van den Hul Colibri Grand Cru

[PeterA]

people not being competent to set up a special race breed cart?!
what a lot of BS......a properly designed product wouldn´t need foggy excuses like this for uneven qc and performance
one needs to source a exquisite sounding specimen and stay away from the rest
who else than a dealer of maybe a reviewer would be in that position.....
for most buyers, the best to avoid the brand all together

It is not clear if you are addressing me in this response, but I was simply expressing my lack of experience and poor set up skills and that it took me a long time to learn how to align the cartridge to avoid the sibilance issue and to improve its performance. That is just me. I don’t have a lot of experience setting up these cartridges and so it took me a while making very small adjustments until I was completely satisfied. In fact today I experimented with different mounting screws.

That’s hardly an excuse or comment about anyone else’s skill levels. I agree with you that there should not be excuses at this level. And I respect and appreciate other peoples frustrations.

 

[infinitely baffled]

What are you talking about, Gavin?
Try saying what you just said to Peter Lederman of Soundsmith. You think he's any more mass market than VDH? He's pretty boutique, and QC is exemplary.

I've owned four vdH cartridges without experiencing a single quality control issue.
The only defects i have suffered are the result of my clumsiness, and a ZeroDust stylus cleaner pulling the diamond from the cantilever. So really, just more clumsiness.
By contrast i rejected two Kiseki Purplehearts for qc issues.

The design of Colibri has an exposed cantilever that is vulnerable to damage. I suspect this is responsible for some of the issues here.
In terms of setup, despite being a novice, with the assistance of kind forum members i have been able to achieve very satisfying results. So it may be tricky, but if someone as cack- handed as me can manage it, there's really no excuse for higher echelon audiophiles

Going back to the MS vs GC, my only criticism of my Ebony Grand Cru would be that it's a better all-rounder than my previous Koa Stradivarius, but so far it lacks some of the magic. The characterisation as 'smooth' i can agree with, i feel a slight lack of excitement, perhaps a less dynamic presentation.
The overall tonal balance is superior to any of my previous Colibri, i felt my Koa Strad had a magical quality in the treble but lacked body, weight, grunt in the bass, even though it gave up nothing in actual bass extension, it was just less forward than i was used to from the Ebony-bodied examples.

However i have two significant caveats. I've not had the 200 hour service, so there is probably more to come. And I still haven't mounted it on the arm it is destined for as that is under construction.
(Another pesky artisan, Frank Schroder.)

I suspect the most likely course of action will be to keep the GC and commission a Master Signature Stradivarius. It may be that the MS has a more dynamic presentation, i haven't owned one so i would like to see. But i do value dynamics very highly. The GC isnt lacking, but nor has it yet quite fulfilled the promise hinted at as i climbed the Colibri ranks.
I jumped from Koa Strad right to GC, missing the Master Signature iterations altogether.
Now i feel i should be certain I'm not missing what i might actually consider to be the most satisfying presentation for my tastes.
But will i sell my Gran Cru?
Doubtful

 

[Tango]

My Quite honestly, I'm close to buying a second to have as a spare!

It takes two to tango bazelio. I have a spare too.

I think the Opus1 on your 4pt sounds better than mine on 3012R. Opus1 needs a little pinch in the butt from an arm to max out its excitement.

 

[christensenleif@msn.com]

if DaVa field coil is comfort zone, I´m impressed

 

[Tango]

@PeterA asked me my impression of the MS 5R vs GC in his Sublime thread. I think it is more appropriate to put my comment here. I must point out that my MS 5R does sound better than the other MS's that I own. And the GC that I have is a MS that was converted to GC by Mr VdH. I have a feeling that my GC is a different variation from Peter's.

Now Straight to the point. Both carts are extremely transparent. The GC is transparent from front to the last instrument in the back. But the MS transparency goes beyond the last instrument to back of the hall. The sense of ambient is the very first thing I notice distinguishing the MS from GC. With MS the ambient pan out almost infinitely from left to right. There is space in front of the first line of instrument and the sound trigger me to sense the space behind the last line of instruments. The MS just let me hear a complete picture of orchestra and the hall with no disconnection of magic crystal ball. But with GC I hear much less hall boundary and hall volume because the sound seems to put more focus on instrument than the picture as a whole. It could be just a different kind of presentation and my wrong use of term transparency but I certainly felt that way. It is hearing whats going on in the hall vs. hearing the orchestra.

