Dirty Little Secrets

[Mr Peabody]

I won an Infinity racing jacket and T-shirt from spiffs while a sales rep and I once saw Nascar and F1 while changing channels, can I be cool too? Oh YEAH! on a trip to Wal-Mart they had a Tide sponsored race car parked outside for ussins' to amuse ourselves on. Bonus points for that?

Wasn't this an audio thread at one time?

[Slippers On]

Ok - can we all agree then that America makes crap cars that can't go around corners, their education system has been eaten up by Political Correctness, the Brits made the best Hi-Fi and Melvin loves to dig holes to fall into


Emaidel......any more juicy bits to whet the appetite? Perhaps you have some 1960's sh*t on a certain Melvin Wa*ker ?????


Slippers by the Hearth

[E-Stat]

No, I'm talking "physical crush". In a bump-n-grind the Nascar driver would drive away every time. That carbon fiber would dust up, (right after the wheels broke off).

As sponsor of both NASCAR and F1 racing venues, Hewlett Packard promoted some track time between two of their drivers in a Car & Driver article - at the wheel of the other's ride. It was Juan Pablo Montoya and Jeff Gordon. Regarding the relative skills of these top-of-their-game guys, guess who came closer to the other's best track time in their own ride?

rw

[melvin walker]

Ok, first the obvious stupidity of your response. All race teams are on a "limited budget". Name me 1 F1 team that is on an unlimited budget. There are none. They may have larger budgets, but its not unlimited. BMW, Mercedes, and the rest of the lot all have budgets.

And unless you are Warren Buffet, I seriously doubt you could underwrite the cost of a Nascar or Drag Race team.

The breadth of your idiocy has no bounds I see.

BTW nice sidestep on E-stat spanking your ass about no Japanese winning F1 championships. I don't suppose you care to address that issue?

Factories can afford to spend millions indidviduals cannot. Fiat which owns Ferrari has spent millions to sponsor Ferrari racing teams . Unlimited budgets where did you get that from. Ford motor Co. Spent millions winning the Manufacturer Sports Car Championship. The development cost is unreal. The Ford GT40 was a result of all that money spent , plus beating Ferrari.

The NASCAR teams as posted earlier are for less costly to operate. Toyota has spent more than a $100,000,000 developing and racing F1 cars with Williams.
Remember only FT cars can call themselves world champion and the drivers world champion drivers.

I do remember that when Ford set out to beat Ferrari , there was a unlimited budget.
Ford was forced to develop a brand new car.

[melvin walker]

I won an Infinity racing jacket and T-shirt from spiffs while a sales rep and I once saw Nascar and F1 while changing channels, can I be cool too? Oh YEAH! on a trip to Wal-Mart they had a Tide sponsored race car parked outside for ussins' to amuse ourselves on. Bonus points for that?

Wasn't this an audio thread at one time?

Check this out in 1963 I had made several changes to my audio system.
A pair of JBL C34 speakers using the 001 speaker system , Fisher , 400CX preamp , SA1000 power amp , 200B tuner and an Empire 398 TT with a Empire 880PE cartridge.

An improvement from my previous system. Those improvement would continue through out the 70's.Improvements was made adding new as well as used audio equipment.
None of the 1963 system was purchased used. That was to take place later.

All of the equipment listed above was sold by 1970.

[Rich-n-Texas]

We used to do work for a local autompbile parts chain and we got all kindsa comps to all kindsa races in the area. Along twith tMaple Shade, we also got passes to CART races in Nazarath. PA, NASCAR in Long Pond, PA, and even CART racing for the few years they had it in the Meadowlands in the late 80's.

Best part was the free sponsor food and preferrred seating. When the Porsche team had us in Nazarath, they served T-bones.

We got to meet all the big names. ...even did a few New Years Eve parties with the Andrettis in a club near their homes in the PA, and this was not part of the company perks.

but, they sold in the early 90's and all that went "poof!"

I think you meant Maple Grove Raceway Mark.

