Audio Technica AT ML-180 Cartridge Advice

Thanks Chakster that is very helpful. Would you suggest Boron cantilever? Also what diamond profile.

WOW, so many great responses. Thanks so much for all the information. I need to go through it all and digest.

Based on the comments it sounds like the lighter weight tonearm would be the best, which is what I am good with. 

Also sounds like I need to go for Boron with the best stylus profile. 

Thanks again 

What would be a better option.

1) Use AT ML150 Stylus with gold plated berylium, or
2) Have Expert Stylus or Garrott Bros install new Boron rod to existing Stylus assembly.

I am thinking option 1 which may be considerably cheaper.

It appears you can use the ML 150 on the ML 180. 

http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/re-tip-or-transplant-audio-technica-ml180-occ-w-broke...

OK, as an update, I was fortunate to find a brand new ML150 stylus from Japan and it arrived today.

After thorough inspection to check it was indeed brand new I fitted it to the ML180 body and installed it on the not so ideal Yamaha GT2000 tonearm. I say not so ideal as the tonearm and headshell have a combined effective mass of 19g and this cart really needs to be on a much lighter tonearm like my Audiomods which is fitted to my Oracle Delphi. 

Now I should point out that it is my intention to rebuild the ML 180 stylus, but I wanted to hear the potential of the cart before I shell out a lot of money on a new cantilever and exotic stylus. 

Well my first impressions are very favorable there is great detail, great tone, expansive soundstage, quiet in the groove and reasonably smooth delivery. Whilst it sounds very good you can tell it needs breaking in and should get better with more play. 

As as a reference point for my observations my other carts are Grace F9 Ruby, Spectral Reference, Shinon Boron Red, Fidelity Research FR1 MK3F, Ortofon SPU. From first impressions I think this cart configuration holds its own in this company. 

Thanks Raul for your helpful comments. Some very good things to consider.

Can I ask a simple question. Apart from the cantilever, stylus and suspension what else is installed in the replacement stylus holder. Is there something electrical, or is all that in the cartridge body. 

The reason I ask is that there is a rectangular shape on the underside of the stylus with a screw, and I wondered if this held something.

Thanks again.

Chakster, isn't the generator in the body of the cartridge (which I have the 180)?

Thanks

Chakster, thanks for those images they are very interesting.

I am guessing from those photos and the differences you have personally heard between 150 and 170, it all comes down to the mass and rigidity of the cantilever.

I think it is this single factor that sets the two apart. Especially since the diamond profile and size are the same. 

I therefore agree with everyones comments that the only way to improve would be to have a short boron tube cantilever installed with a microline type stylus. 

Interestingly enough I have had a verbal quote from Van Den Hul who can provide new boron pipe cantilever with VDH natural diamond and rebuild the suspension, all for US$750 incl. shipping and insurance.

I may give it some consideration, however I feel very happy with the current set up especially since it is a brand new stylus.

I think I may have answered my question. The only other components in the stylus holder apart from cantilever, stylus and suspension is the compliance adjustment screw and the suspension filament.

Therefore the only difference I can see between the ML150 stylus and the ML180 stylus is the cantilever material (boron tube vs Beryllium) and size of microline stylus (0.08 vs 010).

Chakster can I ask what the main sound differences were between the 150 and the 170. For example frequency extension, soundstaging, tone, imaging, smoothness, etc, etc.

Thanks

Chakster, thanks for the reply. I will certainly keep a look out for an ML170 or ML180 stylus but for now I will probably hold off on rebuilding the damaged ML180 Cart as I do not think it will ever reproduce the sound like the original would. 

Thanks for the explanation Nandric. 

Can I ask what determines the frequency range, for example 5 to 40,000. Is it the cartridge body/generator or is it the cantilever/stylus?

Thanks for the explanation Chakster.  Thankfully it appears there is no noticeable mismatch with the 150 on the 180 body. I'm sure I would hear it if there was. 

Can I ask what the effective mass of the Victor UA 7045 tonearm is and does it allow for damping. Reason for asking is to determine whether this cart would be better on my 10g Audiomods arm than it is on my 19g Yamaha GT2000 arm. 

Thanks 

The question is to determine which of my arms is more compatible with the cart. I am not looking to compare with the victor arm. 

