Just bought a Hashimoto HM3 SUT on fleabay

Discussion in 'Turntables' started by mjw21a, Sep 18, 2018.

  1. mjw21a

    mjw21a Super Member

    Messages:
    3,257
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Ok, so I had an itch for a new SUT and bought a Hashimoto HM-3 SUT off eBay wire for both gain levels. (1:20 and 1:40 I think).

    Now I'm pretty sure this is way too high a gain level for my 0.5mv Audio Technica ART9 though probably perfect for my Fidelity Research FR-7. I believe resistive loading is an option? My Valab LCR-1 also has variable loading via DIP switches. Perhaps I can use those in conjunction with the SUT to vary the loading?

    Looking for any advice that may be useful here before I begin m search with Google. I'm thinking Audionote Tantalum resistors if I need to do this. Is there any online calculators would help me figure out what will be optimum for my ART9 (my main cart these days)?

    Thanks guys
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2018

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  2. ateal

    ateal Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    912
    Location:
    Was SoCal now Central Florida
    Be interested to see how it compares against your FRT-4.

    I just sold my FRT-4 after buying both versions of the Audio Interface CST-80. Amazing SUT.

    Keep us posted.
     
    mjw21a likes this.
  3. edwyun

    edwyun Super Member

    Messages:
    1,196
    Location:
    NY/NJ, USA
    mjw21a likes this.
  4. mjw21a

    mjw21a Super Member

    Messages:
    3,257
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Mmmm, apparently putting a 47k resistor in between the SUT and phono should halve the output so that should do the trick
     
  5. bimasta

    bimasta Super Member

    Messages:
    2,731
    So you bought both. Where do you find them? Not easy, I lucked into mine. I didn't compare it to the FT SUT (and I often use FR mcs, so it could make a difference) but compared it to a Cotter/Verion. I think my experimenting is over.
     
    ateal and mjw21a like this.
  6. mjw21a

    mjw21a Super Member

    Messages:
    3,257
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Wow, been reading your thread on Audiogon, seems a fair step up from the FRT-4. I wonder if the Hashimoto can come close?

    I'll post my findings on here once I have it. Really hoping it can better the FRT-4 which I think is really pretty similar to my Cinemag 1254 SUT. A bit warmer and more open, and more resistant to hum though there's otherwise not much difference. . Fairly similar all up.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2018
    ateal likes this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  7. ateal

    ateal Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    912
    Location:
    Was SoCal now Central Florida
    The 40 Ohm version I got was from HiFiDo and the 3 Ohm version I found later on Yahoo Japan. I mainly use the 3 Ohm version as I have a Fidelity Research MC202 and PMC1 in rotation on the Yamaha and the Spectral Reference on the Oracle Delphi. All have around 0.2mV output.
     
    mjw21a likes this.
  8. rothwellaudio

    rothwellaudio Forums Sponsor Sponsor

    Messages:
    1,556
    No, don't do that - it's a bad idea. Yes, it will halve the signal into a phonostage with a 47k input impedance but it will raise the source impedance, raise the noise floor and affect the frequency response.
    If the SUT has ratios of 1:20 and 1:40 use the lower ratio. It is still a bit on the high side for the ART9 but really not too bad.

    Cartridge loading? Don't get too hung-up on trying to achieve some theoretically perfect figure - there isn't one. Audio Technica's recommended load impedance is 100 ohms minimum, so anything above 100 ohms should be fine. With your 1:20 turns ratio and a standard 47k phonostage the cartridge load will be just over 100 ohms, so no need to mess to with it, at least from a cartridge load point of view. Yes, the signal into the mm phonostage will be higher than 5mV but there should be plenty of headroom and there shouldn't be any danger of overload.

    You could reduce the signal level by using load resistors in parallel with the SUT's secondary winding (ie its output) and about 5k would halve the signal, but the load impedance seen by the cartridge would be way below Audio Technica's recommended 100 ohms. Alternatively you could use resistors in parallel with the SUT's primary winding (ie its input) and about 12 ohms would again halve the signal voltage. However, once again the load impedance would be way below 100 ohms (obviously) and all you're really doing is throwing away some of the signal voltage right at the start of the chain and therefore compromising the signal-to-noise ratio. BTW, those calculations don't take into account the resistance of the SUT coil windings, so they won't be 100% accurate.

