Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges? I'm
considering their DJ-100 because it has five various sized styli that will
fit it and these cost less than the Stanton ones.

thanks,

--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com



--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com

"Ken Bouchard" wrote in message
...
Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges? I'm
considering their DJ-100 because it has five various sized styli that
will
fit it and these cost less than the Stanton ones.

While I have no personal experience with them apart from hearing a few
things played back on them (which sounded plenty fine to me) A cousin of
mine, who is a pretty level-headed audiophile (IOW, he doesn't spend $450
for an A/C power cable, thinking it will improve his sound) has raved about
them. I don't know which model he's got, though, but I'm pretty sure he's
used at least a couple of theirs over the years and really seems to like
them. FWIW, YMV, ETC.
--


Neil Henderson
Progressive Rock
http://www.saqqararecords.com

OSPAM wrote:
"Ken Bouchard" wrote in message
...

Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges?

I've got a Grado Silver cartridge in the Rega turntable that is the backbone
of my vinyl digitization rig. It's been a solid performer. I think that
Grado has done a good job of competing with Shure, who I perceive to be the
500 pound gorilla in this market segment. I don't have a lot of respect for
the Stanton line of cartridges. Never have, and what I see of their current
cartridge line doesn't excite me.

In my experience, they have been smooth, clean, and very listenable.

Ken Bouchard wrote:
Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges? I'm
considering their DJ-100 because it has five various sized styli that will
fit it and these cost less than the Stanton ones.

They require radically different arm configurations, but the DJ-100 is
more apt to track properly on a heavy arm than most of the other Grados.
They have a very lush lower midrange.

They actually have separation and top end, unlike the Stanton stuff.

1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com

Are you talking about working with 78s? Who has 78 styli for the Grados,
other than the normal 2.7 mil one?

The Stanton 681 really is a better choice for 78s, because the lack of top
end detail and separation are a non-issue, and the extreme ruggedness of the
681 is a big deal.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

I just remembered something "bad."

They tend to have low damping. This can cause problems in some arms --
especially high-mass designs -- with wobbling and other LF effects.

William Sommerwerck wrote:
I just remembered something "bad."

They tend to have low damping. This can cause problems in some arms --
especially high-mass designs -- with wobbling and other LF effects.

Agreed, they are not as well-damped as Shures.

People also sometimes complain about hum pickup from turntables with
poorly-shielded motors.

"Ken Bouchard" wrote in message ...
Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges? I'm
considering their DJ-100 because it has five various sized styli that will
fit it and these cost less than the Stanton ones.

thanks,

--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com

I'd agree with Mr. Kruegers comments, and would add that over the
decades Ortofon has marketed solid, budget range cartridges like the
old FF15E Mk II which sold for $40 and (if remember the designation
right) the VMS models which went bewteen $65-120. The competitiveness
of these, and the good customer response, was repeated in fairly
regular fashion as the models changed over time. Maybe someone here
has some experience with Ortofon's current afforable products and can
offer input.

I have used Grado's over several years (from the Sig 8). Right now,
using the Platinum wood body. They sound very good. I know that with
direct drive tables, they 'might' hum, but that had to do with the
shielding of the tt motor. Medium mass arms are good for them.

Ken Bouchard wrote:
Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges? I'm
considering their DJ-100 because it has five various sized styli that will
fit it and these cost less than the Stanton ones.

thanks,

--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com



--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com

I've used Grados a lot, and the more expensive ones, particularly, sound
very nice. They have a slightly warm coloration which tends to offset the
too-bright coloration of far too many records, especially from the later LP
eras.

Down sides: There can be a tendency to wobble on warped records,
particularly "dish" warps, which have a higher frequency. This gets worse as
the cartridge gets older, and can be alleviated by replacing the stylus. The
ideal arm for a Grado is a medium mass one which isn't super-low-friction; a
tiny bit of frictional damping isn't a bad thing in a Grado's case.

Also, as mentioned, they do pick up hum from synchronous motors, such as
those found in the AR turntables and some Linns. They have no problems with
direct-drive tables, in my experience.

