Pickering / D 2000 Q stylus made by Goldring

[stingra]

Hi,

I´ve just found a new NOS / NIB Goldring made replacement stylus for Pickering D 2000 Q.

It says D.891 Shibata on the box.

I guess it is for the XV 15 / Stanton 681 moving iron body, or what do you think?

Does anyone have any experience with this stylus?


Best Regards / Ingemar

[flood2]

Hi,

I´ve just found a new NOS / NIB Goldring made replacement stylus for Pickering D 2000 Q.

It says D.891 Shibata on the box.

I guess it is for the XV 15 / Stanton 681 moving iron body, or what do you think?

Does anyone have any experience with this stylus?


Best Regards / Ingemar

A D2000Q is designed for the UV-15 body which, although it is a MI body like the XV15 and 681, has a lower inductance. If it is labelled as a D2000Q replacement then the stylus will certainly "work" in your XV15 body, just not quite the result that you might expect from a properly matched body/stylus.

[stingra]

Thanks for your answer

What is the difference between the two bodies, technically and soundwise?

[wualta]

stingra: Could the stylus you've found possibly be a D891SL, meant for a Stanton 891, in other words, a moving-magnet (aka samarium-cobalt) cartridge? Take a look at this old LH thread about the 891SL and see if they're talking about the stylus you found:

http://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?topic=3911.0

If so, it's meant for a cartridge that's very different from the Pickering 2000Q, an early CD-4 cartridge, moving-iron, with about a third the inductance of the otherwise similar Stanton 681.

[stingra]

wualta: I´m pretty sure it´s a moving iron, because it does not seem to have any magnet in the shank.

I have many different models of Stanton and Pickering, both MI and MM, and this one seems to be an MI.

The number 891 is confusing, absolutely.

It seems to be a bit of a mystery 

[Chris65]

A photo or two would help identify what you have .

D2000Q (photo taken from the web):
                             

[flood2]

wualta: I´m pretty sure it´s a moving iron, because it does not seem to have any magnet in the shank.

I presume you were using a non-magnetic screwdriver or similar to see if there was any attraction? You can't see the "magnetic member" (as it is referred to in the patent) as it is in "front" of the pivot point or forward of the crimping point of the tubing assembly.

To answer your question about the difference in sound between the bodies between UV and XV....it is dependent on the stylus assembly and matching the mechanical resonance characteristics (Q and frequency bandwidth) with the electrical damping provided by the body. The XV15 has the electrical resonance around 11kHz and is designed to give a flat response with a stylus having a mechanical resonance around 17kHz. The D2000Q will have a higher resonance. Incidentally, the 45kHz bandwidth is only achieved when loaded at 100k NOT 47k with the recommended capacitive load. Someone will correct me, but IIRC the inductance of the UV15 is 290mH? In which case, into 47k or 100k and 100pF, the electrical resonance is ~30kHz. The difference between the 2 loading resistances is the attenuation rate, Q and bandwidth around resonance - if you wish to play CD4, then you must use 100k. In practical terms what this means is that if you put the D2000Q (if indeed it IS a MI stylus you have) in your XV or 680 bodies is a greatly reduced bandwidth. It will start to roll off above 11kHz so it will sound very warm indeed.

[stingra]

Ok, I´ll try to take some pics

[tubeactive]

 Hi flood2 !   

   For all the good Lenco folks, could you please explain the math involved with the computations required to arrive at the resonant high frequency ? 

  Could this calculator be easily used ? : http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-XLC.htm

 Checking some of my notes, the Pickering/Stanton 780Q has a rated 290 mH. I guess we can presume the XUV-2000Q is similar.
    780Q coils  are 670 Ohms DCR each.
However, the Stanton 681EEE has ~930 mH; one of the highest rated L inductances found in any modern mag. cart. Coils are 1200 Ohms DCR.
                    Stanton 680EL has ~400 mH. Coils are approx. 1300 Ohms DCR.
                     Stanton 380 has ~400 mH. Coils are ~900-1200 Ohms each. (380 is a mm, but math should be similar; my fave mm)
                      Pickering V-15 has ~400 mH. Coils are 420-830 Ohms each. (V-15/Stanton 500 are popular LencoHeaven faves)
                       Stanton 500A has ~400-550 mH. Coils are 535-750 Ohms each.( " )

 I have been compiling inductance ratings with interest for some of my future preamp builds. Input resistance of the phono stage resonates reactively with the inductance of the pickup and capacitance of cables or added cap, causing HF rolloff with low R loading. While very popular in the late '40s/early to mid 1950s (ie: the GE VR pickups and UPX-003 preamps), this may still be the way to go with 78s. For example, the GE RPX with 520 mH and a 340-450 Ohm coil, loaded with 6800 Ohms yields ~ -12db@10KHz ("AES"EQ spec for rolloff). With a 6200 Ohm input resistor, ~  -13.7db@10KHz results (RIAA EQ rolloff). With a 3900 Ohm input R, ~ -16db@10KHz (NAB/Columbia "LP" EQ rolloff) results. With a 47K Ohm or 100K Ohm input R, an additional high frequency rolloff network is required.....

