Hear my Cartridges....🎶

Well, I noticed the MM/MI superiority (Shure´s flagship, to be exact and thanks to the SME III) over thirty years ago and have lived happily ever since... but I do occasionally give a try to vintage true quality MC carts such as the Highphonic MC R5 that I will evaluate very carefully with modern AT-ART9 in near future : )

Halcro´s experiment removes the gear dependent factor, that everyone has a different analog rig, amps, speakers etc. Halcro´s tool is a culmination of carefully selected components from his experience during the decades. IMHO -Ö- this thread has surpassed the famous MM thread because it´s based on a scientific method that can be observed online in real time by all who have modern computer technologies available.
I personally don´t use that technology (I´m an old hat ;^_ ) and cannot say anything about the carts here in question really but I do take seriously what enthusiasts and musicians/music lovers with decades of experience like Frogman says about.

Keep them coming Henry .....

Such awesome comparisons. Thanks! In virtually every single case (100% of the time) MM/MI completely wipes the floor with MC. It’s not even close IMO. MC is annihilated. MM has vivid life, technicolor, texture, and harmonics. What a shame that people are half deaf and have driven the MC market to such dominance today. MC users need to go out to more live shows and experience what real live music sounds like. 

PS
The album is Bande Originale du Film de Fernando E. Solanas 'SUR'
composed and interpreted by Astor Piazzolla.
I bought it without the cover.......

Many audiophiles have been using the Denon DL-103R LOMC cartridge (and variations of it) for decades and some serious High-End users still have a 'soft-spot' for it in their Systems.
For $300-$400 it would seem like a bargain to sample the MC sound...?
Let's see how it sounds against a vintage MM cartridge like the Fidelity Research FR-6SE which can be had on the 'used' market for much less than the Denon....

DENON DL-103R LOMC Cartridge
Mounted in Vintage FR-66S Tonearm on TW Acustic AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable

FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-6SE MM Cartridge
Mounted in Vintage FR-66S Tonearm on TW Acustic AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable

I listened again on my Stax Lamda Pro/tube driver.  I had previously listened using brand new earbuds which I am realizing are definitely overly bright sounding.  With the Stax the MIT does not sound onjectionably bright, but pretty well balanced; and the Shure, as expected, sounds even more covered and dull sounding.  

Isn’t it amazing......
My ‘aural’memory is so bad that only when I flip back and forwards between both videos is what you say, so obvious.....🙉
It’s really night and day.....

My only concern is with your ‘brightness’ comment on the MIT1......
In my room, the cymbals have just the right degree of ‘shimmer’ and ‘transparency’ without undue emphasis.
Perhaps because the bass (which is REALLY deep) does not have the correct ‘heft’ in the video....it ‘slants’ the ‘balance’....?

I would still love to hear your thoughts on the Signet/FR comparison Frogman.
Thanks......

I think that “speed” means different things to different listeners.  For me, speed is what I have previously tried to describe as “sense of aliveness”.  It is where the emotional component of music is found (heard).  Then there is the issue of how tonal balance influences perceived “speed”.  A cartridge that does not properly decode the high frequency information in the grooves might sound thick and tubby and the absence of a good leading edge will distort the rhythm component of music.  The MIT/Shure comparison is a good example of this.

No contest.  To my ears the MIT is a far superior cartridge.  Even though the balance is clearly tilted too far to the high frequencies it is, overall, much better at letting the drums sound like drums and not cardboard boxes and papery cymbals like the Shure does by comparison.  The excessive brightness would probably be a deal breaker for me ‘though.  The sound of the Shure is very much as I remember my Shure’s sounding in my system: grayish in color without enough brilliance and definition in the highs and an overall “soft” sound.  

The MIT’s soundstage sounds huge and expansive while the Shure’s seems smaller.  Even the space occupied by the live audience in the overall sound stage seems a lot smaller by comparison.  While the MIT’s excessive brightness distracts one can still hear the differences in timbre between the different drums and cymbals while the Shure homogenizes the various sounds.   I hear a bit of thickness in the lower mids that is similar to what I hear in my system when the xover point on my REL subs is set a few hertz too high; I lose a little midrange clarity.  

Thanks, halcro.

BTW, I do have some thoughts on the Signet/FR MC, some of which relate to the above.  

