BeoGram

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

Phil Hunt — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 21:45:41 GMT

j0hnbarker:

Wow! This thread has had more comebacks than Lazarus!

Amen.

Phil Hunt:

I have 3 MMC-2s and an MMC-1 for my 8002s.

I also have a Yamaha PX-2 linear tracker with AT 440mla and Adcom hi output MC with Van den Hul stylus.

The AT is much hotter/harsher than the others despite it's current cult status . The Adcom sounds the best, but all 3 MMC-2s are close to it but have a lusher warmth that is a matter of taste. Somehow the MMC-1 seems a little harsh/distorted? Age issues no doubt. Peter Lederman says that the failure mode of the suspension is softening, not getting hard. I am probably going to spring for a "Voice" at some point but am concerned it will be hotter than I prefer. Someday I need to wander up top Peekskill with my old carts and have a serious listen. phil

hi phil,

i've got a mmc 20 cl retipped with van den hul stylus... ;-) the sound is imo perfect, better than the mmc 2. i've no experience with soundsmith cartrigdes, but soundproof and peter made a useful test review in this forum. http://forum.beoworld.org/forums/t/30106.aspx

best regards

dario

Well.....I guess this resurrection business gives me permission to brag.

I DID make the pilgrimage about 2 mos ago and I did purchase the Voice. Good news-it sounds sublime to me; both lush AND focussed. The other news-it sounds very much like my 2 favorite MMC2s. I am not bummed in the least. It confirms my judgement that the MMC2s were pretty damn good in the first place and that my ears are working. Peter was kind enough to examine all my MMCs and give his appraisals. My MMC-1 that I find perceptibly more strident than the 2s: "it is early MMC-1 production and has the 'wire' suspension that never wears out; the stylus shows negligible wear". The 2 MMC2s I prefer to my MMC1: both have good suspension and little wear (one I know history of-bought it new 18yrs ago and have used it a lot)

I find nothing "CD-Like" in the MMC2s or Voice except in the best sense of the comparison; they all sound very open, airy and at the same time, mellow to my old ears. Prehaps the MMC-1, but that's another story. And I also have MMC20CL/EN that I've run on my Yamaha PX-2 (as well as MMC1/2/Voice w/med and low mass setups). The EN can take a seat next to my MMC1, and the CL can come to the front of the class and sit with the 2s because they sound so alike; but the Voice-he's the teacher's pet!

It has been a satisfying pursuit, all of this, and it's satisfying for me to see how close to the apex the 8002/MMC-2 combination comes. I think I'm finally pretty complete with my pursuit of a great system. I know that there is no end to the little tweaks and equipment upgrades ($$$) that could be made, but I'm on a very satisfied plateau now; I think this setup will satisfy me the rest of my life now. Time to find more good music-music to hear, music to make.

Wishing everyone in the community a satisfying and serene holiday, Phil

PS: thanks again for the stylus guard, John Barker!

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

j0hnbarker — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:41:57 GMT

Wow! This thread has had more comebacks than Lazarus!

Amen.

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

geoff136 — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:32:13 GMT

Hi Jeff, I am new on this forum and came across on this issue. I know of someone who selling his B&O 8002 and would like to use it on with my McIntosh tube system. I am trying to get back on vinyl records and that was when I stopped using it 20 years ago. I would to give this a try but need your opinion first. How is it sound using this with your Mcintosh system?

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

superdario — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 05:12:58 GMT

Phil Hunt:

I have 3 MMC-2s and an MMC-1 for my 8002s.

I also have a Yamaha PX-2 linear tracker with AT 440mla and Adcom hi output MC with Van den Hul stylus.

The AT is much hotter/harsher than the others despite it's current cult status . The Adcom sounds the best, but all 3 MMC-2s are close to it but have a lusher warmth that is a matter of taste. Somehow the MMC-1 seems a little harsh/distorted? Age issues no doubt. Peter Lederman says that the failure mode of the suspension is softening, not getting hard. I am probably going to spring for a "Voice" at some point but am concerned it will be hotter than I prefer. Someday I need to wander up top Peekskill with my old carts and have a serious listen. phil

hi phil,

best regards

dario

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

Peter — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 18:15:35 GMT

Agree with just about everything you say. I prefer the CLs to the later cartridges too, though the CL is very temperature sensitive - probably not an issue in California! - and I prefer my 4000 to my 8002. Not sure about the suspension issue - all I know is that the older the cartridge, the less likely it is to track CD4 records - something I would have put down to either stylus wear or hardening of the suspension. I am sure Peter knows best though.

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

Phil Hunt — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:38:25 GMT

I have 3 MMC-2s and an MMC-1 for my 8002s.

I also have a Yamaha PX-2 linear tracker with AT 440mla and Adcom hi output MC with Van den Hul stylus.

The AT is much hotter/harsher than the others despite it's current cult status . The Adcom sounds the best, but all 3 MMC-2s are close to it but have a lusher warmth that is a matter of taste. Somehow the MMC-1 seems a little harsh/distorted? Age issues no doubt. Peter Lederman says that the failure mode of the suspension is softening, not getting hard. I am probably going to spring for a "Voice" at some point but am concerned it will be hotter than I prefer. Someday I need to wander up top Peekskill with my old carts and have a serious listen. phil

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

Jon — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:23:44 GMT

Well, in my experience...