The next difference is the tone. The tone of GC is much richer than the MS. My GC sounds even richer than the Opus. Many will favor the GC because of this and say the tone is more balanced. More weight also come with this tone. So the GC is hefty dynamic with a quicker transient than other great carts including the Opus1. MS transient is lightning quick but it strikes with less weight than GC. What spectacular is the GC ability to play jazz or chamber with a few instruments so damn tangibly like those instruments were right in front of you. I mean my MS already takes Heifetz, Al DiMeola and Budd Johnson into my room but the GC is even more spooky. With these music the suspension of disbelief is more than anything I have heard...better than MS and better than tape. I just went "Whoaa!" hearing solo sax, cello, violin, acoustic guitar etc from GC. It is definitely made for this kind of music. Realistic? I can't say. But suspension of disbelief "Hell Yeah!" Imo, the MS sounds more believable eventhough its tone could be less easy to the ears for some. The MS has a more believable size and scale to me. Every tiny move of a musician to his instrument translate out with the MS and this make the music more connected and emotional. Initially I thought it was just the AS2000 that does this but then I learned from a/b it is the cart too. The "build up" (the musical passage that rise from low to high raising our adrenaline) from the MS is also very special it really drives me more than the GC. I am not talking just exciting dynamic. Listen Scheherazade at around 0:55 and on. I can understand why ddk also prefer the MS. It displays the character of his AS2000 more.

I am talking grade A carts here. So no aspect falling short in these carts. Only a degree "more" I am talking about a vs b. People may disagree with me but that would be more on personal preferences. The GC does deserve a different model designation from the MS.

If I could think of something more I will add to this post later.

GC.

MS 5R

 

[Lagonda]

Tang you truly have fantastic ears, or a great imagination !

 

[Tango]

Tang you truly have fantastic ears, or a great imagination !

I do have a wild imagination but still a shadow behind you Lagonda san.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Tang, Milan is PRETTY wild, I can tell you.

 

[PeterA]

@PeterA asked me my impression of the MS 5R vs GC in his Sublime thread. I think it is more appropriate to put my comment here. I must point out that my MS 5R does sound better than the other MS's that I own. And the GC that I have is a MS that was converted to GC by Mr VdH. I have a feeling that my GC is a different variation from Peter's.

Now Straight to the point. Both carts are extremely transparent. The GC is transparent from front to the last instrument in the back. But the MS transparency goes beyond the last instrument to back of the hall. The sense of ambient is the very first thing I notice distinguishing the MS from GC. With MS the ambient pan out almost infinitely from left to right. There is space in front of the first line of instrument and the sound trigger me to sense the space behind the last line of instruments. The MS just let me hear a complete picture of orchestra and the hall with no disconnection of magic crystal ball. But with GC I hear much less hall boundary and hall volume because the sound seems to put more focus on instrument than the picture as a whole. It could be just a different kind of presentation and my wrong use of term transparency but I certainly felt that way. It is hearing whats going on in the hall vs. hearing the orchestra.

The next difference is the tone. The tone of GC is much richer than the MS. My GC sounds even richer than the Opus. Many will favor the GC because of this and say the tone is more balanced. More weight also come with this tone. So the GC is hefty dynamic with a quicker transient than other great carts including the Opus1. MS transient is lightning quick but it strikes with less weight than GC. What spectacular is the GC ability to play jazz or chamber with a few instruments so damn tangibly like those instruments were right in front of you. I mean my MS already takes Heifetz, Al DiMeola and Budd Johnson into my room but the GC is even more spooky. With these music the suspension of disbelief is more than anything I have heard...better than MS and better than tape. I just went "Whoaa!" hearing solo sax, cello, violin, acoustic guitar etc from GC. It is definitely made for this kind of music. Realistic? I can't say. But suspension of disbelief "Hell Yeah!" Imo, the MS sounds more believable eventhough its tone could be less easy to the ears for some. The MS has a more believable size and scale to me. Every tiny move of a musician to his instrument translate out with the MS and this make the music more connected and emotional. Initially I thought it was just the AS2000 that does this but then I learned from a/b it is the cart too. The "build up" (the musical passage that rise from low to high raising our adrenaline) from the MS is also very special it really drives me more than the GC. I am not talking just exciting dynamic. Listen Scheherazade at around 0:55 and on. I can understand why ddk also prefer the MS. It displays the character of his AS2000 more.

I am talking grade A carts here. So no aspect falling short in these carts. Only a degree "more" I am talking about a vs b. People may disagree with me but that would be more on personal preferences. The GC does deserve a different model designation from the MS.

If I could think of something more I will add to this post later.

GC.

MS 5R

Thank you very much Tang, for writing this comparison and for posting the two videos. From your written descriptions, both of my Grand Crus seem to be a bit more like your 5R Master Signature, in that they really excel in terms of spatial information, and information in general. Neither the 5R GC or the modified MS GC seem as generous tonally as your GC. However, it is very hard to make such assessments without the direct comparisons in the same system context.

