Thorens And Nagaoka Mp-200

the thin end of the wedge
Guest

Post by Guest » 21 Jul 2011 18:19

Bas is trolling again :roll:

bastlnut
long player
long player
Posts: 4391
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 16:30
Location: Bern, Switzerland, World

Post by bastlnut » 21 Jul 2011 19:27

you and your big words.

what i posted is legitimate.
i just installed an Alphason Xenon tonearm on a Lenco L75.
it sounded slow and a bit euphonic.
that i have experience with Alphason tonearms i remembered that i should install the strip of wood i finished painting and was waiting to dry.
this tightened up the sound a great deal and the speed returned.

tell me where to find that in your spreadsheet!
so sick of you patting your own back.
what you put into and easy user friendly format from old research, none of your own, is confusing a lot of people.
apologize!

regards,
bas

Guest

Post by Guest » 21 Jul 2011 20:03

bastlnut wrote:...that i have experience with Alphason tonearms i remembered that i should install the strip of wood i finished painting and was waiting to dry.
I venture you perhaps imagined it bas. And you can't tell, or prove, one way or the other, as with many of the supposed 'improvements' you post about, of course. Which doesn't matter, so long it's for your own enjoyment, and you're not intent on advising others on this basis.

Waiting for paint to dry describes it well. Keep it tangible !

bastlnut
long player
long player
Posts: 4391
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 16:30
Location: Bern, Switzerland, World

Post by bastlnut » 21 Jul 2011 20:14

ld wrote:
bastlnut wrote:...that i have experience with Alphason tonearms i remembered that i should install the strip of wood i finished painting and was waiting to dry.
I venture you perhaps imagined it bas. And you can't tell, or prove, one way or the other, as with many of the supposed 'improvements' you post about, of course. Which doesn't matter, so long it's for your own enjoyment, and you're not intent on advising others on this basis.

Waiting for paint to dry describes it well. Keep it tangible !
another example of your lack of experience.

don't break your arm now!

bas

panum
junior member
junior member
Posts: 15
Joined: 02 Aug 2009 09:12
Location: Finland

Re: Thorens And Nagaoka Mp-200

Post by panum » 13 Oct 2011 20:43

I must say that ld is right as can be. I have had nagaoka mp150 and mp200 carts mounted on tonearm whit a 8.0gr effective mass.I have measured the natural resonance of these both combos and they both had around lateral 10-11Hz and vertical 9-10Hz (could be the other way around, cant remember). As whit traditional way of calculating those resonances would be near 20Hz.
I am not clever enough in physics that I would bother to try analyse his methods of calculations, just happy that someone has developed quite specific way to calculate cart/tonearm resonances.

MCM_Fan
member
member
Posts: 208
Joined: 14 Jan 2017 00:36

Re: Thorens And Nagaoka Mp-200

Post by MCM_Fan » 31 Oct 2019 05:21

Bumping an old thread (boy do I wish I'd seen it sooner) as my experience may benefit others.

A little background: I always like to have two turntables available. One, with a low mass tonearm, for running my vintage high compliance cartridges. I have several of these (I have been very lucky that they seem to seek me out) that I have acquired locally (Signet TK10ML, Shure V15 Type VMR, Grado G2+, Empire 2000E/III, etc.). Currently, I am using a Harman Kardon TK60, with the very nice ITO Microrace tonearm (8g effective mass) with these cartridges and I love it.

My other table has usually been a vintage Japanese direct drive model with a medium mass tonearm (most recently an MCS 6700). I have accumulated several headshells of various brands and weights to make it easy to swap cartridges on this table. It mainly serves as the table for my thrift store vinyl purchases of less than pristine condition. So, in theory, something like a Nagaoka MP-110 or MP-200 that have reputations for minimizing the surface noise of such albums.

Recently, I had an opportunity to upgrade to the highly regarded Yamaha PX-2, but none of my really good cartridges were a good match for the 17g effective mass of the big Yamaha. As mentioned, my really good vintage cartridges are all much too high in compliance for this table. I did try the Signet TK10ML (dynamic compliance = 24x10-6 cm/dyne) on this table, but sure enough, the observed resonance frequency was down around 6Hz and it flat out sounded better on the HK T60 (as expected for a relatively high compliance cartridge).

All of my medium to low compliance cartridges are inexpensive conicals (AT3600L, Shure M35X, etc). They sound fine on the PX-2, and the observed resonance frequencies for both were in the 10 - 11 Hz range, but that table is deserving of a much higher quality cartridge/stylus.

Based on Nagaoka's published dynamic compliance spec of 7.2 at 100Hz, and the "standard" conversion factor of 1.75 (average of 1.5 and 2), I calculated the MP-200 dynamic compliance at 10Hz to be 12.6 with a expected peak resonance frequency of just a hair over 9 Hz on the Yamaha PX-2. When a screaming good deal popped up, I leapt at the chance to get a Nagaoka MP-200 for my Yamaha PX-2. I'd read so many good things about the Nagaoka MP-200, and based on the numbers, it seemed like the perfect match.

Long story short. It is not. Not even close. I tried the MP-200 on the PX-2 with a number of heavier and lighter headshells. I was underwhelmed by the sound. This combination sounded dull and was sorely lacking the authoritative bass punch and full lower midrange both the PX-2 and MP-200 are known for. So, I pulled out my test records (Shure ERA IV and HiFi News Producer's Cut*) and ran the combination through the resonance test tracks. With the stock Yamaha headshell, the observed resonance frequency was ~ 6.5 KHz. With a lighter Technics headshell and the lightest aluminum mounting HW I have, I was able to bump up the observed resonance frequency to just over 7 Hz.

* Yes, I am aware of the inaccuracy of the HiFi News resonance tests. I used the correct values posted in this thread:

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/ ... es.159661/

On a whim, tonight I decided to try the MP-200 on my Harman Kardon T60. Lo and behold, it sounded WAY better on this table than on the PX-2. The improvement wasn't subtle. It REALLY sounded good on the T60. I then ran it through the test records and the observed resonance frequency was ~9 Hz.

The actual back calculated dynamic compliance of the observed resonance on both turntables came out to 21Hz within rounding error (20.7 Hz on the Yamaha PX-2 and 21.3 Hz on the HK T60). Based on actual observed peak resonance frequency on two tables/tonearms, one with an effective mass of 17g and the other with an effective mass of 8g, I am absolutely convinced that the dynamic compliance of the Nagaoka MP-200 is indeed 21x10-6 cm/dyne at 10Hz, as stated ipapb in the 4th post of this thread. I also conclude the MP-200 is a MUCH better match for the 8g arm of the HK T60 than it is for the Yamaha PX-2. That is based on both what my ears tell me and the observed peak resonance frequencies observed using two different test records.

So, either Nagaoka is specing their dynamic compliance far too low at 100Hz, or the typical conversion factor of 1.5 - 2x simply does not apply.

The MP-200 does sound great (really quite excellent) on my HK T60, but as mentioned, I already have several wonderful vintage high compliance cartridges for that table. I didn't really need another. If I had it to do over I would have gone with a "lowish" compliance moving coil cartridge (like a Denon DL-110 or an Audio Technica AT33EV) instead of the Nagaoka MP-200 for the PX-2. Either of those would have been a much better match.