    I recommend you just use the SUT with the 1:20 ratio and leave it at that. You could try different load values on your phonostage if that is easy to do - it won't do any harm - but you may find no great benefit with lower than 47k. Still, worth a try I suppose.
     
    rebellovw and mjw21a like this.
  9. ateal

    ateal Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    912
    Location:
    Was SoCal now Central Florida
    It is definitely a step up from the FRT-4 (excuse the pun) although I will miss the convenience of the FRT-4.

    I hope the Hashimoto exceeds your expectations. It looks highly respected. Look forward to your findings.
     
    mjw21a likes this.
  10. mjw21a

    mjw21a Super Member

    Messages:
    3,257
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Ok, I'll just run it 1:20 once it arrives. Thanks for your detailed explanation there. I was concerned about overloading the phono though it sounds like that won't be an issue.

    Haha, it's a wonderful pun. Very worthwhile using.

    I'm very much hoping it's better than the FRT-4 or it will be something of a let down. For the price I expect great things. At least it's a real looker.

    Going to replace those knobs with solid aluminium knobs. Either black or a gold / champagne colour ;)

    s-l400 (3).jpg
    s-l400 (4).jpg
    s-l400 (5).jpg
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2018
    derekva, bluemooze and ateal like this.
  11. bimasta

    bimasta Super Member

    Messages:
    2,731
    I have two MC201s, one used, the other NOS in my "cartridge hedge fund" for future use. From what little info I can find, the only difference from the 202 is a finer tracing edge on the 202 (.023 Namiki Vital elliptical vs .03 line contact) — probably slightly more detailed but is it a quantum-leap upgrade? I can't find details on the cantilevers, even in FR's included booklet, though I can see mine is aluminum tube. Can you shed more light on the differences?

    The 201 was successful, maybe it was just time for a marketing recharge... sexy gold body etc.

    I use the same AI SUT, though I only have the 40ohm version, into a standard 47K MM Tube input. I also have a SS preamp with dedicated MC input (and it's completely independent of the MM, a complete MC preamp on its own with FET gain stage, no SUT needed).

    I ask all these questions because, while it's very good and I'm delighted to have it (with another round in the chamber that's not even 'broken in') — but I'm not in love with it, either with the AI into tubes, or the SS MC stage. What am I missing? Or doing wrong? I know you're experienced and very discerning, and it may just be different preferences, but any ideas will be helpful.
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2018

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  12. Gibsonian

    Gibsonian AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,655
    Location:
    Iowa
    I use the 1:20 Rothwell MCL with a 0.4 mV AT 33SA cart and doesn't overload and sounds fine. Just run it straight up and let us know the results!
     
  13. mjw21a

    mjw21a Super Member

    Messages:
    3,257
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    I've a Garrotted MC201 in my cartridge fund also that I bought cheap with a bent cantilever. Needlestein did a wonderful job of bending it back to it's original position. I think it's a nude stereohedron mounted? I've not had a listen to it yet though as I'm still very much enjoying the Audio Technica ART9 on my main tonearm and the Fidelity Research FR-7 on the second arm.
     
    Pio1980 likes this.
  14. ateal

    ateal Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    912
    Location:
    Was SoCal now Central Florida
    From what I have gleaned from the web I think you are correct that the main difference of the MC 201 and MC 202 is the stylus profile, however I think there may be something more......

    Whilst I did own an MC 201 a few years ago I can't recall exactly how it sounded and so its difficult to comment on how it compares to the MC 202. The only thing I can confirm is that I let the MC 201 go straightaway as it did not move me at the time. In fact I much preferred the FR1 MK3F that I also had at the time. Both carts were fed into an SUT with a 3 Ohm tap so each had the correct degree of amplification.

    My current observations of the PMC-1 and MC 202 are that they are very similar in tone, imaging and soundstage, with the MC 202 recovering slightly more detail. Both share a tonal resemblance to the FR1 MK3F but are significantly more engaging in that they have better imaging, soundstage, bass delivery and slam than the older and extremely capable FR1 MK3F.
     
  15. ateal

    ateal Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    912
    Location:
    Was SoCal now Central Florida
    I would be very keen to get your thoughts on the MC 201 once you get round to installing it. Especially how it compares to the FR7 and FR1 MK3F.
     
    mjw21a likes this.
  16. bimasta

    bimasta Super Member

    Messages:
    2,731
    We touched on this on another forum a few months back, but only in passing. I too have the FR1 Mk3F, more than one, and I agree the areas you fault could be bettered, and I'd add transparency, but I wouldn't call them "significant" shortcomings.