I suspect that your system is considerably more revealing than is mine, so these differences may be more pronounced in your context. The AS2000 is certainly a more transparent platform, and I suspect the amps and speakers are as well. I do, however, get the vdH DNA from your videos and I recognize those attributes when listening to my system.

I think both of your videos sound wonderful. In isolation, I enjoy each and am sure I would enjoy them both hearing your system live as well. Your Grand Cru has a richer tone but seems more balanced and extended than did the Opus 1 in my system. It also sounds more dynamic. I really appreciate you taking the time to share with us your impressions of these two fine cartridges.

BTW, I miss seeing the AS2000 in the introductions of your videos the way you used to show it in the earlier ones. I want to be reminded of the glorious source of these sounds in the videos.

Could you perhaps send a photo of your GC and 5R MS? I want to compare the proportions of the magnet to the tube holding the cantilever. My two GCs are slightly different looking. Does your GC have the metal screw inserts and the "GC" painted on the front? Both of mine have the painted letters but only one has the metal screw mounts. Finally, I wonder if your GC is similar what I saw mentioned as a GC "jazz version", given its emphasis on the instruments and slightly different spatial presentation.

 

[hb22]

I love this cartridge very much. It is really piece of art.

 

[tima]

Opening bass attack slightly weightier and more articulate on video 1.
Clarinet solo ~1:20-ish is slightly more articulate, tonally more realistic on video 1.
Both quite nice.

 

[Tango]

Thank you very much Tang, for writing this comparison and for posting the two videos. From your written descriptions, both of my Grand Crus seem to be a bit more like your 5R Master Signature, in that they really excel in terms of spatial information, and information in general. Neither the 5R GC or the modified MS GC seem as generous tonally as your GC. However, it is very hard to make such assessments without the direct comparisons in the same system context.

I suspect that your system is considerably more revealing than is mine, so these differences may be more pronounced in your context. The AS2000 is certainly a more transparent platform, and I suspect the amps and speakers are as well. I do, however, get the vdH DNA from your videos and I recognize those attributes when listening to my system.

I think both of your videos sound wonderful. In isolation, I enjoy each and am sure I would enjoy them both hearing your system live as well. Your Grand Cru has a richer tone but seems more balanced and extended than did the Opus 1 in my system. It also sounds more dynamic. I really appreciate you taking the time to share with us your impressions of these two fine cartridges.

BTW, I miss seeing the AS2000 in the introductions of your videos the way you used to show it in the earlier ones. I want to be reminded of the glorious source of these sounds in the videos.

Could you perhaps send a photo of your GC and 5R MS? I want to compare the proportions of the magnet to the tube holding the cantilever. My two GCs are slightly different looking. Does your GC have the metal screw inserts and the "GC" painted on the front? Both of mine have the painted letters but only one has the metal screw mounts. Finally, I wonder if your GC is similar what I saw mentioned as a GC "jazz version", given its emphasis on the instruments and slightly different spatial presentation.

Merry X Mas Peter,

Thanks for your kind words. I will take some pics of my GC and pos. But I doubt we can identify anything. As I wrote before, I think I have a different variation of GC from yours. Ddk and I exchanges some notes and we seem to share the same impression of GC. His GC is the variation that Mr. Vdh made for jazz.

 

[Tango]

Opening bass attack slightly weightier and more articulate on video 1.
Clarinet solo ~1:20-ish is slightly more articulate, tonally more realistic on video 1.
Both quite nice.

Merry X mas Tima,

Actually shifting the vta two cards less makes the tone of clarinet sound more dense and articulate. But I like the vta at this position to get the clarinet and woodwind flutter more.

 

[tima]

Merry X mas Tima,

Actually shifting the vta two cards less makes the tone of clarinet sound more dense and articulate. But I like the vta at this position to get the clarinet and woodwind flutter more.

And Merry Christmas to you Tango,

The clarinetist has the skill to enunciate each note. His breath, tongue and fingers are in sync. He is very talented. To my ears how you have vta set on video 1 yields better distinction of individual notes which on video 2 I hear as ever so slightly blurred together when he has many to play in a short time. My mediocre desktop speakers might be a factor there wrt resolution, although I hear that difference on repeat listenings.

I like that you used Scheherazade to compare sonic differences. Many are already familiar with it.

 

[bazelio]

MS 5R is my preference in these two videos, Tang. More like-like and vivid to my ears. Your system sounds great.

 

[bonzo75]

I liked both but there seemed something more special about the MS especially in terms of rise, more swing, a bit more thrill factor

 

[Tango]

I liked both but there seemed something more special about the MS especially in terms of rise, more swing, a bit more thrill factor

Covid must have strengthened your hearing.