Over the years, I’ve read many Reviewers and Audiophiles describing the ’speed’ and ’attack’ of MC Cartridges as a distinction to MMs.
I have to admit that I don’t hear this......not that I’m denying others can 🤔

Perhaps you can hear something in this comparison between the JMAS-MIT 1 LOMC and the classic vintage SHURE V15/III MM...?
But this Shure V15/III is fitted with a Jico SAS Stylus which really improves what is a pretty decent cartridge.
Viva Ginger Baker.....🥁

JMAS-MIT 1 LOMC Cartridge
Mounted in Vintage SAEC WE-8000/ST ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding Vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable

SHURE V15/III MM Cartridge with SAS Stylus
Mounted in DV-507/II ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding Vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable

On my phone. Signet for me. Better separation of instruments and easier to follow the melodies weaving through the piece.

Because the vintage FR-7f was heard previously on Ketty Lester's 'Love Letters'.....I thought we needed to hear it further 🤗
And against my 'Mainstay' MM reference.....

FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7f LOMC Cartridge
Mounted in Vintage FR-66S ToneArm on TW Acustic Raven AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable

SIGNET TK-7LCa MM Cartridge
Mounted in Continuum Audio Copperhead ToneArm on TW Acustic AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable

Mea Culpa Frogman.....
I shouldn't have editorialised so much in the prologue...🥺
And you're right about the similarities of both cartridges.....that's why I paired them.
You're also astute in picking the slight 'edge' that the Empire has over the FR-6SE.
The Empire is a very under-rated cartridge IMO with not many audiophiles sampling it because:-

• It's MM
• It's high-compliance
• It's cheap on the 'used' market

The Fidelity Research MMs need high-mass, high-quality arms to show their best.
The FR-6SE's 'cousins'....the FR-5 and FR-5E are even warmer and 'murkier' making them too much for even a SS amplification system (unless your speakers and room are also too 'bright').

But you've brought up a serious point about synergy and 'system matching'......
There are many cartridges which will match a particular 'system' more than others will.
It should not be a blanket statement about the 'quality' of such cartridges.
That's why it's so advantageous to sample a wide range of cartridges in your particular system to find those that 'illuminate'....🎇🎼

With vintage MMs.....that task is easy and 'fun' whilst if you attempt that exercise with current MCs......you need a friendly 'banker' 🤯

Harold.....both cartridges loaded at 60K Ohms with no added Capacitance.

Thanks Frogman, very very interesting review again and we much appreciate your insight.
Henry, I´m afraid your Empire is 100 kOhm impedance ? And what´s capacitance ?

The Empire was also one of the first MM’s that I acquired after starting to follow Raul’s thread (the first was the Azden MP50VL).

I find the comments re the FR’s warmth interesting and I may be reading too much into them and halcro’s choice to point this out re the FR and not the Empire. I don’t disagree about the description, but it is interesting because to my ears the Empire is even more so in the camp of warm and full-bodied. The FR, compared to the Empire, seems to rob the slide guitar of body. When Ry plays in the uppermost range of the instrument it almost sounds as if the strings are suspended in air as opposed to being attached to the body of the guitar. The sound in that range is thinner and more metallic, while with the Empire the guitar’s resonating cavity is more easily heard for what I think is a better tonal balance.

For me this comparison highlights one of the most interesting aspects of system tuning. It also goes to a question that halcro asked early on: Is it possible to hear that his system’s amplification is ss?  My system is all tube and in that context, while the Empire sounds very good it tends to tilt the balance too far in the direction of warmth and the sound can be overly full without enough incisiveness in transients and high frequencies in general. What I am hearing in the context of halcro’s ss based system sounds fantastic. The Empire seems a better fit in a ss system than in an all tube system like mine.

Why not put the FR-6SE on the FR-66S arm?

And now for something completely different......🎸

The Empire 4000D/III Gold was one of the first vintage MM cartridges I acquired after reading about it in Raul's MM Thread here on A'Gon.
It was cheap (even though NOS) and it opened my eyes (and ears) to the 'real' sound of music I had been missing since my last MMs 20 years previously.
The 4000D/III was high-compliance with a miniature nude stylus on a tapered gold-anodised aluminium cantilever.
It had a wide frequency range of 5-50K Hertz making it suitable for 4-Channel.