The second NASCAR race I went to was Pocono in '89, the first race was at Dover. Back then, the banking at Dover was 36 degrees; we watched the race from the infield, and let me tell you how loud 42 cars sounded when the green flag dropped, then four + hours of sweet unrestricted American V8 power. When NASCAR started running the pace car through pit road so the drivers could check their tachs for the correct speed before they dropped the green, we'd stand as close as we could behind the pits when the drivers went through with their motors all wound up, and the roar from that parade was absolutely mind blowing.

Many great memories of the ol' Winston Cup races back in the 90's.

[E-Stat]

Fiat which owns Ferrari has spent millions to sponsor Ferrari racing teams .

There is no doubt a special history with Ferrari. They built road cars to fund racing. Virtually every other maker builds race cars to promote and develop their road cars.

The Ford GT40 was a result of all that money spent , plus beating Ferrari...I do remember that when Ford set out to beat Ferrari , there was a unlimited budget.

Do you remember the story behind the story? Henry the Second offered to buy out Enzo. The fiesty Italian declined (which was probably the best choice long term). Well, that pissed off Mr. Ford. He vowed to kick Ferrari's ass. He accomplished that four years running at Lemans.

rw

[Mr Peabody]

Have you seen the Ferrari Merridian nearly $3k table radio? It does have CD & DVD playback as well. This has to be for those who have too much money, I can't imagine something like that being worth $3k.

[markw]

I think you meant Maple Grove Raceway Mark.

You're right. Getting old can do strange things to your memory.

The second NASCAR race I went to was Pocono in '89, the first race was at Dover. Back then, the banking at Dover was 36 degrees; we watched the race from the infield, and let me tell you how loud 42 cars sounded when the green flag dropped, then four + hours of sweet unrestricted American V8 power. When NASCAR started running the pace car through pit road so the drivers could check their tachs for the correct speed before they dropped the green, we'd stand as close as we could behind the pits when the drivers went through with their motors all wound up, and the roar from that parade was absolutely mind blowing.

Many great memories of the ol' Winston Cup races back in the 90's.

We have friends in Symmrna, which is right next to dover. That place is a madhouse on race weekend. Everyone avoids Rt.t 13 on race weekend. The only way any sane person attends is to go down a few days before and with a self-contained camper.

Long Pond is a bit better but,t hen again, it doesn't host any of the big races like Dover does. ...or is that Dover downs?

[markw]

I won an Infinity racing jacket and T-shirt from spiffs while a sales rep and I once saw Nascar and F1 while changing channels, can I be cool too? Oh YEAH! on a trip to Wal-Mart they had a Tide sponsored race car parked outside for ussins' to amuse ourselves on. Bonus points for that?

Wasn't this an audio thread at one time?

I think there's a little miscegenation going on between this thread and the one on "what other hobbies do we share"

Oh well, that's all right. It's all in the family.

... at least that's what they would say in the deep south.

[bobsticks]

Man go to the F1 website and read. There you will find the answers to all your questions.
As for as the Japanese spanking America in the 1970's , take a look at the Japanese GNP , than take a look at the United States GNP. Now and in 1970.

Nascar is for the "Good ole Boys" country , whiskey running. Cheap American iron.
Drag racing is for those who race on a limited budget. Come think of it so is Nascar.
Don't drink, smoke or chew. I do read . You should try that some time.
it is said that reading helps separate the man from the Ape. How long are your arms ?
Better watch out now I am beginning to sound like the rest of you.
Last comment on this issue.

Evidently the translator program has been updated. When did you hit the "idiom" button, Melvin?

[kexodusc]

Ding Ding Ding! And the winner is Kex for outing Pix/Melvin!

It never even registered with me until I saw your post. Now it seems clear.

And BTW, it appears our old friend Lex/TLADINY/PS is back with us as well with definitely one new Screen Name and maybe 2 or 3 others.

JSE

Nah, these guys aren't the same...I wasn't implying they were...Just that the comments from GM I quoted made it hard to determine who he was referring to.

Melvin is a bit more clever than Pix...when faced with overhwhelming facts dismissing his arguments, he just avoids the issue and changes the subject. Pix fails to understand what you are saying (or just doesn't read your comments) and keeps bulldozing his way through the argument.

He's kinda like the Costanza-philosophy - it's not incorrect if you believe it!

[emaidel]

As for as Consumers Reports is concerned , what publication or source offers better informed test than Consumers Reports ? .

