Cartridge help?

[mbeigh]

I have a Garrard SL 95B tt with an Empire 999 se/x cartridge. I am looking to replace the cartridge and or stylus. Will be playing thru a hafler preamp and amp and Advent Legacy speakers. Any suggestion will be welcomed.

Thanks
M beigh

[emaidel]

This may not be what you want to hear, but get rid of that turntable first! You can find numerous used Dual turntables on ebay (and elsewhere), as well as AR, or even Rega and MMF tables for a song. No point upgrading something that won't provide the benefits of an upgrade. Most also come with a cartridge, so you just might luck out there too.

[jrhymeammo]

Hey MB, Welcome to AR dot com. I hope you'll find this site useful.

I would ignore emadiel's post above, if you are satisfied with your Garrard. Give us an idea on how much you are looking to spend on a replacement.
For under $100, I would look for Shure M97XE or Audio Technica AT-95E.

Click on a link below for a free manual for your TT.

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/garrard/sl-95b.shtml

JRA

[jrhymeammo]

turntables on ebay

Absolutely the worst place to buy a functional TT. It's like going to a TT Junkyard 95% of the time.

[emaidel]

My suggestion isn't as mean spirited as it may seem. I sold plenty Garrard SL-95's in the late 60's (when the model was new), and remember many truly awful features about it. For one, the clunky, aluminum-trimmed, wooden tonearm just as often as not, sat lopsided on the record. Next, the cueing system flat out stinks, as it's almost impossible to use it without causing the tonearm to bounce across the record. And last, when using the automatic function, the tonearm "slams" down on the record, as opposed to descending softly as it does on a Dual, or many other units: hardly what one would wish to subject a new cartridge to.

As the original poster has Hafler electronics and Advent loudspeakers, I felt the SL-95 was a poor match in quality, and recommended a replacement. Ebay may not be the best place to look, but as of this morning, there are dozens of Dual turntables available at good prices, and with supplied cartrdiges. There are also quite a few Pioneer, Sony and Technics single play turntables available too, most of which would easily outperform the SL-95. I'd be leery about the Technics models, as many are likely to have been used by DJ's who mercilessly abuse them.

My own experience with purchasing turntables on ebay was mixed: the Dual 721 I bought years ago (for $150) arrived in operating condition, but had frayed cables, a worn out stylus, and was positively filthy. The Dual CS-5000 I purchased more recently (for $300)arrived in mint condition, and was very carefully packed by the shipper. So, a purchase on ebay isn't always a disaster in the making.

I did look, but found no AR turntables, and the Rega models were quite expensive. If a used Dual 1229, for example, can be had for $100 or less, and comes supplied with a working cartridge (most likely a Shure model, which will easily blow away an Empire 999), then that offers a really terrific deal, and infinitely better performance than an old Garrard SL-95 with a new cartridge.

Believe it or not, I'm trying to be helpful here, not just critical.

[mbeigh]

Thanks for your thoughts. This tt is actually in my second system. I have a Rega P2 in my main system.

M Beigh

[royphil345]

Excellent suggestions from JRA...

Some people think if you're not running the same turntable and cartridge they own, you're missing out on "audiophile bliss". I'm not even sure how some people hear these subtleties while running a cartridge that's mediocre at best... Those old Garrards will play music for sure. I imagine it only slams the needle down on the record if you hit the auto button and ask it to? The damped dynamic stabilizer brush on the Shure M97xE will gently lower the stylus into the groove, even if you drop the tonearm from several inches up. Might be a good match if you like using the auto function.

I like the tonal balance of the Shure M97xE in the lower price-range. The output isn't the strongest. The Audio Technica AT-95E is a fantastic bargain and I've been hearing great things about the AT-120E as well. Many people seem to prefer it over the more expensive and higher compliance AT-440MLa.

The Dual 1229 and Garrard SL-95B are both idler drive "stackers" with the primitave dry main bearings and mechanical automatic tonearms. The automatic functions work exactly the same way. They're both known to be pretty musical sounding tables, although not the last word in resolution or rumble specs. I would sure love to hear WHY one would be INFINITELY better than the other... to the point where one's worth purchasing and the other should be thrown out??? No reasons given for such a bold statement... as usual...

The tonearm on the Garrard is not wooden (someone who only saw a photo of it might think so), so I'd have to imagine anything else a certain person claimed to know about it was pure fantasy too... Why would a person actually go through the trouble of inventing things to bash someone's gear and then recommend something that very honestly is so similar it might as well be the same table?