The Fidelity Research FR-6SE on the other hand was far lower in compliance, consistent with the Company's obvious aim to make it compatible with their high-mass Tonearms like the FR-64S and FR-66S.
The FR-6SE, with its Elliptical Stylus, sounds unlike most other cartridges you will hear being warm, full-bodied and robust. No brittleness or high-end annoyance in sight 😎

EMPIRE 4000D/III GOLD MM Cartridge
Mounted in DV-507/II ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding Vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable.

FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-6SE MM Cartridge
Mounted in FR-64S (Silver-Wired) ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding Vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable.

Thank you Harold and Frogman for your understanding and kind words....😍
And thank you again Frogman for such a detailed and instructive analysis of the Signet and Decca and your kind words about my System.
Coming from you....it means a great deal to me 🤗

I hope it's instructive for others.....that most of these listening sessions and detailed analyses and impressions, are done with cartridges which are NOT LOMCs?
The vast majority of my collected cartridges comprises 2nd hand (or NOS) vintage MMs mostly over 35 years old bought for $90-$1000 (the average would be $500).
The supposed 'superiority' of the $10,000-$20,000 uber MCs which are establishing a 'Market-for Themselves' is a myth.
You will find exactly the same differences and nuances between them as you are hearing with the 'lowly' MMs.

I will eventually do a 'mad' comparison between my cheapest NOS ($110) MM and my most expensive ($10,000) LOMC.

Stick around......🤪

Very well then, Frogman. That darn cart costs a minor fortune but it´s worth all the trouble, as reviewed by so many over the years. But when will this money-wasting hobby end ... I should have not started to read this thread at all ; )

Absolutely appreciate your enthusiasm. Thank you for indulging me to the extent that you could. I totally understand your explanation and I certainly trust your reasoning behind the chosen cart/arm combinations. It is a treat to be able to hear this very impressive collection of cartridges on such superb equipment; even with the limitations of the methodology.

Hearing the Signet and Decca on the same arm and table is fascinating and confirms much of what I have been hearing so far from and about each of the two cartridges. Both are clearly terrific cartridges. However, since the goal here is to describe the differences, to my ears and preferences the difference between the two can be summarized very succinctly. Decca: more of the music.

From the very first chord of the piece one of the main differences is heard. Consistent with the thickness in the lower mids/upper bass that I have noted in previous comparisons involving the Signet, the basses and celli are pushed forward a bit and “crowd” the violas and violins playing an octave higher; not to mention the bassoons and horns which also play. The balance between the four different sections of string instruments (violins, violas, celli, basses) is better allowing the character of each to be heard more clearly without the cello and basses dominating. The question becomes: is this because the lower mid/upper bass is a little more prominent with the Signet or because the Decca is more realistically brilliant in the highs allowing the character of the violins to balance out the blend even when playing in their lower range? I think it is a little of both. The sound is more realistically linear with the Decca and a little bit tubby with the Signet. In a way the effect is analagous 😉, but in reverse (?) to the effect that users of good subwoofers experience. Even when there is no obvious bass content in the music, good and well integrated subwoofers give midrange and hf sounds more body and weight. The Decca’s linearity through the highs gives mid and low frequency sounds more clarity...those pesky harmonics. It also gives trumpets more realistic brilliance without the slightly pinched quality they have with the Signet and trombones more realistic raspiness. With the Decca they have both brilliance and body. Then there is the issue of dynamics (the music):

Both do a very good job with dynamics, but with the Signet one gets the feeling that when the music turns less exuberant and is quieter and slower that the conductor loses some focus. This is obviously not the case as it is not heard this way with the Decca. I hear better clarity of musical intent with the Decca. The musical intensity is better sustained when there is less sheer volume.

This composition has several instances when a short musical motif is “handed off” from one instrument (or section of instruments) to another. Two examples: @1:15 (basses to cellos to violins to violas) and @3:14 (violas, to 1rst violins, to 2nd violins, to clarinets). With the Signet these four note motifs sound a little discreet. With the Decca one hears a little more of the intent of each player (or section) to connect and hand it off to the next player without losing as much musical “steam” in the process in order to create a longer musical line, the sum of the individual motifs. 

Don’t mean to sound like a broken record 😉, but the Decca does it for me.

Btw, adorable young audience member’s voice heard. I suspect she was agreeing that the Decca is king 😊?