I had an 8002, and went through 3 original MMC2 cartridges over it's life (original one gave out after 25 years [it was my Dad's system originally - given to me as a gift], first NOS one I bought from B&O turned out to be defective after a week, and the second NOS was good).

It was used with a BM6000, and Beovox S80.2 speakers. It sounded very smooth and articulate, but always a bit lean to me (which I always complain about B&O speakers sounding lean anyway). Even when I increased the tracking force a smidge, it warmed up a bit, but the bass got all tubby and sloppy sounding.

That being said, I sold the 8002 to a friend and now have an older 8000 with an MMC20CL. It's used with a BM8000, and MS150 speakers (along with the same S80.2's sometimes switched in).

The 8000/MMC20CL combo sounds noticeably warmer in a more "lifelike" sense. It is set at the recommended 1 gram of tracking force.

Now, whether that's due to the BM8000 and MS150 speakers, I don't know. However, I've heard people on this forum opine that the BM6000 is actually a bit warmer sounding of a reciever, and I can tell you the S80.2's definitely have a bit more of a relaxed sound than the MS150's, which are more forward, but with a fair bit more bass depth and volume. Even when I use the S80.2's, the BG8000/MMC20CL sounds more lifelike.

I would think that the BG8002 would be the technically superior turntable with it's revised platter and cartridge choices, and it very likely is. But as far as what my ears hear....The 8000/MMC20CL beats it. Maybe I just like distortion? The right kind (certain even-order distortion products) can fool us and sound pleasant. But I don't think the 8002/MMC2 sounds any cleaner, either. I just find the 8000/MMC20CL to sound more lifelike - more of that "there are real musicians in front of me" feeling.

Jon

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

chartz — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:00:38 GMT

Hello,

I've just got from an auction site a NOS MMC20EN with standard headshell adaptor and tools, all in original box for 60 €.

Although the tip is new, how will it sound like?

The guy also had a new MMC4000 which sold for 40 €!

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

chartz — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 13:07:36 GMT

Yes I think the idea that worn LPs come to life again with a bright cartridge is a clever one; it makes sense.

You could always tame a bright cart by lowering the value of the resistor at the input of the RIAA module in the Beomaster.

If someone with knowledge in measuring cartridges had a go perhaps...

So be it—two arms on a Beogram anyone?

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

Peter — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:01:33 GMT

The Soundsmith cartridges are very different from the originals. If you want sound more like a CD, then the soundsmith range are for you.

However the sound can be a little bright and the detail is a bit wearing after a while. The older CLs and Axels retipped cartridges offer a softer and much easier to listen to sound. Which you like more is all a matter of taste - See Soundproof's review. He is having another go at present!

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

chartz — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 09:54:11 GMT

hpersson:
By the way I took the refurbishment route, because the original cartridges look much better.

Very true, but I've got used to that black prominence at the end of my arm. When funds allow, I will have mine re-tipped too, and I will give my conclusions then.

Happy New Year to you and your families!

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

hpersson — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 17:44:01 GMT

Comparing the 20CL with the 20EN I think you would be pleasantly surprised by the 20CL.

From a technical and objective viewpoint it has several advantages.

A Contact Line stylus means better contact with the groove and therefore a more accurate sound reproduction and less distortion and as a benefit less damage to your records. If I remember correctly the tip mass of the 20CL is smaller meaning less pressure of the needle is needed, at the same level of distortion. Another benefit to record preservation.

A cantilever made of sapphire (original) or ruby (if it is a smmc) which means a truer reproduction of sound because it is more rigid and can forward the vibrations from the stylus to the magnetic field inside the cantilever more accurately than one made of aluminium, which could be the explanation for the apparently warmer sound of the 20EN.

In my personal experience the the MMC20CL (and this goes for the MMC1 and MMC2 as well) is much more "open" in the higher spectrum of the tonal range giving a sense of being closer to the music or of "being there".

By the way I took the refurbishment route, because the original cartridges look much better.

Best regards

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

chartz — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 10:39:30 GMT

Hello everyone,

Well I didn't take the re-tip route, I got an SMMC20EN from the US of A.

The sound is great, but not warm. As I said somewhere else, digitally recorded LPs sound EXACTLY like the CD, maybe a tiny bit better - although it doesn't really make sense, does it? At first it was a bit aggressive but now it is well run-in, it just sounds right. I just got myself a new LP, the Mr Atomic Count Basie one, 1957 mono recording and it sounds so good. The CD is awful (of course?). I'm also re-discovering my fantastic Beatles LPs, whose CD versions are simply dreadful too.

Anyway I still have that MMC20CL. Would I be pleasantly surprised or simply disappointed?

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

Peter — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:05:16 GMT

The innards of the cartridge are identical - I would have the CL rebuilt.

Re: Beogram 8000 'vs Beogram 8002

chartz — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:00:15 GMT

Hi,

I got for nothing an MMC20CL whose sapphire cantilever is broken.

Axel tells me he can rebuild it for 150 €.

So what do I do? A re-tip of my (dull but unworn) MMC20EN (99 €) or the CL?

Will I get the MMC20CL sound everyone talks about?

Thanks again.