. Published compliance ratings of cartridges tend to be HIGHLY suspect in accuracy. I doubt they are often even done properly in the first place.
2. Published ratings do not usually specify horizontal vs vertical compliance ratings - which can quite important to know.
3. Manufacturers use at least three different measurement methods to arrive at a cu rating yet they often do not publish which method they used. This point is very important to have because depending upon which method they used you need to apply an equalizing formula to the results to be able to "compare apples with apples".
4. I cannot prove this yet, but I think the 8Hz lower limit for cartridge/tonearm resonance is too high for better transcription rigs with reasonably flat records. The 8Hz limit is putting an unnecessary design limit on tonearms to sound better by having higher effective mass. I know how to attempt to prove this but I just can't make time and resources for it yet.
5. Since our solutions generally involve ADDING mass rather than removing it, I do not worry about exacerbating the high frequency limit of the cartridge/tonearm resonance.
6. Clients can choose to use the shim to get them at the right angles or they can use the single-bladed WallyReference tools to do the same. I will tell them over the phone that they are not likely to get their tonearms to accommodate the SRA/VTA correction if such correction is "significant". It is up to them to try - or not try - without the shim. The beauty of the shim on tonearms with removable headshells means you can have multiple cartridges on their own headshells with shims and (as long as the shims are equalized for height of the tallest cartridge in the stable) they can change cartridges within 1-2 minutes and have all parameters perfect.


I aim at 92 degrees dynamic (or 91 degrees if I have just too high VTA to try to get downward) for the clients and do NOT re-measure once mounted. They use the WallyReference to ensure their "reference" is same as my "reference" and that's all that is necessary to get them spot-on.

I hope that helps. Thanks tima!

 

[tima]

Hi @tima,

There is a LOT to your questions. Will do my best...

I do not document cartridge/tonearm pairings of my clients either for determining the question of whether they have enough tonearm height adjustability range to suit the needs of their specific cartridge nor do I "watch out for" their cartridge/tonearm resonant behavior. Here are my reasons for doing so.
1. Published compliance ratings of cartridges tend to be HIGHLY suspect in accuracy. I doubt they are often even done properly in the first place.
2. Published ratings do not usually specify horizontal vs vertical compliance ratings - which can quite important to know.
3. Manufacturers use at least three different measurement methods to arrive at a cu rating yet they often do not publish which method they used. This point is very important to have because depending upon which method they used you need to apply an equalizing formula to the results to be able to "compare apples with apples".
4. I cannot prove this yet, but I think the 8Hz lower limit for cartridge/tonearm resonance is too high for better transcription rigs with reasonably flat records. The 8Hz limit is putting an unnecessary design limit on tonearms to sound better by having higher effective mass. I know how to attempt to prove this but I just can't make time and resources for it yet.
5. Since our solutions generally involve ADDING mass rather than removing it, I do not worry about exacerbating the high frequency limit of the cartridge/tonearm resonance.
6. Clients can choose to use the shim to get them at the right angles or they can use the single-bladed WallyReference tools to do the same. I will tell them over the phone that they are not likely to get their tonearms to accommodate the SRA/VTA correction if such correction is "significant". It is up to them to try - or not try - without the shim. The beauty of the shim on tonearms with removable headshells means you can have multiple cartridges on their own headshells with shims and (as long as the shims are equalized for height of the tallest cartridge in the stable) they can change cartridges within 1-2 minutes and have all parameters perfect.


I aim at 92 degrees dynamic (or 91 degrees if I have just too high VTA to try to get downward) for the clients and do NOT re-measure once mounted. They use the WallyReference to ensure their "reference" is same as my "reference" and that's all that is necessary to get them spot-on.

I hope that helps. Thanks tima!

Thank you JR for your extensive reply !

 

[jadis]

Last week, installed a brand new Koetsu Urushi Tsugaru on a Rega RB880 tonearm and Rega P8 turntable. Plays beautifully.

 

[XV-1]

Last week, installed a brand new Koetsu Urushi Tsugaru on a Rega RB880 tonearm and Rega P8 turntable. Plays beautifully.

View attachment 98169

How did you align the cart as it seems that JR has issues with how Koetsu's are aligned, let alone manufactured .