^^ Exactly. This means you have so many cart/headshell/arm/deck combinations that is not easy to tell which combination suits best a certain cart, so actually there are several possibilities to choose. Halcro knows his system´s options and has carefully chosen the arms/decks for these evaluations and of course we totally trust him.
Furthermore, as for our home listening situations, probably ALL of us have DIFFERENT combinations of TTs. Not to mention phono preamps, amps and speakers, and cables and our environment. Everything is relative, in the end. So the best cartridge(s) are the best for the listener alone at his/her home, of course two persons may have the same opinion of a certain cart but that´s another thing. This is off-topic of course but true.

Anyway, his tests show the importance of the mighty Decca Reference, but the appropriate arm(s) needs to be chosen carefully. I know one arm that makes the Reference (and the Jubilee) sing but the cart is darn expensive I simply can´t afford it now, hopefully in the future. It has one disadvantage... unfortunately it´s a dust magnet in my system: /

And as for Decca recordings, the original UK pressings never let you down.

Thanks for the latest Decca Reference option, we much appreciate your enthusiasm : )

I also play 'requests'.....

LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI CARTRIDGE
Mounted in Vintage FR-66S Tonearm on TWAcustic AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable
Listen for the cicadas chirping in the garden. An Australian summer indicator...😘

SIGNET TK-7LCa VINTAGE MM CARTRIDGE
Mounted in Vintage FR-66S Tonearm on TWAcustic AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable
Listen for something MORE frightening.....
The 'ruler of the house' saying "enough is enough"....turn it off!!!
I transcended my 'Loud Listening Timeframe'...🥺

Yes, a vote for same arm/same cartridge comparisons.

Haha......I agree that sounds like it would be ideal 🤗
But it ain't going to happen...👎
You know I have 6 arms (5 different ones) on two (different) turntables.
So 5 different cartridge geometries with various headshell materials from metal, wood, carbon-fibre.....
There is then the issue of cartridge to arm matching.....
The Copperhead is the best 'Universal' arm IMO being immaculate with every cartridge....MM, MI, or MC high/low compliance..the 'best'.
But it has no removable headshell and is a total 'beast' to set-up correctly.
The three Fidelity Research arms (FR-64S and FR-66S) are virtually as 'Universal' whilst having removable headshells and being easy to set-up.
The DV-507/II is brilliant for all my high-compliance MMs but is not as great with the MCs.
And it is NOT particularly 'happy' with the LDR (you both know this problem)....mis-tracking at the same point on all records 👹
The SAEC WE-8000/ST is happiest with the LOMCs and does less justice to the MMs.....
All my arms have been selected to have near-identical performances with the cartridges that suit them the best. You have to trust me on this one....🤥
I have tried the LDR on ALL my arms and head and shoulders....it sounds its best on the FR-66S.
The variables are significant I admit......with two very different turntables and five very different arms with cartridges matched to different headshells (and different leads).....the permutations and combinations are outrageous.....
But it is what it is 👐
How about I play the same recording with the LDR on the FR-66S and the Signet TK-7LCa on the same arm and turntable? The Signet TK-7SU is identical to the 7LCa except for the Shibata stylus...

PS I couldn't agree with you more Frogman.....Deccas never let me down whilst Mercurys and even RCAs often frustrate.

PS - Yes, a vote for same arm/same cartridge comparisons.

Thanks @frogman. I listened to both again and while acknowledging the Sony has more initial bite, things quickly fall apart when things get going. The Signet also gives an initial perception - that of being a little muddy and gray... but then the lower-end grunt lets you know it’s not messing around! Further listening through the Signet lets you into the construction of the music. I once had a Croft 4S power amp. It was finely detailed and warm and I enjoyed it. One day a friend hauled an early 90 pound Michelson & Austin TVA KT88 monster up the stairs. Hearing the same music through it was a revelation. Gone was the enveloping warmth and detail, replaced with a new, unprepared for coherence, neutrality and most importantly, insight. In the same manner, the Sony is not unlike that Croft amp. And the Signet is the M&A.

Bummer about your lost post, noromance; always interesting to read your comments and I agree with your preference for the Signet.

Great recording! For whatever it may be worth, the greatest percentage of recordings that I own which I consider the best as concerns sonics are Deccas.

