Turntables, Arms & Cartridges

While the alloy frame, yoke, magnets and mounting plate of the N^o8 all resemble those of the N^o5 [HFN Dec '18] the revisions to the cantilever, diamond, copper windings, chestnut body material and – importantly – the polymer suspension have all made their mark. Output is a dB or so lower than the N^o5 at 385µV (re. 1kHz/5cm/sec) while channel balance is tighter at 0.26dB and separation wider at 35dB through the midrange. The N^o8 is also a slightly higher compliance design than the N^o5 (15cu vs. 12cu) and some 2.5g lighter in weight, so therefore better suited to lower mass tonearms. Moreover it's a better tracker, even at the lower recommended 2.3g downforce. In practice the N^o8 offers some 10µm 'headroom' over the N^o5, achieving >80µm/75µm via the left/right channels, respectively, and keeping hold of the maximum +18dB groove modulation (re. 315Hz/5cm/sec) at 1% THD where the N^o5 had skipped off into the lead-out groove at its rated 2.4g downforce.

The 'nude Shibata' diamond is better cut and aligned too, so the N^o8's VTA is far more accurate at 22° than the N^o5's 28°. However, the N^o8's body is very tall, so most tonearms will need to be raised at the rear to optimise VTA and frequency response. The latter mirrors that of the N^o5 with a 'mild' mid/presence and slightly 'brighter' aspect to central images [black trace, Graph 1] than those at the periphery of the soundstage [red trace]. Generator symmetry is improved, however, and this is not only reflected in the reduced vertical distortion of <2% vs. <3% (N^o8 vs N^o5, from 20Hz-3kHz at –8dB re. 5cm/sec) [red trace, Graph 2] but also in the matching trend of THD vs. frequency between lateral and vertical cuts [black vs. red traces, Graph 2]. PM