Our body reaction during listening is a good indicator of musical involvement. In this case I am sure if you were listening in room you would be making Solti moves.

 

[Anthony Ho]

@PeterA asked me my impression of the MS 5R vs GC in his Sublime thread. I think it is more appropriate to put my comment here. I must point out that my MS 5R does sound better than the other MS's that I own. And the GC that I have is a MS that was converted to GC by Mr VdH. I have a feeling that my GC is a different variation from Peter's.

Now Straight to the point. Both carts are extremely transparent. The GC is transparent from front to the last instrument in the back. But the MS transparency goes beyond the last instrument to back of the hall. The sense of ambient is the very first thing I notice distinguishing the MS from GC. With MS the ambient pan out almost infinitely from left to right. There is space in front of the first line of instrument and the sound trigger me to sense the space behind the last line of instruments. The MS just let me hear a complete picture of orchestra and the hall with no disconnection of magic crystal ball. But with GC I hear much less hall boundary and hall volume because the sound seems to put more focus on instrument than the picture as a whole. It could be just a different kind of presentation and my wrong use of term transparency but I certainly felt that way. It is hearing whats going on in the hall vs. hearing the orchestra.

The next difference is the tone. The tone of GC is much richer than the MS. My GC sounds even richer than the Opus. Many will favor the GC because of this and say the tone is more balanced. More weight also come with this tone. So the GC is hefty dynamic with a quicker transient than other great carts including the Opus1. MS transient is lightning quick but it strikes with less weight than GC. What spectacular is the GC ability to play jazz or chamber with a few instruments so damn tangibly like those instruments were right in front of you. I mean my MS already takes Heifetz, Al DiMeola and Budd Johnson into my room but the GC is even more spooky. With these music the suspension of disbelief is more than anything I have heard...better than MS and better than tape. I just went "Whoaa!" hearing solo sax, cello, violin, acoustic guitar etc from GC. It is definitely made for this kind of music. Realistic? I can't say. But suspension of disbelief "Hell Yeah!" Imo, the MS sounds more believable eventhough its tone could be less easy to the ears for some. The MS has a more believable size and scale to me. Every tiny move of a musician to his instrument translate out with the MS and this make the music more connected and emotional. Initially I thought it was just the AS2000 that does this but then I learned from a/b it is the cart too. The "build up" (the musical passage that rise from low to high raising our adrenaline) from the MS is also very special it really drives me more than the GC. I am not talking just exciting dynamic. Listen Scheherazade at around 0:55 and on. I can understand why ddk also prefer the MS. It displays the character of his AS2000 more.

I am talking grade A carts here. So no aspect falling short in these carts. Only a degree "more" I am talking about a vs b. People may disagree with me but that would be more on personal preferences. The GC does deserve a different model designation from the MS.

If I could think of something more I will add to this post later.

GC.

MS 5R

Both video are really good but i think the first one (GC) was more emphazes on mid-bass which will give a heavier sense (or richer) on every note, result could arguably less "air" or "ambient" than the 2nd video (MS), the MS may give an impression to seat further from the instruments but slightly skinner sound IMHO.

As what you said it really depends on personal preference and system dependency of which cartridge is being best, the designer could use a different angle to develop these cartridges (Jazz/Pop vs Classical etc).

 

[Tango]

Both video are really good but i think the first one (GC) was more emphazes on mid-bass which will give a heavier sense (or richer) on every note, result could arguably less "air" or "ambient" than the 2nd video (MS), the MS may give an impression to seat further from the instruments but slightly skinner sound IMHO.

That's pretty much how I view it. In the video, you can hear some differences. But in real the sense of "ambient" is much more pronounced for the MS such that the listener would not know it is missing in other carts until he experiences himself. Agree with you that seating further from orchestra like the way MS presents the tone will be more skinny.

This Moussorgsky A Night on Bare Mountain/ Leibowitz, AP45 is really great for hall ambient altogether with rise, swing, thrill that Bonzo said.

 

[Ron Resnick]

. . . This Moussorgsky A Night on Bare Mountain/ Leibowitz, AP45 is really great for hall ambient altogether with rise, swing, thrill that Bonzo said.

I think this is the Analogue Productions reissue version of the Chesky reissue that I take everywhere as a standard test album.

The word that came to my mind when I listened to this video, twice, on an iPhone X was "screechy." I don't hear the weight and heft of the orchestra that I'm used to hearing. This sounds to me like someone fiddled with the tone controls, and turned up the treble and turned down the bass.

I just listened to this video again, twice, on an iMac, and now I know never to listen to these videos on iPhones. The screechiness is gone, but I still hear a slightly lighter-weight presentation, and a stronger treble energy focus, than I am accustomed to from this recording.