 

[jadis]

How did you align the cart as it seems that JR has issues with how Koetsu's are aligned, let alone manufactured .

I've always use the Dennesen Soundtraktor, ever since I became a Koetsu distributor. I am not a highly tech geek as far as measuring devices are concerned, not microscope nor oscilloscope, but I guess very few people in the 70s or 80s have them. I have mounted and installed about 30 something Koetsus and I never had a customer complaining of mistracking, distortions and other issues off the bat. They have destroyed some via over exuberant cleaning ladies and had some light skewing here and there after a long time. I never had use a shim on any headshell either, and just adjust the tonearm height to get a cartridge base parallel to the vinyl surface, mostly by ocular inspection. It's a bit difficult to see the stylus land on the null point of the grid but I use a flashlight.

 

[peelaaa]

Last week, installed a brand new Koetsu Urushi Tsugaru on a Rega RB880 tonearm and Rega P8 turntable. Plays beautifully.

View attachment 98169

Beautiful. Out of interest as I have same cartridge, mine does not have threaded mounting holes. I am sure I can see a nut in your picture so is yours the same?. Reason I ask is that on the Koetsu Facebook page there are owners who seem to think that all the newer made models have threaded holes. Mine was purchased only last year.

 

[jadis]

Beautiful. Out of interest as I have same cartridge, mine does not have threaded mounting holes. I am sure I can see a nut in your picture so is yours the same?. Reason I ask is that on the Koetsu Facebook page there are owners who seem to think that all the newer made models have threaded holes. Mine was purchased only last year.

Yes, new ones of this model do not have threads. A pain to install. We can only wonder why this change was made. Another change is that the Rosewood Platinum is now available only in glossy finish.

 

[dan31]

Last week, installed a brand new Koetsu Urushi Tsugaru on a Rega RB880 tonearm and Rega P8 turntable. Plays beautifully.

View attachment 98169

A well kept secret. Rega decks and arms love Koetsu’s. It’s a great balance for those on a budget. I keep a Koetsu Black Goldline on my Rega P9 as a house turntable for family and parties.

 

[jadis]

A well kept secret. Rega decks and arms love Koetsu’s. It’s a great balance for those on a budget. I keep a Koetsu Black Goldline on my Rega P9 as a house turntable for family and parties.

I can say the same thing about Rega arms and Koetsu. I've used an RB300 myself on a Rosewood Signature for 5 years, and it was smooth sailing.

 

[RickS]

I’ve gotta try a Koetsu on my Audioquest PT-6 someday. It would not surprise me if it worked amazingly.

 

[mulveling]

The "Koetsu demands heavy arm" trope may have gotten out of hand, over the years. There are definitely examples of audiophiles who tried a Koetsu and hated it, but compared to light arm being the culprit, it's as likely to be attributed to them: disagreeing with the Koetsu philosophy of sound, or not having a system balanced well for Koetsu, or getting a bad production unit, or suboptimal phono stage or setup.

There's probably a lower limit of mass below which you will sacrifice bass response, or cause a resonance peak well into audible range, etc. But the high mass of a Koetsu itself helps a lot. And I was recently surprised to hear my RSP running spectacularly on my friend's VPI 3D Reference arm. It did have the dual pivot - I think stability is still key to Koetsu - but that's certainly not a heavy or even medium mass arm.

 

[jadis]

The "Koetsu demands heavy arm" trope may have gotten out of hand, over the years. There are definitely examples of audiophiles who tried a Koetsu and hated it, but compared to light arm being the culprit, it's as likely to be attributed to them: disagreeing with the Koetsu philosophy of sound, or not having a system balanced well for Koetsu, or getting a bad production unit, or suboptimal phono stage or setup.

There's probably a lower limit of mass below which you will sacrifice bass response, or cause a resonance peak well into audible range, etc. But the high mass of a Koetsu itself helps a lot. And I was recently surprised to hear my RSP running spectacularly on my friend's VPI 3D Reference arm. It did have the dual pivot - I think stability is still key to Koetsu - but that's certainly not a heavy or even medium mass arm.

Thanks for the input, Mike.

