wrote in message
. ..
In general, when someone makes a comparison between 2 versions of the same
thing, it is assumed that other things are held constant. Therefore, the
statement above, saying that conical stylii are less temperamental that
elliptical ones, assumes that the quality of the the stylus is the
same--only the shape of the tip is different.

I don't find any confusion at all.

You haven't been following the thread then. It was claimed that a $50
cartridge with a conical stylus at any tracking force, would cause less
groove damage than the most expensive cartridges available using line
contact or any other stylus shape.
(use Google if you need to review the thread)

So, if you are not confused, do you agree?
I sure don't.

MrT.

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u
wrote in message
. ..
In general, when someone makes a comparison between 2
versions of the same thing, it is assumed that other
things are held constant. Therefore, the statement
above, saying that conical stylii are less temperamental
that elliptical ones, assumes that the quality of the
the stylus is the same--only the shape of the tip is
different.

I don't find any confusion at all.

You haven't been following the thread then. It was
claimed that a $50 cartridge with a conical stylus at any
tracking force, would cause less groove damage than the
most expensive cartridges available using line contact or
any other stylus shape. (use Google if you need to review
the thread)

So, if you are not confused, do you agree?
I sure don't.

Sounds like posturing to me.

Conical styli are generally a step backwards. So we have a big step
backwards into an obsolete format, followed by a step backwards within the
technology of that obsolete format.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Conical styli are generally a step backwards. So we have a big step
backwards into an obsolete format, followed by a step backwards within the
technology of that obsolete format.

Pretty much sums it up. But at least he admits it's only to save money (even
that's doubtful) not that it's actually superior to CD, as many others feel
the need to claim.

MrT.

In article , Mr.T
MrT@home wrote:

You haven't been following the thread then. It was claimed that a $50
cartridge with a conical stylus at any tracking force, would cause less
groove damage than the most expensive cartridges available using line
contact or any other stylus shape.

Sorry. You're the one who hasn't been listening. That isn't what I said
at all. Are you trying to prop up a straw man?

See ya
Steve

--
Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD! http://www.vintageip.com/records/
Building a museum and archive of animation! http://www.animationarchive.org/
The Quest for the BEST HOTDOG in Los Angeles! http://www.hotdogspot.com/
Rediscovering great stuff from the past! http://www.vintagetips.com/

"Stephen Worth" wrote in message
...
You haven't been following the thread then. It was claimed that a $50
cartridge with a conical stylus at any tracking force, would cause less
groove damage than the most expensive cartridges available using line
contact or any other stylus shape.

Sorry. You're the one who hasn't been listening. That isn't what I said
at all. Are you trying to prop up a straw man?

I notice you snipped the part where I suggested any doubters merely use
Google groups to ascertain that is pretty much exactly what was claimed.
The thing I love about Usenet is that anybody can claim they didn't say
something, but the whole world can still read exactly what was said.

If you are now making a different claim, maybe you should tell us what it
is?

MrT.

In article , Mr.T
MrT@home wrote:

If you are now making a different claim, maybe you should tell us what it
is?

I said that it's perfectly possible to put together a good sounding
setup for playing vinyl LPs for $250 to $300.

See ya
Steve

--
Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD! http://www.vintageip.com/records/
Building a museum and archive of animation! http://www.animationarchive.org/
The Quest for the BEST HOTDOG in Los Angeles! http://www.hotdogspot.com/
Rediscovering great stuff from the past! http://www.vintagetips.com/

"Stephen Worth" wrote in message
...
I said that it's perfectly possible to put together a good sounding
setup for playing vinyl LPs for $250 to $300.

Lets see you said :

Dual 1228 ($75 to $100)
Used 70s preamp with phono input ($40)
New cartridge ($50)

OK so far, (depending on your definition of good sounding of course)
assuming you can actually find a Dual 1228 for that price. Just add a new
belt, and possibly replace motor, spindle and arm bearings :-) (assuming you
can actually get them) Good S/H Duals are pretty thin on the ground around
these parts though unfortunately.

Tell us what NEW $300 turntable/arm/cartridge you consider good sounding
with minimal record wear? I guess we should all trade our expensive TT's in
on the cheapest Pro-ject, which is the only thing I know that even comes
close to your price. Having heard one, I won't be trading mine any time
soon!

You also said :

"A $50 conical/spherical tip cartridge is kinder to records than the
most expensive elliptical, and it's a lot easier to keep in proper
alignment."

Which is what I objected to.
Current denial that you even said it, and lack of supporting evidence on
your part is noted.
Your misunderstanding about cartridge alignment is also noted.

MrT.

In article , Mr.T
MrT@home wrote:

assuming you can actually find a Dual 1228 for that price. Just add a new
belt, and possibly replace motor, spindle and arm bearings :-) (assuming you
can actually get them) Good S/H Duals are pretty thin on the ground around
these parts though unfortunately.

I've bought three myself for between $50 and $100 at ebay. They were
all in great condition and needed no servicing. There are good Duals
for sale at ebay all the time.

Tell us what NEW $300 turntable/arm/cartridge you consider good sounding
with minimal record wear?

Turntables today are a very weak specialty market. They are either
overpriced cheap decks or way overpriced well made ones. It doesn't
make sense to buy new turntables for so much money, when there are so
many excellent used ones from the 70s that offer so much more value for
the money.

You're just arguing for arguing's sake. You know all this stuff already.

See ya
Steve

--
Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD! http://www.vintageip.com/records/
Building a museum and archive of animation! http://www.animationarchive.org/
The Quest for the BEST HOTDOG in Los Angeles! http://www.hotdogspot.com/
Rediscovering great stuff from the past! http://www.vintagetips.com/

"Stephen Worth" wrote in message
...
assuming you can actually find a Dual 1228 for that price. Just add a
new
belt, and possibly replace motor, spindle and arm bearings :-) (assuming
you
can actually get them) Good S/H Duals are pretty thin on the ground
around
these parts though unfortunately.

I've bought three myself for between $50 and $100 at ebay. They were
all in great condition and needed no servicing. There are good Duals
for sale at ebay all the time.

Shipping a cheap turntable from overseas though is not something I'd care
to do, but good luck to you.

Tell us what NEW $300 turntable/arm/cartridge you consider good sounding
with minimal record wear?

Turntables today are a very weak specialty market. They are either
overpriced cheap decks or way overpriced well made ones. It doesn't
make sense to buy new turntables for so much money, when there are so
many excellent used ones from the 70s that offer so much more value for
the money.

I agree, and it doesn't make sense to buy a turntable at all when CD players
offer "so much more value for the money" than any turntable. Except of
course to transcribe old records you have in your collection. Most people
with a record collection will already have an old turntable though. Those
that god rid of their TT usually got rid of their record collection too.

You're just arguing for arguing's sake.

Not at all, I STILL don't think a $50 cartridge is the equal of any CD
player.

You know all this stuff already.

Yes, the bit's that are actually correct anyway.

MrT.