Cartridge upgrade for vintage TT - MM or MC?

Any vintage MM from the "cartridge of the month" in our old thread, your digital will always be completely different until you will upgrade the turntable and tonearm, not only the cartridge. it is also depends on the record pressing. You need a high resolution MM cartridge like AT-ML150 OCC or at least something like Victor X-1IIe to make the hell out of your records. With more money there are many more killer MM or MI cartridges like Grace, Stanton etc. Make sure to stay away of the low compliance MC cartridges with your current technics tonearm and phono.

It depends on the turntable design, many vintage turntables are crap too, some of them are amazing in comparison to the more expensive turntables made today. I am using only vintage turntables, i hate belt drive turntables (no matter new or old). But i like all my vintage direct drive machines.

You can always buy new Technics SL1200G or GR to save your time, but if you're really into vintage analog gear then nothing wrong with it! 

Forget MM cartridges! None of them sounds as good as even the venerable Denon 103 (and its variants)!

This is funny, ever heard Denon DL-107 MM that was a broadcast standard before they designed DL-103 MC ? Same brand, just MM, no need to pay for SUT.

If you like conical stylus and low compliance over a decent MM/MI design then you’d better listen to AM radio (Denon was designed for broadcast in the 60s). The OP asking for high resolution, not a rolled-off oldschool sound of Denon DL-103.

The problem with your DL-103 is that you do not even use it on the right heavy tonearm, instead, you’re using it on lightweight tonearm designed for MM (or mid compliance MC).

Another problem with DL-103 is a short life span of the conical stylus (300 hrs) and the cost of re-tipper job, who will glue a new tip on aluminum cantilever. This is a degradation, because the original tip does not have a glue and was pressure fitted. To get equal sound the re-tipper must change the whole cantilever. This is a waste of time and money.

Even a much better LOMC cartridges can’t beat some killer MM or MI.

The MM/MI always cheaper, stylus is user replaceable, life span of the tip can be 600 or even 2000 hrs (depends on the profile).

Also the OP does not have an arm for low compliance MC anyway.

I have no idea how a conical tip with 2g tracking force can last more than 300-400 hrs not being worn out, elliptical can be used a bit longer, but they are all inferior compared to a proper profiles like Shibata, LineContact, MicroRidge ... that comes with MM and MI cartridges (some of them also have much better cantilevers).

I have never experienced roll-off with MM or MI from Stanton or AT top models, but i pretty much experienced a roll-off with SPU cartridges (just like oldchool Denon). MM is a choice of industry professionals, let me remind about this article again. Since they are vintage cartridges (from the 70s/80s) we can’t find much info about them, except for an old press like TAS etc.

Denon require not a Mid Mass arm, but a Superheavy mass arm like FR-64s (over 30g). So you need an iron headshell and a brick instead of the regular counterweight on your Pioneer turntable.

In fact i have Grado Signature XTZ (MI) right now on my Denon DA-401 tonearm and this particular Grado was the best from the founder of the company. And yes, the price was $750 in the 80’s. I like this cartridge, but it can’t surpass some of the very best MM from AT, Victor or Stanton.

So here’s something interesting. In my search for new TTs in the same price range I came across some good reviews of the Fluance reference series.

The RT82 ships with the Otofon OM 10 and lists the following specs:
Tonearm effective weight: 28.2g
Headshell weight: 10g
Cartridge weight: 5g
Cartridge compliance: 20

Just for giggles I put these into a resonant frequency calculator and got 5.4 (!)

That can’t be right, can it? Am I missing something? ...

... What about something like the AT VM540ML?

I was also looking at the Grado Silver/Gold or the Otofon 2M blue in the same price range.

You have to calculate your tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency with actual Test Record, buy Hi-Fi Test LP for it. It is also depends on suspension condition if the cartridge is not new.

You must know a cartridge dynamic compliance measured at 10Hz (not at 100Hz). If you see 100Hz in the manual simply convert it to 10Hz by multiplying on 1.7

More about tonearm/cartridge resonance here.

The "WOW" factor of the cartridge in your system pretty much depends on Stylus Profile and Cantilever Material. If you want extended frequency response, less record wear, long stylus life span and overall better quality you need something line MicroLine and Beryllium cantilever (not available for any new AT model), this is exactly what you can have with Audio-Technica AT-ML150 OCC for very reasonable price. For example the AT-ML170 is absolutely mind blowing cartridge and AT-ML180 is simply amazing but very expensive and impossible to find. There are many reasons why the AT-ML150 OCC is better than AT VM540ML, but one of the main reasons is Beryllium cantilever, Ceramic Base and OCC coild wire and OCC terminal pins. Actually the AT-ML150 OCC was in production and in stock in the shops until the 90’s, even after production of Beryllium was restricted by ecologists. I think the AT-ML150 OCC can be found for $350-450 depends on condition, i bought at least 3 of them over the years, then upgraded to 170 and 180.

Some people never learn, spending years and years on this forum and discovering some truly amazing cartridges (mostly vintage MM/MI or MC) they always advice inferior Nagaoka, Grado or Hanna. Why? I just don't understand it. Instead of some killer cartridges, someone buying inferior mass market product designed in the digital era. Look at those cartridges under macro lens, is there anything interesting ? No, what i can see is glued diamonds in boron rod, or bonded elliptical styli on aluminum cantilevers. This is inferior technology, it's been said many times, explained in details million times on this forum by many members. Even $100 FR-5EX outperform most of them. But we always see some recommended low budget Nagaoka or those Ortofon 2M even after people reporting about bad quality on the same forum (pins fell off on that new Ortofon and it's a poor quality control, so bad). 

Reviewers often knows nothing about cartridges, i always see so many mistakes in reviews, some people can't even write the name of the cartridge designed correctly. I wonder how a qualified reviewer can say something about new cartridges if he never tried any good old cartridges. For reviewer it will be stupid to compare old gold vs new, who cares? The old gold in not in the stores anymore, reviewers only promote new (i hope for a honest opinion about new stuff at least, but i want to know the background of the reviewer otherwise why should i trust him?).