[emaidel]

Presently on ebay, there are three Dual turntables that appear to be outstanding values: one is a 505, another a 1248, and the last a 733. All come with cartridges claimed to be in perfect working order (two are Ortofons, and the other a Shure), and all are presently being offered for prices around $60. While it's unlikely the bidding will end at prices that low, if any of these can be had for around $100 or so, that respresents a substantially greater value and far wiser purchase than to spend almost that much, or even more, for a really good cartridge to install in a really lousy turntable like the Garrard SL-95B. That turntable sold for $95 when new (1967-68) and was a lousy deal then.

[emaidel]

The Dual 1229 and Garrard SL-95B are both idler drive "stackers" with the primitave dry main bearings and mechanical automatic tonearms. The automatic functions work exactly the same way. They're both known to be pretty musical sounding tables, although not the last word in resolution or rumble specs. I would sure love to hear WHY one would be INFINITELY better than the other... to the point where one's worth purchasing and the other should be thrown out??? No reasons given for such a bold statement... as usual...

The tonearm on the Garrard is not wooden (someone who only saw a photo of it might think so), so I'd have to imagine anything else a certain person claimed to know about it was pure fantasy too... Why would a person actually go through the trouble of inventing things to bash someone's gear and then recommend something that very honestly is so similar it might as well be the same table?

You, sir, are a complete and total jerk. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and in attempting to discredit that which I do know about, you've only made a bigger fool of yourself than you can possibly imagine.

For starters, the tonearm on the SL-95B was made of Aformosia wood, encapsulated in aluminum. It was big, clunky and massive and destroyed many the stylus of a high-compliance cartridge, thereby rendering it a horrible choice for any of the modern, quality cartridges you're recommending.

Secondly, there are huge differences in the idler-wheel drive of many turntables, and that used in the SL-95B vs. that used in the Dual 1229 pales by comparison. Audible rumble was very much a characteristic of the Garrard unit, while it was entirely absent on the 1229. The jerky, awkward tonearm movement of the SL-95B was typical at the time of all Garrards, and most (if not all) enthusiasts cringed at the manner in which it yanked itself off the record, moved across in awkward, jerky movements, and then (if one had stacked records) did indeed "slam" itself down on the lead-in groove. And NO dynamnic stabilizer of any type could possibly prevent stylus damage from either this, or from dropping the tonearm as you so preposterously claimed. All automatic Dual and Miracord turntables at the time shamed Garrard models with their smooth, gentle operation, especially, the gentle manner in which their viscous-damped cueing mechanisms so carefully lowered the tonearm vs. the silly manner in which Garrards worked. There was good reason both the competing Dual model (the 1019) and the Miracord (50H) cost more than the SL-95B: they were both worth it. I sold all three of these turntables back then. Did you? I hardly think so...

The SL-95B was by no means "musical" sounding, and your claim that it was is ridiulous. The 1229 all but blew away the sound of the newer Garrard Zero-100, which while a far better turntable than its predecessor, is a legend in this industry for being the horrible clunker that it was.

I "invent" absolutely nothing that I post here, or elsewhere on AR. Your nasty, vile, insulting and purely infantile and puerile posts only indicate that you really need to stay hidden under your rock and stay there until Mommy lets you out for playtime. Your "proof" of whatever it is I've said is wrong, or, even worse, a "lie" has only served to make your postings all the more outrageously false than they actually are.

If you believe for one moment, that anyone here believes in any of the nonsense that you've posted, then you really need to get a grip on yourself. As my favorite TV Judge, Judge Judy so often says to her intellectually cretinous liitgants, "You're an idiot."

I'm sorry, but I didn't want to answer your posts. Unfortunately, I just couldn't let this last one slip by.

[royphil345]

Looks medium mass to me goofy...

What's the deal mbeigh? Is it wood?

He actually made up a story about the type of wood!!!... Truly bizarre.

"And NO dynamnic stabilizer of any type could possibly prevent stylus damage from either this, or from dropping the tonearm as you so preposterously claimed."

Is that a fact? Ask anyone who owns the M97xE... goofy...

There are certainly differences among idler wheel drive tables. The two automatic changers in question? Not a heck of a lot... goofy...

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/vi...ges/85918.html

You keep claiming this "blows away" or "pales in comparison" to that. You always support your ridiculous claims with stories you obviously make up off the top of your head and nothing solid whatsoever. And then you always melt down and call people names when you get caught. THAT is what I would call nasty, vile, insulting and purely infantile. Kind of makes anything you have to add to this forum less than worthless doesn't it? As I've said before, there's not much that's more cowardly and pussy than hiding on the internet and calling people names. Anytime you want to get together and try to talk to me like that is fine with me. I will make the time.

