CD-4 Cartridge Stylus Recommendations

[trevorspiro]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/26627702...486&ssuid=&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

 

[jupp369]

using a Nagaoka JT 322 CD4 Tonabnehmer from Netherlands: Nagaoka JT 322 CD4 Tonabnehmer | THAKKER
and I'm satisfied. Had also an AT15 or 25(?) special edition and a VM35F (from 50 years ago)
Think, most importand is the vertical angle, try some beer mat's with or without the rubber mat.
For recording I use 3 angles: 1st Track, up to 5cm, and the rest ... only for recording! (using "Schön Schablone - make it yourself)

https://www.thakker.eu/tonabnehmer/nagaoka-tonar-jt-555-tonabnehmer/a-5049/​

 

[Doug G.]

Modern cartridges are probably rated to only the range in which they will likely be used and only to which the manufacturer wants to guarantee. The AT440MLa, for instance, is rated only to 20kHz but obviously responds to much higher frequencies or it wouldn't work for CD-4, which it does and works well.

Doug

 

[erdz]

I purchased an AT 750 SH last summer with spectacular results. Thorens 160 TT with Rega 200 arm and Marantz demodulator. Too bad that there not more releases. Way better than SQ. In some ways better than my Teac 2340 playing discrete quad tapes - less mechanical noise .

 

[barfle]

Most frequency response ratings are for the -3db point, so doubling that frequency could mean that it’s just 6db down (half voltage), and that might well be adequate for your demodulator.

 

[kfbkfb]

The CD-4 IC (QSI 5022) has a limiter prior to the FM decoder, the limiter will make the level of 45kHz the same as 20kHz (so long as the 45kHz level is within the limiter range [IIRC, ~40dB]).

Channel separation in the 20kHz to 45kHz should be at least 12dB (test reports of stereo cartridges rarely test channel separation above 20kHz).


Kirk Bayne

 

[Quad D]

After a while with AT-VM540ML doing the CD-4 duties, I got tired of the slight treble lift of the cartridge (despite the inherently low capacitance of the CD-4 playback system), so I switched back to AT-VM95SH. Treble is better balanced here, and there is less surface noise and CD-4 "system" noise (the one that drops down when CD-4 carrier turns off at the end of the side). Maybe the Shibata is the right stylus shape after all. Very good CD-4 playback, equally good as with 540ML, but with less surface noise,

 

[Francis Drake]

After a while with AT-VM540ML doing the CD-4 duties, I got tired of the slight treble lift of the cartridge (despite the inherently low capacitance of the CD-4 playback system), so I switched back to AT-VM95SH. Treble is better balanced here, and there is less surface noise and CD-4 "system" noise (the one that drops down when CD-4 carrier turns off at the end of the side). Maybe the Shibata is the right stylus shape after all. Very good CD-4 playback, equally good as with 540ML, but with less surface noise,

That does match my view on these various 'fine line' styi, especially the noise issue. Even on non-CD lp's the performance doesn't come close to a Shibata. After all these years it seems that nothing comes close to the original.

 

[Quadchuck]

One of my best Albums is Pick Up The Pieces AWB, playing with AT 14 and 15 carts
on a NOS JVC 4-dd5 in a zero100.
it took years to get good results, but I think I have the best I'm gonna get and it's a pleasure
to hear it as it was intended.
My other Demods work fair to Ok but this combo has been the best

 

[par4ken]

One of my best Albums is Pick Up The Pieces AWB, playing with AT 14 and 15 carts
on a NOS JVC 4-dd5 in a zero100.
it took years to get good results, but I think I have the best I'm gonna get and it's a pleasure
to hear it as it was intended.
My other Demods work fair to Ok but this combo has been the best

I had a Zero100. I thought that the idea/design was so cool, I just had to have one. The problem that I had with it was that it wouldn't track any record with the slightest warp to it.

