Mike Reed
pfm Member
Think I'd be tempted by line contact, as Paratrace styli, as used by ESCo, have, by reputation, a fairly short life span. However, maybe they suit Deccas better, for some reason.
Decca carts, what’s the appeal
- Thread starter Frizzy
- Start date
Think I'd be tempted by line contact, as Paratrace styli, as used by ESCo, have, by reputation, a fairly short life span. However, maybe they suit Deccas better, for some reason.
A loooong time (45 years or so) ago I used a London (it was red, I think) successfully in my idler-drive Dual 1229 with its dual-gimbal tonearm. This was for mainly classical music. The sheer presence, the excitement generated, I can still dimly remember.
The apparently flimsy plastic mount, complemented by the Dual's headshell carrier arrangement, didn't seem to affect performance adversely. Rigid attachment, at least for Deccas, might be overrated.
Some years later I used an LP12 with an RB300 and an Ortofon moving coil into an EAR 834P for transcribing valued records. It was pretty good for that purpose... but for playing records, if I ever do it again, I'd be looking for the Dual/London combination.
The apparently flimsy plastic mount, complemented by the Dual's headshell carrier arrangement, didn't seem to affect performance adversely. Rigid attachment, at least for Deccas, might be overrated.
Some years later I used an LP12 with an RB300 and an Ortofon moving coil into an EAR 834P for transcribing valued records. It was pretty good for that purpose... but for playing records, if I ever do it again, I'd be looking for the Dual/London combination.
Frizzy
Liberal anarchist
Interesting, may have to wait till I get a more suitable arm, tri planar maybe. Noticed there a few new mc designs using the same stylus arrangement, one was a £10k Russian handmade job that looked a audio Lada.
Should have asked about Spu at same time. Are they just same mechanics diff shell?
Should have asked about Spu at same time. Are they just same mechanics diff shell?
narabdela
who?
I read an article a while back (can't trace it now), that argued that the flimsy plastic mount was a deliberate design feature, and that attempts to firm things up were actually detrimental to the performance of the carts that featured them. Your experience seems to back that up.
It has also been argued that the "Deccas damage records" mantra is incorrect. Providing set-up instructions are followed correctly and the urge to reduce the recommended tracking weight is resisted. They do mistrack and damage records if the recommended tracking weight is reduced.
Yank
Bulbous Also Tapered
First time I heard a Decca it was on a Vestigal arm, so even more of a mismatch than the Dyna would be. It was still fantastic.
Mike Reed
pfm Member
Totally different. This moving col design dates (I think) from the sixties and is still going. It needs a heavy-ish mass arm (as opposed to Deccas) and most still track at around 4 g (which can be off-putting). Like the Decca, the SPU has an enormous following.
The best arm I have used Decca London's in has been the servo driven arm on my very old JVC QLY-5f -the vertical compliance issues are dealt with easily by this arm -the servo driven Bio-tracer type arms on various Denons also sail well with Londons as does the Sony PS-X555ES Sony. Spacers are required between cart top and headshell to get VTA right on everything except the JVC (which has a conventional pivot height adjustment).
martin dawson
pfm Member
In the late 70’s I used a Decca London Gold / Hadcock combination to me it was like marmite some records sounded very good on other records dreadful... in the end it went. I bought a Grace / Supex in another league surface noise reduced.
Regards,
Martin
Regards,
Martin
J W is still doing the bizz !. Just re tipped my L/G, running it with the old mayware 4 arm and its a terrific match. The line contact stylus John prefers on the golds works wonderfully well and gives a slightly more refined sound than the stylus I had before,me thinks. Just as exciting as well.Ah, those rose-tinted memories of hallucinogenic music; vague memories but it was a bit hazy at the time !
I've had two Decca arms; the first, I think, must have been the FFSS but the later one was an International (which my bro.-in-law still has). It was in this that my Decca (C4E, London?????) was mounted, and the memory of its visceral sound remains from 1974/5. I, like others, hanker after trying the Decca cart. thing again, in the context of a much better system than yesteryear.
As Tony says, the C4E (= SC4E ?) does have a rep., but maybe others, more modern ones, come close? John Wright, mentioned above, is the acknowledged expert refurbisher of Deccas; he must be getting on now, though.
Tony L
Administrator
I’d say share some of the same strengths than ‘prefer’. Certainly no need to use an idler drive turntable.
Mike Reed
pfm Member
Can't quite see the correlation between deck and cart. here. Arm, yes, but whether a deck is idler, DD or belt-drive, suspended or not has never occurred to be in relation to the performance of a cart.