I've been a subscriber to Consumer Reports (CR) since the 60's. While I've always found it interesting reading, I've bitterly disagreed with many of their product ratings, especially when it came to audio equipment. In the late 60's, if one were to believe them, there was only ONE audio system for anyone to buy:

Fisher 500T (or, Lafayette LR-1500T)
AR2ax
Dual 1019
Shure V/15 Type II

while there wasn't anything inherently wrong with any of that equipment, not every liked the sound of an AR2ax (I certainly didn't) and as good as the Shure cartridge was, it had a very low output and without an adjustable phono level input, it was a poor match for many a receiver. I don't remember if the Fisher had it, but I know the Lafayette unit did, and even it didn't provide enough gain resulting in a very lackluster sound when paired with the Shure.

When the AR3a was introduced, a speaker which almost everyone felt was a huge improvment over the original AR3, CR actually stated that it wasn't as good as either the original AR3, or even the AR2ax. They actually said this!

In the 80's, CR tested what they called "expensive" loudspeakers. The top-rated speaker was a Marantz model (!!!), and second was the ESS AMT1-b. I worked for ESS at the time, and wouldn't ever own a 1b because I thought it sounded lousy. Still, we used the test report to help us sell the speaker.

And where was my beloved Dahlquist DQ-10 in CR's ratings? Way, way down the list, and with its bass response indicated as "average." As good as the speaker is, its bass response doesn't even come close to "average."

CR had no business then, and still doesn't now, rating anything that has a subjective nature to it, and that included just about all loudspeakers.

On another note, CR used to test cereals by feeding the cereal mixed with water (not milk) to laboratory rats, and measured the growth in the rats as their dietary needs are similar to those of humans. Milk was deliberately not used as the nutritional value of milk was well known, and it was just that of the cereal that was being tested.

Using this test standard, shredded wheat fared very poorly, and Special K came in first. Later, when they ran the identical tests with newer cereals, shredded wheat came in first, and CR simply stated they "didn't know" why there was such a disparity.

You may find your support for CR flagging when you take a look at the most recent issue. The Cadillac CTX was rated over both a BMW and a Mercedes, and two Japanese cars (the Acura TL and the Infinity GX) were rated over the Cadillac. That ought to squash your balloon!

[melvin walker]

I've been a subscriber to Consumer Reports (CR) since the 60's. While I've always found it interesting reading, I've bitterly disagreed with many of their product ratings, especially when it came to audio equipment. In the late 60's, if one were to believe them, there was only ONE audio system for anyone to buy:

Fisher 500T (or, Lafayette LR-1500T)
AR2ax
Dual 1019
Shure V/15 Type II

while there wasn't anything inherently wrong with any of that equipment, not every liked the sound of an AR2ax (I certainly didn't) and as good as the Shure cartridge was, it had a very low output and without an adjustable phono level input, it was a poor match for many a receiver. I don't remember if the Fisher had it, but I know the Lafayette unit did, and even it didn't provide enough gain resulting in a very lackluster sound when paired with the Shure.

When the AR3a was introduced, a speaker which almost everyone felt was a huge improvment over the original AR3, CR actually stated that it wasn't as good as either the original AR3, or even the AR2ax. They actually said this!

In the 80's, CR tested what they called "expensive" loudspeakers. The top-rated speaker was a Marantz model (!!!), and second was the ESS AMT1-b. I worked for ESS at the time, and wouldn't ever own a 1b because I thought it sounded lousy. Still, we used the test report to help us sell the speaker.

And where was my beloved Dahlquist DQ-10 in CR's ratings? Way, way down the list, and with its bass response indicated as "average." As good as the speaker is, its bass response doesn't even come close to "average."

CR had no business then, and still doesn't now, rating anything that has a subjective nature to it, and that included just about all loudspeakers.

On another note, CR used to test cereals by feeding the cereal mixed with water (not milk) to laboratory rats, and measured the growth in the rats as their dietary needs are similar to those of humans. Milk was deliberately not used as the nutritional value of milk was well known, and it was just that of the cereal that was being tested.