 

[Quad D]

One of my best Albums is Pick Up The Pieces AWB, playing with AT 14 and 15 carts
on a NOS JVC 4-dd5 in a zero100.
it took years to get good results, but I think I have the best I'm gonna get and it's a pleasure
to hear it as it was intended.
My other Demods work fair to Ok but this combo has been the best

Pick Up The Pieces sounds pretty good even in stereo version when played through SQ decoder. Happens to me a lot, Doobie Brothers quad albums (CD-4) sound almost the same quadrophonic when played through SQ. Maybe there was a pass through SQ encoder during stereo mastering, since it was recorded in 4 channel. A little too much for the accidental out of phase pickup by SQ decoder during playback.

 

[Quadchuck]

I replaced the plain decoder in my QX 646 and QX949 with a full logic QX949a board
in each unit, but preformance outside a test record is minimal.
I should have bought a TateII when they came out, I had the chance and passed.
Non-logic boards don't cut it. IMO

 

[Tim7099]

Pick Up The Pieces sounds pretty good even in stereo version when played through SQ decoder. Happens to me a lot, Doobie Brothers quad albums (CD-4) sound almost the same quadrophonic when played through SQ. Maybe there was a pass through SQ encoder during stereo mastering, since it was recorded in 4 channel. A little too much for the accidental out of phase pickup by SQ decoder during playback.

I must try that! Thanks for pointing this out. Could it be that the rear information is matrixed (is it?)?

 

[par4ken]

Could it be that the rear information is matrixed (is it?)?

There would be no SQ information matrixed into a CD-4 record. Still the fact that they sound great via an SQ decoder does not surprise me. I don't know what SQ decoder you are using but the Tate decoders (Audionics and Fosgate) do an amazing job!

In an advertisement or review for the Audionics decoder it was implied that it was better to "decode CD-4" records rather than to properly "demodulate" them. CD-4 gives a maximum of about 20 dB separation, Tate more like 30-35 dB!

That result is fully dependant upon how a particular recording happens to "decode", and will not likely match the original intent of the mix. The stereo enhance (surround) mode would work best, straight SQ will put almost everything up front.

 

[DuncanS]

I suspect its down to the fact that CD4 is actually like 2 FM radio stations so it is 'matrixed' in away. The unmodulated 'stereo' signals are LF+LR & RF+RR (The FM modulated upper bands are LF-LR & RF-RR) so the Matrix decoders can work quite well with the 'stereo' signal pair.

 

[Quad D]

I must try that! Thanks for pointing this out. Could it be that the rear information is matrixed (is it?)?

I was referring to regular stereo non CD-4 version, that might have seen a trip through the SQ encoder as a simpler way of getting decent sounding stereo record than the remixing from 4 channels to two. In case the studio original mix is 4 ch format.

 

[Sonik Wiz]

I was referring to regular stereo non CD-4 version, that might have seen a trip through the SQ encoder as a simpler way of getting decent sounding stereo record than the remixing from 4 channels to two. In case the studio original mix is 4 ch format.

There has been extensive discussion elsewhere about "stealth quad" encoding elsewhere. Nonsense.

 

[kfbkfb]

Aside:
The Sansui QS (sometimes also called RM) matrix decoder is generally considered to provide better fake surround sound from any stereo source - disc[including the compatible stereo/sum signal on CD-4 discs]/tape/radio/streaming than the CBS SQ matrix decoder.


Off topic:
IMHO, it would have been a cost saving idea to make only the quad mix of an album (for CD-4/Q8/Q4) and use the Electro-Voice Stereo-4 matrix system to encode this same quad mix into stereo for stereo releases of the album (maybe not mention the Stereo-4 encoding by name - call it Stereo+)


It is unlikely that the proponents of CD-4 would have allowed the compatible stereo/sum signal to be matrix encoded (any system).


I am interested in how well the AT-VM95SH works for CD-4, anyone tried it (especially on the inner grooves of CD-4 discs)?


Kirk Bayne

 

[Quad D]

There has been extensive discussion elsewhere about "stealth quad" encoding elsewhere. Nonsense.

It is the responses like this one that discourage me from participating more on this forum. I rather keep it for myself.

 

[kfbkfb]

Quad D:
I see by your equip list that you have a Sansui quad receiver - have you tried the QS decoder with the albums you mentioned previously (played using a CBS SQ decoder)?


Kirk Bayne