[emaidel]

Wehn it comes to credibility or your preposterous claim that I "make up stories," I'll leave that up to the rest of the readers here at AR. I've made up absolutely nothing jagoff, and you really need to know and accept that. Your audioasylum clip proves nothing whatsoever to support your ridiculous disbelief that the tonearm of the SL:-95B was wood. It was a successor to the dreadful LAB-80 Garrard model (Garrard's first to use that type of wooden tonearm), that was the most notoriously troublesome unit Garrard ever made. The SL-95B worked, but not particularly well. Do you have personal experience with it, and any of the other turntables I've mentioned? I'd stake my life on the fact that you don't.

Insofar as using terms as "blows away" or is "infinitely superior" and things like that, I'll just have to try to use smaller words for your limited mental capabilities. I'll just say "sounds better" or "performs nicely" instead. Maybe then you'll be able to comperehend.

You're a troll, and will always be one. After all, I'm not the one who wound up with a reprimand from a site mod, and had to have his posts edited for foul language. You're not fooling anyone, Goofy.

[royphil345]

"Your audioasylum clip proves nothing whatsoever to support your ridiculous disbelief that the tonearm of the SL:-95B was wood."

Really?... "-has that cool-retro "luxury" aesthetic of the late 60s with that FAKE WOOD STRIP on top of the tonearm,..."


"I'm not the one who wound up with a reprimand from a site mod, and had to have his posts edited for foul language"

A liar, loudmouth and coward is the one type of person that just turns my stomach and I'll admit I do get a little crazy.


LOL @ freaky compulsive liar internet tough guy...

[emaidel]

And, my apologies to you, mbeigh. Your post asked a question and I answered it in an honest, and hopefully, helpful manner. That I've participated in this hijacking is something for which I owe you an apology. At least you might have gotten a laugh or two at royphil's nonsense. It's been a while since he's come out of hiding, and, as a leopard never changes his spots, neither does he. Again, sorry. Hope you managed to make a decision on your turntable that will satisfy you. Surely, as the owner of a Rega P2 you're well aware of the SL-95B's shortcomings, and were probably just as happy to put up with them.

Peace.

Ed

[royphil345]

How do we know if that's the truth or not?

LOL @ freaky compulsive liar internet tough guy...

On the subject of trolls and "leopards that never change their spots".... Why were you banned from AudioKarma and all your posts erased? If I understand correctly, it was the exact same thing. Bashing certain gear because of firm personal beliefs based on nothing and childishly ripping into anyone who dared disagree with the "facts" you sit there and make up. Glad you came here ...

[emaidel]

You'd be surprised how many here at AR, and elsewhere, have also been banned from AK. I make no bones about the manner in which I was banned: a site mod sent me a snotty email, poorly written, and with numerous grammatical and spelling errors. I suggested he use Spell-check, and then he wrote back, "Spellcheck THIS, A**wipe!" and everything I had posted vanished. Others were banned for even more ridiculous reasons, and those of us who were banned all consider it an honor at this point.

[gillsev]

... the dreadful LAB-80 Garrard model (Garrard's first to use that type of wooden tonearm), that was the most notoriously troublesome unit Garrard ever made.

Sorry Emaidel but I respectfully disagree with your statement. The Garrard Lab 80 was the best engineered Automatic Transcription turntable in 1964. It was the best of its time (second only to the 301 & 401 respectively). I was able to dismantle one before. The craftsmanship and engineering design of the auto cycle was superb. I still have mine from 1964! That is 45 yrs. old (my age too!) but still functions like the first day I got it!

Here is a review of it from the United States Testing Company (April 1965) ...

http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/8...repportay9.jpg

[Reticuli]

The United States Testing Company? Wow. Back in the day when people cared about cool stuff working well and not just vacuum cleaners and air purifiers.

To the original poster, you need to find out what kind of compliance you should be using for your arm, and then take it from there.

Edit:

Read the USTC review. They say the arm on the 80 is appropriate for any cartridge, from the highest to the lowest compliances. That is absolutely mechanically impossible.

The tonearm mass, mass distribution, and cantilever compliance is a constant in turntables and there is no arm in the universe that will work with all cartridges properly, i.e. getting the resonant frequency high enough so that the arm follows the record and low enough so that low-end music information in the groove does not cause movement in the cart & tonearm.