Using this test standard, shredded wheat fared very poorly, and Special K came in first. Later, when they ran the identical tests with newer cereals, shredded wheat came in first, and CR simply stated they "didn't know" why there was such a disparity.

You may find your support for CR flagging when you take a look at the most recent issue. The Cadillac CTX was rated over both a BMW and a Mercedes, and two Japanese cars (the Acura TL and the Infinity GX) were rated over the Cadillac. That ought to squash your balloon!

I agree with most of your points , I have a pair of AR2a and agree that the AR3a was an improvement over the AR3. Most of those who read consumers Report are not hobbyist,
Consumers report is the only game in town. We can all pick some test that we disagree with . I don't always agree with CR , there are many reports I agree with and use CR , To help assist me in making informed decisions.

I don't use consumer Reports in assisting me in buying cars , clothes , audio or any high end item. That is not what CR is for. CR is for the average consumer. Those who are not research oriented.
Where can I go and get an unbiased test on a toaster , cloths dryer , or refrigerator ?

[JSE]

Nah, these guys aren't the same...I wasn't implying they were...Just that the comments from GM I quoted made it hard to determine who he was referring to.

Melvin is a bit more clever than Pix...when faced with overhwhelming facts dismissing his arguments, he just avoids the issue and changes the subject. Pix fails to understand what you are saying (or just doesn't read your comments) and keeps bulldozing his way through the argument.

He's kinda like the Costanza-philosophy - it's not incorrect if you believe it!

My bad, I do bet they have the same mother though! They have to be related.

[melvin walker]

There is no doubt a special history with Ferrari. They built road cars to fund racing. Virtually every other maker builds race cars to promote and develop their road cars.


Do you remember the story behind the story? Henry the Second offered to buy out Enzo. The fiesty Italian declined (which was probably the best choice long term). Well, that pissed off Mr. Ford. He vowed to kick Ferrari's ass. He accomplished that four years running at Lemans.

rw

I remember the story , it cost Ford millions to defeat Ferrari. I might add the Ford GT's were developed in Great Britain not America. The GT's were tested and than raced by Europeans. After achieving success , American drivers were than allowed to race the Ford GT's.

To further expand on the story , Ferrari a small company did not have the money to compete with the wealth of Ford Motor Company. The Europeans appealed to Mercedes to get back in sport car racing.
Mercedes declined but agreed to work with Porsche to develop a car that would defeat Ford.
The all conquering Porsche 917's appeared and the rest is history.
Not only did the Porsche's defeat Ford but when rule changes outlawed them , they came to America and dominated the Cam-Am series , until rule were changed again.
At this point Porsche retired the 917's.

[Mr Peabody]

I bet Speed Racer could beat them all! And he's American and so is the Mach 5.

[melvin walker]

Six in a row from 1986-1991. Unlike BMW, Honda is also competitive at the international level with their motorcycles. Add twelve more.


See above for correct answer.


The correct answer is Americans Dan Gurney, Jerry Grant, Mark Donahue, and Mario Andretti were among the drivers involved in the historic 1-2-3 finish at the Le Mans 'Vingt-Quatre Heures in '66.

We're still talking about cars?

rw

The winning Fords in 1966 at LeMans was driven by Chris Amon and Bruce McLaren , they won LeMans by a few feet from their team-mates Hulmes and Miles.
All the drivers were Europeans !
Ford won the World Sport Car Championship in 1966 the only year Ford won.
LeMans is only one race in the Sports Car championship series.
Ford finished third in the World Sport Car Champion ship 1967 and was no longer a factor in the World Sports Car Championship series


Ferrari won the World Sport Car Championship in 1967 , after that the series was dominated by Porsche for the next several years beginning in 1968.

Formula one / Grand Prix or constructors Championship is a series where a manufacture
builds a car or there is a combination chassis and engine. Honda built only the engine , McClaren built the chassis. Ferrari ,and Renault builds the entire car chassis plus engine.