Up sides: They are quite uncritical about capacitative loading.

And they can be *very* nice for playing 78s, again as long as the 78 isn't
warped. Keep a Stanton 500 around for those discs.

The "DJ" Grado is, I think, a version of the least expensive one. You'd
probably get better results from one of the more expensive units; they're
still pretty reasonable for the first few steps. And the "selection of 5
styli" -- are you sure that's not just a 5-pack of the same stylus? That
would seem like a reasonable package for DJing.

Peace,
Paul

(dansteel) wrote in message . com...
"Ken Bouchard" wrote in message ...
Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges? I'm
considering their DJ-100 because it has five various sized styli that will
fit it and these cost less than the Stanton ones.

thanks,

--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com

I'd agree with Mr. Kruegers comments, and would add that over the
decades Ortofon has marketed solid, budget range cartridges like the
old FF15E Mk II which sold for $40 and (if remember the designation
right) the VMS models which went bewteen $65-120. The competitiveness
of these, and the good customer response, was repeated in fairly
regular fashion as the models changed over time. Maybe someone here
has some experience with Ortofon's current afforable products and can
offer input.

I'm using the Shure V15VxMR myself but the Ortofon OM40 is a high
class cartridge. The OM20 cart + OM40 replacement stylus can be bought
today. The OM40 is the recommended choice after tests made by Swedish
Audio-Technical Society. I've been using the FF15 MkII, VMS30, OM30 in
the past, and been happy with these.

T

Dansteel said:

I'd agree with Mr. Kruegers comments, and would add that over the
decades Ortofon has marketed solid, budget range cartridges like the
old FF15E Mk II which sold for $40 and (if remember the designation
right) the VMS models which went bewteen $65-120. The competitiveness
of these, and the good customer response, was repeated in fairly
regular fashion as the models changed over time. Maybe someone here
has some experience with Ortofon's current afforable products and can
offer input.

The OM-20 retails for $195, but it can be found new for as low as $109.95. It
has a real smooth, non-fatiguing sound that many people like a lot. It seems
to be the opposite of the Audio-Technica AT-440ML, which is a good $100
cartridge, but not to everyone's liking.

Boon

Mr. Phillips said wrote:


Dansteel said:

I'd agree with Mr. Kruegers comments, and would add that over the
decades Ortofon has marketed solid, budget range cartridges like the
old FF15E Mk II which sold for $40 and (if remember the designation
right) the VMS models which went bewteen $65-120. The competitiveness
of these, and the good customer response, was repeated in fairly
regular fashion as the models changed over time. Maybe someone here
has some experience with Ortofon's current afforable products and can
offer input.

The OM-20 retails for $195, but it can be found new for as low as $109.95.
It
has a real smooth, non-fatiguing sound that many people like a lot. It seems
to be the opposite of the Audio-Technica AT-440ML, which is a good $100
cartridge, but not to everyone's liking.

Boon








Just to add my ..02 worth, I've had no experience with Orotofon or Audio
Technica cartridges, but have had a favorable experience with the classic Shure
multi-radial in the past - it seems to track anything. I've also had very good
luck with a wide range of different Grado models, using either Eminent
Technology, Audioquest, or VPI arms. They tend to have relatively high
outputs, which may be an advantage, depending on your system requirements.
Also, they tend to have a relatively lush, musical midrange, with no loss of
detail (especially when price is taken into consideration).



Bruce J. Richman

"Arny Krueger" wrote

I think that Grado has done a good job of competing with
Shure, who I perceive to be the 500 pound gorilla in this
market segment.

500 pound gorilla ... quack, quack, quack.


I don't have a lot of respect for the Stanton line of
cartridges.

How would you know? I’ve had 2 - Stanton 681EEE
Mk IIs and they are a good performers. But with an
output of 0.7mV they will tax the lesser phono pre-amps,
compared to the 5.0 mV outputs of AT440, Grado Red
and Blue, for example. The Stanton 881 Mk II S
cartridge is a fine performer, too. There have been
occasions where I preferred this cartridge for
transcription work over a MC. The output voltage is
also low at 0.9mV.

