tonearm micro seiki ma707

[giarlo]

sono alla ricerca dello shell originale per il braccio MA707 ,e del peso aggiuntivo per variare la massa effettiva.
se qualcuno ha notizie im merito può
scrivere a giarlo@alice.it
Giancarlo
are looking for a shell original MA707 arm, and the additional weight to vary the effective mass.
if anyone has any news on this may im
write to giarlo@alice.it
Giancarlo

[Blue Angel]

Happy New Year

Micro Seiki turntable arms are usually branded "Micro". Some of their turntables are also sometimes branded only "Micro" eg my BL-51 has been branded Micro Seiki and my MR-711 wears a Micro badge.

I am not immediately familiar with headshells for an MA-707 but will have a look here soon.

Oops Just had a look. It's the same headshell I have been looking for for a very long time. I had 3 some time ago. Now I only have one

You are going to have a real problem finding one of these. I have been trying to get a friend to make me one but he doesn't want to bite...

Cheers from Cape Town

ba

[rodanone]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Turntable-Heads ... 500wt_1314

[rodanone]

I was also looking forever for a DQ-41 tonearm and they share the same head shell. I believe the tone arm on the DQ-41 is listed as basic MA707. It's not quite as nice. However, I never thought I'd hear the thing since I received it without a headshell. Serendipity later a guy in FL also had the same problem as you gents. My DQ-41 was still wrapped in plastic. I started it up last week. Not cheap by any stretch. But AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!! Just wanted to share that. Seems like the overhang is the same as the original based on everything I know (It measures as close as I can.) And the mass of the original is listed at 4G. I know this is less.

[Blue Angel]

I was also looking forever for a DQ-41 tonearm and they share the same head shell. I believe the tone arm on the DQ-41 is listed as basic MA707. It's not quite as nice. However, I never thought I'd hear the thing since I received it without a headshell. Serendipity later a guy in FL also had the same problem as you gents. My DQ-41 was still wrapped in plastic. I started it up last week. Not cheap by any stretch. But AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!! Just wanted to share that. Seems like the overhang is the same as the original based on everything I know (It measures as close as I can.) And the mass of the original is listed at 4G. I know this is less.

Hi rodanone

I looked at your ebay link's picture which doesn't look the same as my Micro headshell. Was there yet another iteration 'shell for this arm?

ba

[phonomac]

Hello ba,
I believe your headshell is from a CF-2 arm. This is the headshell from my MA-707:


This extract, courtesy of Michael Otto's archive shows a page from a 1981-82 Micro Seiki catalogue


The distinguishing features are that the finger-lift is at the front of the headshell, and the connections are by 4 pins which extend from the rear of the headshell and mate with a socket on the arm.

I am also pretty sure that I have seen pictures of a version of the MA-701 (maybe a dedicated turntable version rather than a universal arm) which has the same headshell as yours.

Fascinating but confusing stuff, this Micro Seiki equipment

regards

Angus

[Blue Angel]

Hello ba,
I believe your headshell is from a CF-2 arm. This is the headshell from my MA-707:


This extract, courtesy of Michael Otto's archive shows a page from a 1981-82 Micro Seiki catalogue


The distinguishing features are that the finger-lift is at the front of the headshell, and the connections are by 4 pins which extend from the rear of the headshell and mate with a socket on the arm.

I am also pretty sure that I have seen pictures of a version of the MA-701 (maybe a dedicated turntable version rather than a universal arm) which has the same headshell as yours.

Fascinating but confusing stuff, this Micro Seiki equipment

regards

Angus

Thanks a lot, phonomac Now I've learned something again.

The same headshell I showed above was also fitted to the arms of versions of semi-automatic Micro Seiki MB-18 decks although these turntables certainly didn't have CF-1/CF-2 arms.

I agree, Micro/Micro Seiki made an astonishing and sometimes bewildering range of very high quality arms and turntables - even a phono cartridge/s of which I have one example.

Thanks too for attaching the data sheet. I now know I have a Micro CF-2 arm on my BL-51.

Regards

ba

[Enochrome]

I have DQ-43 without the headshell. The tables are worthless without the headshell. Some guy
tried to sell me the headshell for $100 with a broken finger lift off and tried to tell me that's how they all came.


The actual arm is not that great at all. It is actually cheap and plasticky. I decided to junk the arm and will strip the deck and rebuild a new deck with the parts. The lower end Micro's are built to last, but they are not built with quality materials. Although, I sound negative, I will say that a Micro table hardly ever fails and will outlast most other decks from this era.

[phonomac]

Hi Enochrome,
I don't know what arm your DQ-43 came with, but if it is 'cheap and plasticky' it certainly wasn't an MA-707 as per the original spec for the DQ-43.

regards

Angus

[Enochrome]

The DQ-43 tonearm I had was, I believe to be the MA-701. My bad, I got the tables mixed up. Yes, the MA-707 is much better. The MA-701 housing is predominantly plastic except for the arm tube and counter weight.

[Alec124c41]

I have ordered this headshell for my 707:
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/180914875526?ssP ... 1423.l2649
I would expect it to be here within 2 weeks, end of next week if Canadian customs is awake.

Cheers,
Alec

[phonomac]

Hello Alec,
Looking forward to a full test report in due course!

regards

Angus

[Alec124c41]

The hen's teeth have arrived! I bought 2 / $200 +.
Quick shot with iPhone:

The original is behind the new one. There are differences in the mount area, and the material, as well as the lift (old one long gone).
It fits, and it works!
Anybody know the difference between a CF-1 and the MA-707?

Cheers,
Alec

[phonomac]

Hi Alec,
As far as I know, the differences between the MA-707 and the CF-1 are that the CF-1 has a carbon-fibre arm tube instead of alloy, and the CF-1 did not have as standard the rider weight and sub-weight to tune the effective mass, although these were available as options. The user manual talks about adjusting effective mass 'using the weights provided' but when you look at the scope of supply the weights are not there.

I guess the thought was that if you were buying the CF-1 you were looking for the lowest possible effective mass anyway.

The new headshell looks good!

regards

Angus