[melvin walker]

As sponsor of both NASCAR and F1 racing venues, Hewlett Packard promoted some track time between two of their drivers in a Car & Driver article - at the wheel of the other's ride. It was Juan Pablo Montoya and Jeff Gordon. Regarding the relative skills of these top-of-their-game guys, guess who came closer to the other's best track time in their own ride?

rw

it just doesn't cost much to compete in NASCAR. It's a down home good ole boys race.
Toyota spends close to $100,000,000 a year to race in F1 with limited results. Honda was successful after spending millions but only their engine was used
Before retiring Michael Schmacher was one of the highest paid sports performers in the world , Ferrari paid him $25,000,000 dollars a year to drive their cars.

F1 is an international sport , NASCAR , well it 's a down home car race , like running whiskey , where it's history began.
NASCAR is nice if you drink Busch beer and wear Levis jeans.

[Mr Peabody]

it just doesn't cost much to compete in NASCAR. It's a down home good ole boys race.
Toyota spends close to $100,000,000 a year to race in F1 with limited results. Honda was successful after spending millions but only their engine was used
Before retiring Michael Schmacher was one of the highest paid sports performers in the world , Ferrari paid him $25,000,000 dollars a year to drive their cars.

F1 is an international sport , NASCAR , well it 's a down home car race , like running whiskey , where it's history began.
NASCAR is nice if you drink Busch beer and wear Levis jeans.

You might be a REDNECK if......^

[emaidel]

Ah, er, getting back on topic..., at least, that is, until Melvin chimes in with another archaic rant about life in the dark ages, I thought I'd explain to anyone interested just what the differences were between PIckering and Stanton.

The answer to the question, "What's the difference?" is, "Absolutely nothing." Aside from cosmetics, packaging and marketing, there was no difference whatsoever between many Pickering and Stanton models.

The name of the company originally was "Pickering and Company," owned by Norman A. PIckering, whom Walter Stanton bought out in the mid 50's. Things were running smoothly until Allied Radio (with Lafayette, and others quickly following suit) introduced the "penny cartridge deal." Turntables with list prices of, say, $79.95 could now be purchased for only an additional one cent ($79.96) and have an included cartridge from Shure, Pickering or Empire all valued at about $46.00 This "penny deal" was targeted primarily to mail order customers, as they had no idea that both the turntable and cartridge were ordinarily discounted at retail by at least 20%. Still, it was a good deal.

Walter was outraged. His product now, at least in his mind, was perceived as being worth only one cent, instead of its list price of $46.00. Then, he solved that problem (and more than doubled his sales) by what has to have been one of the most brilliant marketing decisions in the history of the business. Instead of painting the cartridge body, he chose to leave it a polished metal, and had his engineers re-tool the plastic shape on the stylus handle (and dust brush, on those models so equipped). Now, with at least a different looking cartridge, he had it boxed in a more elaborate package, along with both a "pill" box (for extra styli, but which ultimately was used for many of the drugs rampant in the business in the 70's), the famous Stanton screwdriver, and even went as far as to calibrate each, and include a calibration document.

Now, with a "different" product, he priced it about 20% higher than the Pickering equivalent, and distributed it through a completely separate sales team. He was certain also that no Stanton cartridge ever became part of the "penny deal" either.

Insofar as improvements and engineering developments, one company (Pickering, for example) would get one improvement, and then the other (Stanton) would get a later one. Specifically, around 1973, Pickering introduced its XV/15-1200E for a list price of $79.95, which was quite high for a Pickering cartridge. The original 1200 was a fair to middling product: it didn't track as well as the Shure V/15 Type II, nor was it able to handle high levels without "cracking," and had a terrible time with overly sibiliant "S's," such as those often heard on records by groups like Sergio Mendes and Brazil '66.

The 1200 was packaged in a gold metal box, and had a gold metal body, along with a gold-finished "Dustamatic Brush." It wasn't particularly successful, for obvious reasons. PIckering cartridges at the time were sold with such marketing nonsense as "100% Music Power," while Stantons were hailed as "The Choice of the Professional," as they had become practically the only cartridge used on every FM radio station across the country.

All of the deficiencies of the 1200 were addressed and corrected, and the result was the legendary Stanton 681-EEE. The list price of the "triple E," as it came to be known, was well over $100, and it was packaged in a large, solid walnut box that actually cost the company $5 (a huge increase over the cost of other packaging for other Stanton, or PIckering models). As the Triple E did indeed sound better than the original Pickering 1200, it was considered a far better cartridge, even though each and every change that went into the Triple E went into production units of the 1200 too.