These are all good entry level phono cartridges (Shure,
Stanton, Grado and AT. The manufacturing cost to
employ efficient mechanical to electrical voltage
(transducer) has trade-offs at this price point. It would
be pointless to stereotype an entire product line without
taking into consideration several other issues. Each
has a slightly different voice and variations from table to
table they are installed on can exist.


Never have, and what I see of their current
cartridge line doesn't excite me.

Really, what empirical experiences are you bring to
the table? Please state make and model of Stanton
and technical and subjective deficiencies? I pray
this isn’t another *you just know* maundering .

Powell wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote

I think that Grado has done a good job of competing with
Shure, who I perceive to be the 500 pound gorilla in this
market segment.

500 pound gorilla ... quack, quack, quack.

If it quacks like a duck....

I don't have a lot of respect for the Stanton line of
cartridges.

How would you know?

From time to time I've had at least 5. I have 3 right now.

I've had 2 - Stanton 681EEE
Mk IIs and they are a good performers.

If they are good enough for you, enjoy!

But with an
output of 0.7mV they will tax the lesser phono pre-amps,
compared to the 5.0 mV outputs of AT440, Grado Red
and Blue, for example. The Stanton 881 Mk II S
cartridge is a fine performer, too. There have been
occasions where I preferred this cartridge for
transcription work over a MC. The output voltage is
also low at 0.9mV.

I've always had premps with more than enough gain. Cartridge output within a
broad range means very little to me.

These are all good entry level phono cartridges (Shure,
Stanton, Grado and AT.

IME Grado and Shure have an performance advantage.

The manufacturing cost to
employ efficient mechanical to electrical voltage
(transducer) has trade-offs at this price point.

In the days when vinyl was all we had, there were patents issues.

It would
be pointless to stereotype an entire product line without
taking into consideration several other issues. Each
has a slightly different voice and variations from table to
table they are installed on can exist.

I've owned maybe 5-7 turntables.

Never have, and what I see of their current
cartridge line doesn't excite me.

Really, what empirical experiences are you bring to
the table?

The Stantons that I have in my possession and have used in the past year.

Please state make and model of Stanton
and technical and subjective deficiencies?

You're not worth the trouble, Mr. quack, quack, ...quack.

(Thomas A) wrote in message . com...
(dansteel) wrote in message . com...
"Ken Bouchard" wrote in message ...
Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges? I'm
considering their DJ-100 because it has five various sized styli that will
fit it and these cost less than the Stanton ones.

thanks,

--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com

I'd agree with Mr. Kruegers comments, and would add that over the
decades Ortofon has marketed solid, budget range cartridges like the
old FF15E Mk II which sold for $40 and (if remember the designation
right) the VMS models which went bewteen $65-120. The competitiveness
of these, and the good customer response, was repeated in fairly
regular fashion as the models changed over time. Maybe someone here
has some experience with Ortofon's current afforable products and can
offer input.

I'm using the Shure V15VxMR myself but the Ortofon OM40 is a high
class cartridge. The OM20 cart + OM40 replacement stylus can be bought
today. The OM40 is the recommended choice after tests made by Swedish
Audio-Technical Society. I've been using the FF15 MkII, VMS30, OM30 in
the past, and been happy with these.

T


Thanks for adding the OM series to the topic. I was impressed with
many of the attribute of the OM 20's & 30's on our excellent (for the
money ) Harman-Kardon T-60,65, series turntables. I also remember them
doing well on Black Widow, Grace 707, and Formula IV tonearms, as well
as on the budget Connisseur turntables. I haven't metnioned the
Ortofon MC's as I didn't think they apllied to the original poster's
situation, but I really liked my first MC-20.

Powell wrote:

How would you know? I’ve had 2 - Stanton 681EEE
Mk IIs and they are a good performers. But with an
output of 0.7mV they will tax the lesser phono pre-amps,
compared to the 5.0 mV outputs of AT440, Grado Red
and Blue, for example. The Stanton 881 Mk II S
cartridge is a fine performer, too. There have been
occasions where I preferred this cartridge for
transcription work over a MC. The output voltage is
also low at 0.9mV.