Three different Signets on three different arms playing three different recordings. My favorite sound from a Signet heard so far; and by far. “Purpose”, I like that and I agree. I don’t like how the Sony makes strings sound. Too tight and steely resulting in harshness when the going gets tough. The Signet deviates from “right” in the opposite direction, but not to the same degree and, overall, I much prefer the Signet.  The bass region is powerful, but doesn’t sound overblown as with the previous Signet.  It does a great job with massed strings letting one hear that there are many individual instruments playing.  Very full and opulent sound that sounds very realistic in many ways in spite of the slightly “gray” character that I hear with most MM’s.  

At the risk of being presumptuous I wonder if it might be possible to hear this same recording with the Decca and on the same Dynavector arm? I would love to hear this recording on the Decca and it would put some of my impressions in better perspective and answer some questions that I have. Thanks!

Very very interesting Noromance......🤔

Lost long post.
Long story short.
Sony just plays it, Signet tells the whole story. Better bass, drive, clarity, delineation, and purpose. 

Dammit... another Audiogon post error. Lost long post @Admin

There were mainly two high-end cartridges that Sony were renowned for in the 80s and both were LOMCs.
The XL-55 is perhaps the best known although the XL-88 and XL-88D (with one-piece diamond-cantilever/stylus construction) is the better model IMO.
The XL-88D was the most expensive cartridge in the world when it was released and sold in Germany for 7500DM which was more expensive than Volkswagen in its days.
There are scant technical specs available on the XL-88 but I found these:-
Specs: 
Type: moving coil
Output Voltage: 0.4mV
Frequency Response: 10Hz - 50kHz
Tracking Force: 1.2-1.8g
Mass: 6.8g 
Channel Separation: > 33dB
The compliance is rather high for a MC at 20-6cm/Dyne and they both sport Hyper-Elliptical styli.
As the XL-55 and XL-88 appear to share much of their construction, I post it HERE as it's interesting 🤔

The Signet TK-7SU is essentially the same cartridge as the TK-7Ea and TK-7LCa except with a Shibata stylus instead of the Line Contact of the LCa.

SONY XL-88 LOMC CARTRIDGE
Mounted in vintage FR-64S (Silver-Wired) ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable.

SIGNET TK-7SU MM CARTRIDGE
Mounted in DV-507/II ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable.
Apologies for the loss of sound near the start...🤪 

Thank you Frogman for once again contributing a perspective and detailed analysis which is invaluable to me 😎

Regards
Henry

I think that noromance’s comments are excellent. Lots of ear candy on this most recent recording. Lovely singing, too.

Acknowledging the fact that the Signets have been heard with two different recordings, on two different arms, and this one with a new stylus 🤪, I almost would not have believed that the Signet heard previously is the same cartridge as this one. I agree that this Signet is more forward than the Decca as noromance points out and that it has more air. “Better” air? Maybe. I think the comments about brightness and questionable “accuracy” are interesting and valid. Accuracy to the recording, of course; because to me the Decca makes the music sound less electronic and with more of the lucidity that live sounds have. Obviously, if the brightness and forward quality are what is on the recording then the Signet is indeed more “accurate”.

The Signet seems to make a huge, extended and voluminous sound in halcro’s room and (on my Stax cans) sounds like the sound is on the cusp of overloading the room; borderline boomy. The sound is, as noromance says, very forward; almost uncomfortably so. The sound seems too full through the lower mids which makes the male vocals sound too chesty and thick. This was the reason I asked about subwoofers. The first time I listened it reminded me of the times I have the xover point on my subs set too high which adds too much thickness to male vocals. Of course, a lot of this is personal taste. I think the Signet sounds more dynamic partly because the volume level heard is slightly lower with the Decca. If I adjust the listening volume up slightly for the Decca, perceived dynamics improve.

I loved the Decca’s sound fhe first time and I love it now. Gorgeous female vocal
sound. I agree it doesn’t sound as exciting as the Signet at first; but, while the sound with the Signet seems to be thrown in my face, I find that my shoulders relax when I listen to the Decca. I hear an easy clarity, lucidity and absence of grain through the midrange. I miss a little of the Signet’s apparent bass power, but I definitely don’t miss the overblown upper bass/lower mids and overly thick male voice.  Clearly, both excellent cartridges; but, I love the Decca. 😍

Short on time right now and will post some details later, but wanted to chime in that I completely agree with noramance’s (and halcro’s) descriptions.  However, not sure yet that I agree with the implied hierarchy (preference).  Great day everyone.