    Like a total klutz, I bent the cantilever on a FR1 recently, irreparably. NOS to boot — one more self-inflicted trauma added to the list. But it'll give me the chance to replace it with a sapphire/microline, and that may change it in a good way. As I have another that I haven't damaged, the comparison won't rely on audio memory.
    That's my feeling about it now, and once more I have two, one NOS, the other used with unknown hours but good-looking stone. I like the new one better (even without break-in, or whatever a 35-year old suspension does) but it still lights no fires.
    Could that "something more" be a different tonearm, preamp, cable, etc? I've seen no suggestion of any changes to the cartridge other than the stylus.

    Forgive my persistence, but having two, I really want to love them, and a simple ancillary change might do it.
     
    mjw21a likes this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  17. ateal

    ateal Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    912
    Location:
    Was SoCal now Central Florida
    That “something more” in my case could largely be down to better equipment as there does not appear to be much difference between the two. When I had the MC 201 it was being used with a Yamaha GT 750, Copland solid state amplifier and Audio Technica AT 700 SUT. The MC 202 is on a GT 2000 with Copland tube amp and Audio Interface SUT.

    However that being said I can’t explain why the FR1 was better than the MC 201 in the old system but the MC 202 is considerably better than the FR1 in the new system. So much so that I just recently got rid of my last FR1.

    The only way to really know the difference is to buy one and compare it with my MC 202, however I have promised myself not to buy anymore cartridges.

    Maybe you could try a higher turns ratio SUT. I say that because when I tried my 40 Ohm Audio Interface SUT (same as yours) with the FR1 (similar output to MC 201) it became a little lifeless compared to the 3 Ohms of the FRT4 and 3 Ohm Audio Interface. Just a thought.
     
    mjw21a likes this.
  18. bimasta

    bimasta Super Member

    Messages:
    2,731
    Mmm, many variations, no way to test. My tube phono stage has gain up 60dB, and impedance down to 10 ohms. With no SUT. Tube-noisy with such a low output cart at full gain, but it'll give an idea about the loading. It will need a rearrangement of my set-up so it's not on the cards soon, but I'll report when it happens. Thanks for your detailed answers.
     
  19. mjw21a

    mjw21a Super Member

    Messages:
    3,257
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Just a thought, though the MC201/202 is a lighter cart than the FR-1 Mk3F so maybe a little more mass is needed or inversely being a newer design, maybe less mass?

    I've found more advanced diamond profiles to sound more lively than simpler so I daresay that accounts for the difference between the 201 and 202. Your observations with respect to loading are of interest. I tried my FR-1 Mk3F with my Cinemag 1254 SUT and found it quite boring. Might need to try it again with the FRT-4.
     
    ateal likes this.
  20. bimasta

    bimasta Super Member

    Messages:
    2,731
    Why must it be so damn hard? And mjw21a only scratches the surface (an apt but unfortunate metaphor when discussing LPs). I know it's part of the appeal to many, and the famous cartoon says it well "What draws me to vinyl is the expense and the difficulty" (a poor paraphrase from memory). But the mere thought of what's required to wring the best from my MC201 — and only then know if I like it — makes me think lovingly of CDs.

    I only have 7 tonearms currently, ranging from ultra-light to fairly heavy; only 4 SS phono preamps and 3 tube; and a meager 3 MC step-ups, one the AI SUT discussed here, superb but, according to Ateal, lousy for the 201; one the MC stage in a fine Tandberg full-function preamp; the third an EMT/Thorens active head-amp — yet the possible combinations, not to mention loading possibilities, amount to - - I'll leave that to a mathematician. And the time it will take to try them all, I'll leave to a mortician.

    I remember when a Garrard changer with a nobody-knew-what cartridge sounded sublime, and Mom blissing out on her plug-n-play KLH 20, playing everything from Shostakovich to Purple Haze. "Progress" has made almost everything easier, and the progress in vinyl playback has been astonishing. But what happened to the easy part?

    I see young newbie hipsters at GW buying stacks of Al Martino records so badly scratched they'd rip my Gyger out of its tiny laser-drilled socket, and they don't know scratches matter, and I'm sure they love them totally, "so much warmer pop-tic-scrunch than my MP3"... and I envy them.

    Sorry for the length of this pointless cri de coeur.
     
    mjw21a and ateal like this.

Share This Page