I'd tend to agree with Arny on this one... the top end detail and sense
of air on the 681 and 881 cartridges are lacking, probably due to poor
transient response. And the separation, especially at higher frequencies,
is much poorer than on something like the AT440. Not to mention the ability
to track wide excursions is not so hot.

But, they are just wonderful cartridges for 78 work, where the huge variety
of styli is a big deal, and where the lack of top end detail isn't an issue
at all.

These are all good entry level phono cartridges (Shure,
Stanton, Grado and AT. The manufacturing cost to
employ efficient mechanical to electrical voltage
(transducer) has trade-offs at this price point. It would
be pointless to stereotype an entire product line without
taking into consideration several other issues. Each
has a slightly different voice and variations from table to
table they are installed on can exist.

Absolutely, and that's why it's important to select the cartridge for the
arm and table, and for the coloration that you personally can live with.
The AT440 will outtrack anything else in that price range, for instance, but
the top end is a little harsh and it requires adjustable VTA to get the
separation optimized. The Grados have a wonderfully lush lower midrange
and good top end detail, but they will oscillate out of control on many
arms because the resonant frequency winds up too high and gets excited by
even minor warpage.

Never have, and what I see of their current
cartridge line doesn't excite me.

Really, what empirical experiences are you bring to
the table? Please state make and model of Stanton
and technical and subjective deficiencies? I pray
this isn’t another *you just know* maundering .

Somewhere around here I have square wave plots of the 681EEE vs. the low end
Adcom MC cartridges, and the difference is pretty amazing. On the other
hand, the 681 is a great cartridge for evaluating test pressings... if it will
track on a 681, it's ready to ship, but if it can't be tracked with a 681,
customers will complain. Lots of stuff out there will track wonderfully on
an AT440 or the V-15, which will just plain make a 681 skip.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Arny Krueger" wrote

I've had 2 - Stanton 681EEE
Mk IIs and they are a good performers.

If they are good enough for you, enjoy!

Sorry, wish I could. I’ve damaged almost every
cartridge I’ve ever purchased... from $40 to $650.
Recently took out the 881, too. I have a new rule,
don’t let people at parties play with the stereo
equipment. Down to a AT OC9... ticktock,
ticktock, ticktock .


But with an
output of 0.7mV they will tax the lesser phono pre-amps,
compared to the 5.0 mV outputs of AT440, Grado Red
and Blue, for example. The Stanton 881 Mk II S
cartridge is a fine performer, too. There have been
occasions where I preferred this cartridge for
transcription work over a MC. The output voltage is
also low at 0.9mV.

I've always had premps with more than enough gain.
Cartridge output within a broad range means very little
to me.

"means very little to me"... I guess we can forgo
any meaningful discussion regarding cartridge
load settings, too.


Please state make and model of Stanton
and technical and subjective deficiencies?

You're not worth the trouble, Mr. quack, quack, ...quack.

Hehehe... like water off a duck's back, Arny .

Powell wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote


I've always had premps with more than enough gain.
Cartridge output within a broad range means very little
to me.

"means very little to me"... I guess we can forgo
any meaningful discussion regarding cartridge
load settings, too.

That's a completely different issue, particularly with Shure cartridges. A
wide variety of timbres are available, if you vary thecapacitive loading. My
Holman preamp has a built-in switch for that purpose. Once upon a time I
built some preamps with a similar feature.

That's one of the compare-and-contrasts between Grado and Shure cartridges.
The Shure cartridges are less sensitive to tone arm mass, and the Grado
cartridges are less sensitive to cartridge capacitive loading. Stantons
are also less sensitive to cartrdige capacitive loading.

Powell said:

Sorry, wish I could. Ive damaged almost every
cartridge Ive ever purchased... from $40 to $650.
Recently took out the 881, too. I have a new rule,
dont let people at parties play with the stereo
equipment. Down to a AT OC9... ticktock,
ticktock, ticktock .