Thanks to your video, I held off buying a used Reference. And I run a SG/p as you know. 

That's what I hear Noromance.....

Yes Frogman....
I have a pair of Vandersteen 2Wq Subs.
One behind each main speaker.

The Signet is more forward with better air and is sweet as a nut.
I believe it's compliance is high but the FR66 is high mass. I wonder if this is causing excessive brightness.
The Decca is amazingly less dynamic and immediate sounding in comparison. Which makes me a little suspicious as to the accuracy of the Signet.
That notwithstanding,  the Signet sounds very musical with lots more detail.

Halcro, I seem to recall reading that you use a pair of subs?

I admit to being a little surprised by how the London Decca Reference beat the Fidelity Research FR-7f LOMC in the 'Love Letters' Test because the FR-7f is a great cartridge.....

Let's try the LDR against my second Signet TK-7LCa with a NOS original stylus.
This stylus is so new....it has less than 3 hours play-time on it 🤗

SIGNET TK-7LCa MM Cartridge
Mounted in vintage Fidelity Research FR-66S on TW Acustic AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable.

LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge
Mounted in vintage Fidelity Research FR-66S on TW Acustic AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable.

Wow!  Thanks for the nice comments, gentlemen.  And this in spite of the fact that I once mistook halcro’s phone ringtones for an electronic keyboard; ringing perfectly in time to the music.  Glad I was able to regain some cred 😊. 

EVERY Acutex cart sounded good , even the ones who cost 10 bucks a pop if dealer bought a hundred at a time in the 70’s !
frogman loves words as much(almost?) as music , not unusual in artists but his expression skill is .Often an intelligent person like him who is not a native speaker of English has studied the language to a much higher level than those of us who just picked it up at moms knee .
There is a cliff you fall over , a door that opens, after you hear X time of LIVE acoustic music where all the pieces just
fall together like it does to a puzzle freak with 50 years at the card table under their belt .

Thank you Harold....
I didn't know how this Thread would be received as I didn't know whether the subtleties of different cartridges.......and we are talking MINUTE subtleties in many instances.......would be able to be discerned via the YouTube sound capabilities? 🤔
To say I'm astounded by Frogman's ability to hear artefacts and nuances that I was never 'consciously' aware of sitting in front of 'The Real Thing'....simply blows my mind 🤯

I have played records for several musicians but none has had the ability to separate the 'performance' from the attempted recreation of the 'musical fidelity'.

I have never heard audio equipment designers speak in the same terms as Frogman....
Current manufacturers  seem to have different 'approaches' to WHAT they are trying to accomplish in their designs and HOW they attempt to achieve them.

All Audio Designers would do well I believe.........to carefully read Frogman's comments in this Thread and 'reflect'.....
Only 'good' can come of listening well and taking note 🎼 

Ah, Frogman now I get it: you use a linear tracker : ) Excellent. 
As for the reference and a reminder, really ; ) for the carts in question, I sold my ACUTEX M320 STR III (short nose, their finest according to some experts) but still have both Grace F-14, Ruby and Boron/ML, both for reasonable prices and only 10 - 100 hours use (grin) thanks to great Victor the Dealer here on A´gon (probably a Russian).

So I would like to hear Grace´s flagship (well, one of them at least) evaluated here someday please ...
What an interesting thread this is... keep them coming .....

Thank you, halcro.  Fascinating comparison. I have never owned a Grace cartridge, but am well aware of their reputation.  A few years ago I posted several comments on the ET2 thread about my experiences with this Acutex.  I found it to have some very interesting traits including excellent dynamic nuance and some of the best controlled and tuneful bass that I had ever gotten from my ET2.  

The Acutex is not a “beautiful” sounding cartridge.  Switching to the Grace is almost shocking, first impression is of a much more refined sound.  With the Grace every individual instrument’s tone up to the upper midrange is more “beautiful”.  The perspective is more closeup and the Acutex more distant.  The overall sound is larger and much juicer compared to the Acutex’s much drier sound.  