Makes me wonder if USTC was just a marketing name for a magazine meant to sound uber-professional. That said, I know nothing about the automatic turntables you guys are talking about, but I do know that statement is a stretch.

[gillsev]

They say the arm on the 80 is appropriate for any cartridge, from the highest to the lowest compliances. That is absolutely mechanically impossible.

The tonearm mass, mass distribution, and cantilever compliance is a constant in turntables and there is no arm in the universe that will work with all cartridges properly, i.e. getting the resonant frequency high enough so that the arm follows the record and low enough so that low-end music information in the groove does not cause movement in the cart & tonearm.

I agree with you, Reticuli. I don't have the specs of the Lab 80's tonearm per se, but judging accordingly, I believe it's effective mass could be between 15 to 25 grams which will be considered a moderate level. Therefore I can use moderate to low compliance cartridges (i.e. between 5 to 20 um/mN). With that in mind, I am using the Shure M91ED cartridge for it, tracking at 1.5 grams.

[emaidel]

Sorry Emaidel but I respectfully disagree with your statement. The Garrard Lab 80 was the best engineered Automatic Transcription turntable in 1964. It was the best of its time (second only to the 301 & 401 respectively). I was able to dismantle one before. The craftsmanship and engineering design of the auto cycle was superb. I still have mine from 1964! That is 45 yrs. old (my age too!) but still functions like the first day I got it!

Here is a review of it from the United States Testing Company (April 1965) ...

http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/8...repportay9.jpg

While I certainly can't dispute your experience, my statement was based on the enormous amount of returns on the LAB-80 we received at Lafayette Radio when we were selling the unit back then. Almost all of us in the store switched customers over to the Dual equivalent, as it was not only a better turntable to begin with, but a less troublesome one too. That you have one that's 45 years old and still works is nice, but few that we sold lasted more than a week before problems set in.

[gillsev]

While I certainly can't dispute your experience, my statement was based on the enormous amount of returns on the LAB-80 we received at Lafayette Radio when we were selling the unit back then. Almost all of us in the store switched customers over to the Dual equivalent, as it was not only a better turntable to begin with, but a less troublesome one too. That you have one that's 45 years old and still works is nice, but few that we sold lasted more than a week before problems set in.

I also can't dispute the quality of Dual turntables. They are smoother and quieter in their auto cycle operation. Less complicated than the Lab 80's mechanism. I had a 1229Q and 701 before and they were excellent models until the bushing on the tonearm lifter wore down in effect making the tonearm jittery as it dropped onto the record during automatic. They were fine though after I obtained a replacement part for them. The Garrard Lab 80 is still functional all this time and is what I kept for nostalgic reasons: I was born in 1964.

[02audionoob]

"And NO dynamnic stabilizer of any type could possibly prevent stylus damage from either this, or from dropping the tonearm as you so preposterously claimed."

Is that a fact? Ask anyone who owns the M97xE... goofy...

I own a Shure M97xE. It doesn't help against a dropping tone arm. It seems to look like it would. But it doesn't.

[JohnMichael]

Gee I am sorry I missed this thread the first time around. A few posts confirm my recent opinions.

[Auricauricle]

Sorry I missed it too....I didn't realise that em could be so...impassioned!

[Reticuli]

"Yeah...look at all that passion all over the wall."

[emaidel]

Sorry I missed it too....I didn't realise that em could be so...impassioned!

Yeah, I guess "impassioned" is a good adjective. I had completely forgotten this thread until I noticed a recent reply to it, and then memories of it, and another really nasty exchange between myself and Royphil345 came flooding back.

I try to post my opinions based on that which I hear, that which I've learned from others (recording engineers, for example), and my experience having worked many years in the industry (although they were quite a while ago). Sometimes members feel my posts are interesting and helpful, but occasionally, they wrankle a few and result in some "spirited" exchanges. This was one of those examples.

It's never my intention to purposely disparage anyone else's opinions, unless I have a legitimate reason to disagree. That's not that "this sounds better than that" type of disagreement, but concrete stuff like the reliability of a given product, such as the Garrard turntables in question on this thread.

I never liked Garrard turntables, even though I purchased a Zero-100 in the early 70's believing it to be a good product. I prefer digital audio to analog, and know that there are quite a few members here who'll never agree with me on that. I also feel the SACD and the DSD recording medium are "the best thing out there" and have been all but ripped apart on that one. So, my opinions are what they are, and anyone is invited to share them, or to disagree with me. That's the nature of an opinion anyway, isn't it? It's only when someone writes back personally insulting and nasty stuff as Royphil345 did that I get "impassioned."