It's gotten to the point where I'm thinking about getting a cheap cartridge so
I can use it whenever I break my expensive one.

Boon

I have an Ortofon DN 165E cartridge in my old Sony PS-X5 turntable.
Does anyone know anything about either of these units?

I haven't used the table in 4-5 years, becuse it's anti-skate control
is messed up. In fact I am really wanting to get an new phono preamp
(my preamps do not have one) so I can listen to the old vinyl, but
finding someone to work on the thing is becoming a problem. I did find
some very interesting info on some affordable phono pres that are out
there ($250-400 range) that are supposed to sound very good.

Tim T

Hello Ken

I cannot comment on the Grado DJ-100 but to say that ime the grado's
give excellent performance at very low prices compared to the
competition. So I would imagine they are good.
But the Stanton DJ cartridges are designed to with stand the riggers
of back que-ing that will destroy a normal cart in no time at all. If
the Grado are also designed for back que-ing ? then they are likely
to be a good buy.

Chris.


"Ken Bouchard" wrote in message
...
Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges? I'm
considering their DJ-100 because it has five various sized styli
that will
fit it and these cost less than the Stanton ones.

thanks,

--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com



--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com

yes, the DJ100 is built "heavy duty" to withstand the rigors of dj use and
the harsh treatment of old 78's.
No, the styli available with a "Grado" are not simply a 5 pack of the same
stylus but rather a full range of different sizes much like those available
for the Stanton 500 but don't cost as much, I got a DJ100 with a 3.5 mil
stylus mounted in a "universal" head-shell for $40 less than the Stanton
(and that was with the Grado cart. costing more than twice the Stanton 500!)
and from what I'm reading here, the Grado is at least as good as the
Stanton. (also, KAB was out of stock and since custom styli come from the
UK, estimate was 10 weeks for a 500 stylus)

thanks,

--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com



"chris" wrote in message
...
Hello Ken

I cannot comment on the Grado DJ-100 but to say that ime the grado's
give excellent performance at very low prices compared to the
competition. So I would imagine they are good.
But the Stanton DJ cartridges are designed to with stand the riggers
of back que-ing that will destroy a normal cart in no time at all. If
the Grado are also designed for back que-ing ? then they are likely
to be a good buy.

Chris.


"Ken Bouchard" wrote in message
...
Anybody got anything good or bad to say about Grado cartridges? I'm
considering their DJ-100 because it has five various sized styli
that will
fit it and these cost less than the Stanton ones.

thanks,

--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com



--
1st Class Restoration
"Put your old music on CD"
www.dvbaudiorestoration.com

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
That's one of the compare-and-contrasts between Grado and Shure
cartridges.
The Shure cartridges are less sensitive to tone arm mass, and the Grado
cartridges are less sensitive to cartridge capacitive loading.

Yes, but it's *SO* much easier to try a few 10 cent capacitors across the
pre-amp input, than to change tone arms :-)

TonyP.

TonyP wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

That's one of the compare-and-contrasts between Grado and Shure
cartridges. The Shure cartridges are less sensitive to tone arm
mass, and the Grado cartridges are less sensitive to cartridge
capacitive loading.

Yes, but it's *SO* much easier to try a few 10 cent capacitors across
the pre-amp input, than to change tone arms :-)

I agree and I've definately done so myself on numerous occasions.

Surprisingly, there seem to be a lot of audiophiles who feel differently.

Probably, a big part of the problem is that the right way to do this
involves also having a test record and doing some frequency response
measurements.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
TonyP wrote:
Yes, but it's *SO* much easier to try a few 10 cent capacitors across
the pre-amp input, than to change tone arms :-)

I agree and I've definately done so myself on numerous occasions.
Surprisingly, there seem to be a lot of audiophiles who feel differently.
Probably, a big part of the problem is that the right way to do this
involves also having a test record and doing some frequency response
measurements.

I do of course, but if someone can't tell what sounds right to them, then
they probably don't need to worry anyway.
However many audiophiles like to adjust frequency response by changing the
most expensive components instead. And would NEVER use a tone control :-)

TonyP.