PIckering later introduced the XUV-4500Q which was, and remains (in my opinion) the finest ever cartridge to play CD-4 records. It was also the only cartridge to do so at 1 gram. Unfortunately, for PIckering, the 4500 was launched at about the same time the entire quad industry collapsed, and so almost no one bought it. That was actually quite a shame, as it was a superb "regular" stereo cartridge, but its association with quad was a major turnoff.

As sales of Triple E's were still going through the roof (well over 10,000 per month!), Stanton saw no need for a new model, and certainly didn't want an equivalent of a dead horse like the 4500, and so it continued along its merry way. Then, Pickering, as a result of the countless requests from the sales department, re-engineered the 4500 into a standard stereo cartrdige, with a less drastic "line contact" tip, and introduced the legendary Pickering XSV-3000.

The 3000, at the time, was far and away the best cartridge Pickering, or Stanton, had ever made, and the fact that it outperformed the Triple E didn't sit well with the Stanton Sales Managers or representatives. Then, in a disguised form (at least cosmetically) it was reincarnated into the Stanton 881-S. There was NO difference whatsoever between the two, other than cosmetics and packaging. And, of course, that all-important "Calibration Sheet."

Today, Stanton is a company dedicated to the DJ business, and rightfully so as the market for moving magnet "Hi-Fi" cartridges is infinitessimal as compared to both the market for DJ cartridges, as well as the cartridge market in the heyday of the industry.

The finest cartridge made by Stanton was the Collector's Series CS-100, which was actually a hand-tweaked 881-S MKII with such ditties as a sapphire-coated, beryllium cantilever, and a nude Stereohedron stylus. I use the CS-100, and prefer it to the Denon 103D, as well as the Ortofon MC-20 MKII. The Collector's Series CS-100 owes its existence to the lowly Pickering XSV-3000, which is where its design all started.

[Mr Peabody]

If I remember right, I think the 681 was the cartridge we shipped to radio stations. I can't remember the exact series we sold to consumers but it was the Stanton P-mount that came with an adaptor to use on a standard headshell. These were good sounding carts. I also really liked Ortofon, a bit in different to Shure and did not like Audio Technika. None of these were used with a "high end" table. This was back in the day of using my Pioneer PL-51 and whatever built in phono stage of gear I had at the time.

[emaidel]

The Stanton cartridge used by radio stations was primarily the 680-EL, or the 680-AL. the "E" had an elliptical stylus, and the "A" a conical one. The EL became quite popular in the DJ business until Ortofon introduced a version of its "Concorde" model as a plug-in. Stanton followed suit with its "Trackmaster," and so it goes....

[melvin walker]

Ah, er, getting back on topic..., at least, that is, until Melvin chimes in with another archaic rant about life in the dark ages, I thought I'd explain to anyone interested just what the differences were between PIckering and Stanton.

The answer to the question, "What's the difference?" is, "Absolutely nothing." Aside from cosmetics, packaging and marketing, there was no difference whatsoever between many Pickering and Stanton models.

The name of the company originally was "Pickering and Company," owned by Norman A. PIckering, whom Walter Stanton bought out in the mid 50's. Things were running smoothly until Allied Radio (with Lafayette, and others quickly following suit) introduced the "penny cartridge deal." Turntables with list prices of, say, $79.95 could now be purchased for only an additional one cent ($79.96) and have an included cartridge from Shure, Pickering or Empire all valued at about $46.00 This "penny deal" was targeted primarily to mail order customers, as they had no idea that both the turntable and cartridge were ordinarily discounted at retail by at least 20%. Still, it was a good deal.

Walter was outraged. His product now, at least in his mind, was perceived as being worth only one cent, instead of its list price of $46.00. Then, he solved that problem (and more than doubled his sales) by what has to have been one of the most brilliant marketing decisions in the history of the business. Instead of painting the cartridge body, he chose to leave it a polished metal, and had his engineers re-tool the plastic shape on the stylus handle (and dust brush, on those models so equipped). Now, with at least a different looking cartridge, he had it boxed in a more elaborate package, along with both a "pill" box (for extra styli, but which ultimately was used for many of the drugs rampant in the business in the 70's), the famous Stanton screwdriver, and even went as far as to calibrate each, and include a calibration document.