I still have a lot to learn about matching tonearms with cartridges. The high compliance, low mass thing. My Black and Rosewood Signature were installed on a linear air bearing ET2 for many many years that I didn't even know if that's a medium or high mass tonearm. But it worked very well and sounded great. A stable arm it was and I read Koetsu loves stable tonearms. Most of my customers have their own tonearms at that time they got a Koetsu and it was not easy to tell them to buy another arm just to suit the Koetsu. Luckily, most matched well.

 

[mulveling]

Thanks for the input, Mike.

I still have a lot to learn about matching tonearms with cartridges. The high compliance, low mass thing. My Black and Rosewood Signature were installed on a linear air bearing ET2 for many many years that I didn't even know if that's a medium or high mass tonearm. But it worked very well and sounded great. A stable arm it was and I read Koetsu loves stable tonearms. Most of my customers have their own tonearms at that time they got a Koetsu and it was not easy to tell them to buy another arm just to suit the Koetsu. Luckily, most matched well.

ET2 is really interesting - high mass in the horizontal and low mass in the vertical, which might actually work out perfectly to Koetsu since the high horizontal mass facilitates good bass response and the low vertical mass may be of benefit to handling warps. I actually have one in the closet (for several years now) I need to dig out and refresh some day (not sure if pump still works). When I did run the ET2, it was long before my first Koetsu - but it had a very clean, pure & transparent sound with Ortofons. It was lovely.

The Dynavector arm is another with low vertical mass and high horizontal.

 

[mtemur]

high horizontal mass facilitates good bass response

I didn’t understand how you associate horizontal mass with bass reproduction. it would make more sense if it would have been vertical mass.

 

[mulveling]

I didn’t understand how you associate horizontal mass with bass reproduction. it would make more sense if it would have been vertical mass.

Bass is modulated in the horizontal, and Koetsu suspensions are very stiff. Without enough mass/inertia to act against that, it could lose some of the very lowest frequency signal energy via wagging the arm (which you see easily on vertical displacement warps) rather than sending it into the generator to reproduce the signal.

I do hear superior bass response with Koetsu on my heavier Fidelity Research arms versus lower mass Graham Phantom and Clearaudio Universal 12", whether or not the root cause is related to the above

 

[mtemur]

Bass is modulated in the horizontal, and Koetsu suspensions are very stiff. Without enough mass/inertia to act against that, it could lose some of the very lowest frequency signal energy via wagging the arm (which you see easily on vertical displacement warps) rather than sending it into the generator to reproduce the signal.

there could be some confusion about movement of stylus in the groove. I believe it will make better sense if we use the term "lateral" for side to side motion instead of horizontal and keep the term "vertical" for up and down motion.

mono records are cut only for lateral motion and there is no vertical information. on the other hand stereo records which are cut using westrex 45/45 system (almost all stereo records) contain both lateral and vertical information. If the two channels of the stereo signal are mostly out of phase, the playback stylus will be driven in a vertical plane. so, stylus movement on the vertical plane basically happens because of out of phase signals and stylus movement on the lateral plane happens because of in phase signals. on westrex 45/45 stereo record stylus moves both on lateral and horizontal planes. long story short, neither lateral nor vertical movement can be directly associated with bass. bass and other frequencies are inscribed in the grooves both laterally and vertically.

I do hear superior bass response with Koetsu on my heavier Fidelity Research arms versus lower mass Graham Phantom and Clearaudio Universal 12", whether or not the root cause is related to the above

I never heard a koetsu cartridge on fidelity research arm but I depend on you when you said bass response is better when they are paired. but it may be due to FR arms' high mass is well suiting to koetsu's suspension. I think we agree on that a well paired cartridge-tonearm combo will not wooble, cartridge will stand still while cantilever and stylus move from side to side and up and down. when this is achieved the stylus can read the groove information accurately without jumping between undulations and eventually reads bass information better because bass takes more space and requires big movement of stylus. obviously a high mass tonearm will be useful in this regard. a very good tonearm's job is not only keeping cartridge steady on the air but also moving on both planes as it's bearings are frictionless.

 

[Don_Camillo]

 

[shakti]

View attachment 98693

very nice set up, like it a lot