TonyP wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
TonyP wrote:
Yes, but it's *SO* much easier to try a few 10 cent capacitors
across the pre-amp input, than to change tone arms :-)

I agree and I've definitely done so myself on numerous occasions.
Surprisingly, there seem to be a lot of audiophiles who feel
differently. Probably, a big part of the problem is that the right
way to do this involves also having a test record and doing some
frequency response measurements.

I do of course, but if someone can't tell what sounds right to them,
then they probably don't need to worry anyway.

We seem to see a number of people who only know what sounds wrong to them.

However many audiophiles like to adjust frequency response by
changing the most expensive components instead. And would NEVER use a
tone control :-)

All too true. I've seen a ton of bitching about the sound quality of Shure
cartridges from people who have no concept of adjusting capacitive loading.

I do of course, but if someone can't tell what sounds right to them,
then they probably don't need to worry anyway.

We seem to see a number of people who only know what sounds
wrong to them.

A good point. If you're picking equipment on the basis of euphony or
"musicality," why do you need a reviewer to tell you what you like?

William Sommerwerck wrote:
I do of course, but if someone can't tell what sounds right to them,
then they probably don't need to worry anyway.

We seem to see a number of people who only know what sounds
wrong to them.

A good point. If you're picking equipment on the basis of euphony or
"musicality," why do you need a reviewer to tell you what you like?

Because a good reviewer will tell you that. A good reviewer will say,
"This measured this way, but it sounded this other way to me. It
sounds brighter than the model X and less bright than the model Y, and
it has a particular thing going on in the upper midrange like model Z."
This lets you get some vague sort of sense about how it sounds, or at
least how it doesn't sound. It's nowhere near enough information to
pick equipment, but it should be enough to specifically rule out some
gear, and give you a short list of equipment to audition.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Ken Bouchard wrote:
yes, the DJ100 is built "heavy duty" to withstand the rigors of dj use and
the harsh treatment of old 78's.

It also has very different compliance than the regular Grado line, and so it
is less likely to go into bizarre dance movements if you put it on a heavy
arm.

No, the styli available with a "Grado" are not simply a 5 pack of the same
stylus but rather a full range of different sizes much like those available
for the Stanton 500 but don't cost as much, I got a DJ100 with a 3.5 mil
stylus mounted in a "universal" head-shell for $40 less than the Stanton
(and that was with the Grado cart. costing more than twice the Stanton 500!)
and from what I'm reading here, the Grado is at least as good as the
Stanton. (also, KAB was out of stock and since custom styli come from the
UK, estimate was 10 weeks for a 500 stylus)

It'll check out the KAB set!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

A good point. If you're picking equipment on the basis of euphony or
"musicality," why do you need a reviewer to tell you what you like?

Because a good reviewer will tell you that. A good reviewer will say,
"This measured this way, but it sounded this other way to me. It
sounds brighter than the model X and less bright than the model Y, and
it has a particular thing going on in the upper midrange like model Z."
This lets you get some vague sort of sense about how it sounds, or at
least how it doesn't sound. It's nowhere near enough information to
pick equipment, but it should be enough to specifically rule out some
gear, and give you a short list of equipment to audition.

You're right, but I'm thinking in broader terms -- "euphony versus accuracy."
Telling the reader what something really (???) sounds like is certainly useful,
but I was much more interested in determining whether it was literally accurate,
something that wasn't of much interest to the editor, publisher, or readers of
Stereophile.

This wasn't the main reason, but it was _one_ reason I stopped reviewing.

William Sommerwerck wrote:

I do of course, but if someone can't tell what sounds right to them,
then they probably don't need to worry anyway.

We seem to see a number of people who only know what sounds
wrong to them.

A good point. If you're picking equipment on the basis of euphony or
"musicality," why do you need a reviewer to tell you what you like?

Because so many aspects of euphony are generalized. Example: absence of
high-order nonlinear distortion. This would be a classic parameter for
people who like to (correctly) claim that THD measurements are a lot less
meaningful than we might like them to be.