Now, with a "different" product, he priced it about 20% higher than the Pickering equivalent, and distributed it through a completely separate sales team. He was certain also that no Stanton cartridge ever became part of the "penny deal" either.

Insofar as improvements and engineering developments, one company (Pickering, for example) would get one improvement, and then the other (Stanton) would get a later one. Specifically, around 1973, Pickering introduced its XV/15-1200E for a list price of $79.95, which was quite high for a Pickering cartridge. The original 1200 was a fair to middling product: it didn't track as well as the Shure V/15 Type II, nor was it able to handle high levels without "cracking," and had a terrible time with overly sibiliant "S's," such as those often heard on records by groups like Sergio Mendes and Brazil '66.

The 1200 was packaged in a gold metal box, and had a gold metal body, along with a gold-finished "Dustamatic Brush." It wasn't particularly successful, for obvious reasons. PIckering cartridges at the time were sold with such marketing nonsense as "100% Music Power," while Stantons were hailed as "The Choice of the Professional," as they had become practically the only cartridge used on every FM radio station across the country.

All of the deficiencies of the 1200 were addressed and corrected, and the result was the legendary Stanton 681-EEE. The list price of the "triple E," as it came to be known, was well over $100, and it was packaged in a large, solid walnut box that actually cost the company $5 (a huge increase over the cost of other packaging for other Stanton, or PIckering models). As the Triple E did indeed sound better than the original Pickering 1200, it was considered a far better cartridge, even though each and every change that went into the Triple E went into production units of the 1200 too.

PIckering later introduced the XUV-4500Q which was, and remains (in my opinion) the finest ever cartridge to play CD-4 records. It was also the only cartridge to do so at 1 gram. Unfortunately, for PIckering, the 4500 was launched at about the same time the entire quad industry collapsed, and so almost no one bought it. That was actually quite a shame, as it was a superb "regular" stereo cartridge, but its association with quad was a major turnoff.

As sales of Triple E's were still going through the roof (well over 10,000 per month!), Stanton saw no need for a new model, and certainly didn't want an equivalent of a dead horse like the 4500, and so it continued along its merry way. Then, Pickering, as a result of the countless requests from the sales department, re-engineered the 4500 into a standard stereo cartrdige, with a less drastic "line contact" tip, and introduced the legendary Pickering XSV-3000.

The 3000, at the time, was far and away the best cartridge Pickering, or Stanton, had ever made, and the fact that it outperformed the Triple E didn't sit well with the Stanton Sales Managers or representatives. Then, in a disguised form (at least cosmetically) it was reincarnated into the Stanton 881-S. There was NO difference whatsoever between the two, other than cosmetics and packaging. And, of course, that all-important "Calibration Sheet."

Today, Stanton is a company dedicated to the DJ business, and rightfully so as the market for moving magnet "Hi-Fi" cartridges is infinitessimal as compared to both the market for DJ cartridges, as well as the cartridge market in the heyday of the industry.

The finest cartridge made by Stanton was the Collector's Series CS-100, which was actually a hand-tweaked 881-S MKII with such ditties as a sapphire-coated, beryllium cantilever, and a nude Stereohedron stylus. I use the CS-100, and prefer it to the Denon 103D, as well as the Ortofon MC-20 MKII. The Collector's Series CS-100 owes its existence to the lowly Pickering XSV-3000, which is where its design all started.

Not you a person that considers history the dark ages , discussing Stanton and Pickering.
Better get my shotgun out , times have changed.
Back to your subject Pickering was an excellent cartridge , I never used one because most of the audiophiles in my group considered it inferior to other cartridages. When installing cartridges with high end arms most audio magazines did not include Stanton are Pickering in their test reports .

What was the name of the quality turntable that sold for $ 79.00 ? I was under the impression that few if any high end or quality transmission turntables non sold for less than $200.00 without an arm.

[SlumpBuster]

NASCAR is nice if you drink Busch beer and wear Levis jeans.

For the record I like High Life and Carhartt.



NASCAR!!! And because you're a tool, I bet you don't even get the joke.