Thanks Raul for the great response. I spent a lot of time yesterday going between an Ortofon Classic GM E MKII SPU, a Grace F9 Ruby and the 180/150 combo and I have to say the 180/150 is opening up / breaking in nicely.

I will contact Northwest next week and ask what options they can provide but I think if it continues to get better I will hold off on any expensive upgrade as this combo currently gives a huge bang for the little bucks I paid.

First of all, many thanks to all who have contributed to this thread.

As an update I have decided to hold off on rebuilding the original ML180 cantilever as the NOS ML150 stylus on the ML180 body is proving to be a very enjoyable cartridge indeed.

During the time it has been breaking in, it has in my opinion, exceeded the performance of the Grace F9 Ruby, the Shinon Boron Red, the Ortofon Classic GM E MKII SPU, the Fidelity Research FR1 MK3F and my most recent addition the Grace Level II RC.

The only cart left in my stable that beats it, is the Spectral Reference LOMC cart.

One of the most impressive features of the cart apart from dynamic range, holographic imaging, expansive soundstage, etc, etc,......... is how quiet it is in the groove. I have always heard of people speaking of "inky black backgrounds" but never truly appreciated it until now.

One other reason not to consider rebuilding was that my research into new cantilever options concluded that even though I could spent well over $600 on a new cantilever for the ML180 stylus holder, I was still not going to get the performance of the original ML180 stylus.

It would no doubt be very good but not the same, and although my current ML150 stylus is also not as good as the original ML180 stylus, I do not believe any expensive rebuild will give me a better return than the NOS factory ML150.

After all, the ML150 stylus is a very high quality gold plated beryllium cantilever with natural (not man made) Microridge diamond. I feel this has to be better than anything a retipper can provide.

In conclusion the ML150 stylus works really, really well on the ML180 body.

Nandric, why use a 160ML when the ML150 already has a gold plated beryllium cantilever and a smaller Microline stylus than the 160 (0.10mm vs 0.12mm).

Does a 160ML even fit on an ML180 body?

Thanks,

Chakster, i referenced the 160ML which Nandric mentioned and I also know it is not compatible with the ML150, 170 & 180 series. That's why I asked the question for Nandric. 

As an update, I just picked up a NOS Signet TK10 ML.

Can't wait to see how it compares to the AT ML180/150 combo.

 

@ronco, sounds like you have a great selection of AT and Signet carts. These vintage MM's are certainly a pleasure to use. I will let you know how it compares to the AT ML180/150.

@rauliruegas, thank you so much for starting the very long and informative MM thread as it has given me the knowledge to seek out and discover these rare and wonderful MM carts. Thank you also for your advice on this thread which has been very helpful. Can I ask what were your observations of the ML180 vs the TK10ML?

@nandric, thanks for the advice on the cantilever rebuild. I agree with you that it is better to use the factory ML150 than to seek out a rebuild of the ML180 as the rebuild will no doubt add too much mass and will not reproduce the same sound as an original ML180. I guess the only way for it to sound exactly like a ML180 is to find an ML180, which I think is impossible. 

Thanks all.


   

@chakster,  I totally agree with you that these rarities with broken cantilevers should be rebuilt by Soundsmith, Expert Stylus, Garrott Bros, VdH etc, and that the results of these rebuilds, whilst not exactly the same as the original, will be great.

My personal situation is that I was very lucky to find a NOS ML150 stylus for $200 within a week of buying the broken ML180 and for me I am happy to use this stylus as it uses very high quality gold plated Beryllium and has provided great results.

If the ML150 did not come along when it did, I would probably be sending the ML180 to VdH for their "Boron Tube" cantilever option and suspension upgrade which I was quoted around $750 incl. shipping and insurance.

@nandric,  I had a long conversation with the VdH representative here in the US a few weeks ago and he explained that Mr VdH performs all the rebuilds himself and that he bought the last remaining supply of Boron tube.

Whilst he did not go into details on the specific step by step approach of how he performs the rebuild, he did explain that a new boron tube cantilever, VdH natural diamond and new suspension would cost me $750 and assured me that Mr VdH does this work himself in his retirement.  

I was only passing on this information from a reputable agent of VdH it is not my assumption or opinion.

Also I am pretty certain that if VdH can build "The Colibri" they can perform a rebuild of an ML180 stylus.