However, the Grace can sound a little thin and forward from the upper mids on up.  The harpsichord seems to get thrown forward at times in a way that seems unnatural.  The Acutex keeps the harpsichord in better perspective relative to the other instruments.  It has a way of separating musical lines in a way that allows the listener to better understand the composition.  While the overall sound may seem too dry and colorless (music has color), I find that after one adjusts to its “sound” it is apparent that it does a better job of creating the illusion of instruments playing in a real space even if the space itself is not particularly attractive sounding; a dry, non-reverberant space.  The sound with the Grace always reminds me that it is a recorded sound; a sound recorded in a larger more  reverberant space.  

If I’m looking for the ear candy aspect of listening the Grace wins.  If I wan to listen to the music without my audiophile hat on the Acutex wins.

This is for Frogman......
Telemann Oboe Concerto in F Minor.
Hope original Baroque Oboe is acceptable....?

The Acutex LPM420-STR MM Cartridge was able to be picked up 'for a song' NOS only 5 years ago.
Loaded at 47K Ohms with about 300pF capacitance, it's a worthy performer.
The Grace F9E MM Cartridge is a perennial vintage favourite among many audiophiles (particularly in its 'Ruby' cantilever version).
This one is the 'normal' cantilever and sounds its best in my system when loaded at 30K Ohms with about 90pF.

ACUTEX LPM420-STR MM CARTRIDGE
Mounted in DV-507/II ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable.

GRACE F9E MM CARTRIDGE
Mounted in DV-507/II ToneArm on solid Bronze ArmPod surrounding vintage Victor TT-101 DD Turntable.

You sure the Decca works well at 15k? Some say 33k, or 47k. But what about 1meg? You may be surprised.

With the Halcro DM-10 PhonoStage, I have infinitely adjustable Loading from 15K Ohms to 60K Ohms and infinitely adjustable Capacitance from 0pF to 430pF so I've tried just about every combination for the LDR.

Sometimes I'm happy to listen at 47K Ohms with zero Capacitance but when I really balance the response against my trusty 50 year-old Rita Coolidge album 'Good Old Days'.....I think the 15K/430pF sounds quite well in my system 🤗

Ha! Thanks for the smile, frogman.
I have the mono original of Love Letters. Now, I'll have to dig it out and see how it sounds on my Decca SG/P.

Thanks for writing my impressions for me, noromance 😃 .  Great description and I agree word for word.  Loved the Decca; but then I have always liked Deccas.

A bit of possible descriptive excess:

The clarity in the bass let’s one hear the pitches of notes better than with the FR.  Beautiful vocal quality with the Decca.  The FR has a little bit of a “hands cupped around the mouth” quality.

Great example of its emotional quality are the sustained vocal notes at the end of each phrase.  Examples: the words “heart”, “apart”, “sigh”.  Ketty sustains that last word of the phrase, but also maintains or slightly increases the vocal intensity for a nice dynamic “push” through the sustained word all the way to the arrival on the sibilant “t”.  That little dynamic push is more obvious with the Decca.  The reduced clarity of the FR at times makes the sibilant “t” seem almost detached and separate from the word itself.  

Decca - Clean, open, uncolored, unveiled, musical, emotional. Ketty is in the room.
FR - Nice (damned already!), musical in a warm and slightly irritating way, veiled by comparison, bass seems deeper but not quite as clear.

I listened to the MIT/Victor again - this time on PC/headphones. The MIT didn’t sound as good as this time - therefore aligning me more towards the Victor - with the caveat that there was more detail in the MIT.
You sure the Decca works well at 15k? Some say 33k, or 47k. But what about 1meg? You may be surprised.

'Love Letters' by Ketty Lester recorded in 1961 is from the 1945 movie of the same name.
If you have the Ketty Lester version....forget all the others 😎

Many audiophiles have heard the reverential tones used to describe the London Decca Reference Cartridge by those few who have heard or owned this 'exotica'.
My example was obtained from a dear audiophile friend in Argentina who is currently building his dream 'Listening Room'.
No. 84 is a good one.....

The vintage Fidelity Research FR-7 Series of LOMC cartridges has acquired 'Legendary' status over the past 20 years with good reason.
My FR-7f together with the FR-7fz are generally rated as the best of the genus. 

LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI CARTRIDGE
Mounted in vintage FR-66S Tonearm on TW Acustic AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable.
Loaded at the peculiar 15K Ohms with 430pF capacitance, the FR-66S is the best match of all my arms for this unique gem.

FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7f LOMC CARTRIDGE
Mounted in vintage FR-66S Tonearm on TW Acustic AC-2 Belt-Drive Turntable.