 

[wualta]

wualta: I´m pretty sure it´s a moving iron, because it does not seem to have any magnet in the shank.

I have many different models of Stanton and Pickering, both MI and MM, and this one seems to be an MI.

Let us know what method you used to test your known-MM styli for the presence of the cantilever magnet.
Testing for the magnet at (or near) the end of a cantilever can be tricky. The best way I've found is to straighten an ordinary steel staple-- if you like, demagnetize it first, but with my staples I've found this unnecessary-- and drop it in the insertion tube. Then turn the tube upside down and see if the staple falls out.

[stingra]

Wualta: I used a small screwdriver and compared it to other Stanton/Pickering MM styli (500/V15, 881, XSV3/4/5000, 980), and then I did the same thing with some different MI styli ( 681eee, 625e, 750, 757, 1800 ) and all the MM styli showed magnetism, but none of the MI showed any magnetism.

So I guess it is an MI stylus?

[wualta]

Sounds that way, though I've never been able to get consistent results on Pickering/Stanton styli with something like a small screwdriver applied to the outside of the tube.
The definitive test will be to put this stylus in the 881 body and flick the diamond with a stylus brush. If you hear nothing (or very very little), the stylus is MI.

[stingra]

This is what it looks like

[wualta]

Thanks for the photo. Interesting. If the stylus is moving iron, then the only mystery is the "D.891". It could simply be a Goldring catalog number that only happens to look like a Stanton stylus model number.

The only question remaining is, do you have a Stanton 780 or Pickering UV-2000/2400 body to put this stylus in. It will sound rather dull (that is, lacking treble) in a 681 body.

[flood2]

Hi flood2 !  

   For all the good Lenco folks, could you please explain the math involved with the computations required to arrive at the resonant high frequency ?  

Hi

I suggest using this one: http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html
The one you have is designed for simply measuring the equivalent reactance (i.e impedance) of a capacitor and inductor. The link I've given is more appropriate for applying to the equivalent circuit of a cartridge.

You have a little typo there! The 680EL is identical to the 681EEE at ~930mH. The P-mount variant is rated at 900mH.

The link I provided will help you optimise the load resistor for the electrical bandwidth. However, you must remember that the designer has assumed a "standard" load of 47k and whatever capacitance they choose (in Stanton's case they assume 275pF or 250pF in the case of Shure or between 100pF to 200pF for AT). So the frequency response is the result of balancing the electrical resonance frequency (defined by the interaction of the cartridge reactance with load) and the amount of electrical damping defined by the coil resistance in combination with the mechanical resonance.  Usually you can't do much better in terms of frequency response extension or flatness by deviating from the recommendations, although it is generally a good idea to put capacitance at the lower end of the range if you can adjust it. For example my Stanton MMs like about 200pF (similarly Shure). The capacitance changes normally only have a more measurable effect in the HF range nearer to 15 to 20kHz and above. Any obvious dullness or brightness is likely part of the voicing of the cartridge (for example AT MMs typically have a boost around 12kHz of some 2dB whereas Shure and Stanton prefer to have a slight dip around 10kHz to sweeten the treble) and it is a mistake to fiddle with loading to correct this as you end up compromising the overall extension or uniformity unless you measure the response. An example being the Shure M97xE - see http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/shure_m97xe_e.html

I know that loading often comes up in forums and I often read about radical changes to the load resistance in order to supposedly improve frequency response. Apart from a very high inductance cartridge like the 680/681/XV15 (or the 980LZS or XLZ model which is high relative to a normal moving coil), I have never found it necessary to change the load resistance. Unless the response is actually being measured, in my opinion it is a mistake to tweak the load resistance too far away from the manufacturer recommendations. Similarly for MC cartridges, the best load is at least 10x the coil resistance otherwise the output drops signficantly and the frequency response suffers.