Who Is An Expert On Acutex Cartridges?

Regards maxson:

Compliance for the LPM 320STR is given at 42 x 10-6 cm./dyne at 100 Hz. Suggested tracking from 0.8 to (IIRC) 1.7 VTF. You might take the lower figure with "a grain of salt", maybe several. Considering the eff. mass of your tonearms, you might want to experiment with downforce. 

Hidden somewhere on the TTNeedles site is a complete brochure describing the LPM 3xx carts. There is a 25 page Acutex thread at Lenco Heaven, the Infinity Black Widow (4gm eff. mass for the original Al. arm tube, 3gm for the later carbon fiber arm) is frequently mentioned as complimenting these cartridges. Using a Technics EPA 250 wand (12gm eff. mass) mistracking with the LPM 320 is controlled at 1.5gm VTF.

More information is offered at Adelcom.net, links to both:

https://www.adelcom.net/AcutexCart1.htm

https://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?topic=6675.0

Peace,

Regards, Lewm, Islandmandan:

Lew, I tried the Saturn V, seemed to diminish that intangible referred to as "air". Resonances can be either constructive or destructive, I'm unable to support it but it seems to me the flimsy mount of the LPM series contributes a character to these carts I very much enjoy.

If I follow you correctly, the MMC20CL is line contact on sapphire, the MMC1, same, and now the Acutex 315 rebuilt with LC on sapphire, should make for some interesting listening! 

Much discussion relative to resonance has been engaged in, wether to damp (at the pickup) or dump through the TA (deck, platter, LP & back to the cartridge). Spacers, isolation devices and probably the "Cartridge Enhancer" modify system dependent characteristics, there's no easy answer there. It seems I'm transitioning to Yamamoto and Ortofon wood headshells. With the variations in species there is a degree of capability to "tune" the cart to the rig, the Saturn V headshell and Grado spacer sit idle in a drawer. 

Islandmandan, our fellow forumite "Frogman" has a high opinion of the Acutex 415.

Mine required attention to every aspect of setup. It is a very interesting cartridge.

Peace,

Regards, Lewm:

Thanks for setting the record straight.

Several years ago a cache of the LPM 4xx cartridges emerged from a vendor who became referred to as "the Italian seller". The cartridges were shipped in the original packaging. Examination of the enclosed literature clearly describes the 400 series as IM. The tri-pole configuration, although reconfigured, remained a design element and is speculatively responsible for the slightly more forward presentation of the later series.

A belated response to Islandmandan (I'd not seen this thread until now): I find that when the LPM carts are mounted on a metal headshell a cartridge isolation device improved definition on my rig (EPA 250 or 501 TA wands). Wether this is due to increased mass or diminished acoustic / mechanical feedback I cannot say.

Lewm, the LPM cartridges mounted on an Ortofon LH-8000 Japanese oak headshell introduces a slight resonance bloom at about 2k Hz. This midrange junkie finds it pleasing. A purist might prefer the Saturn V.

Peace,

Regards, Lewm:

A vendor," PickeringUK" offered the low output cartridges some time ago, I received a XLZ-4500 and thought it wonderfully true to the recording. The third day of ownership a coincidental glance at the stylus revealed it snapped in half, the business end pointed straight down, hanging by a thread. I have no idea how it happened. Neither of us can assume the title of "The Destroyer", Conan has it claimed (woeful grin).

Acutex LPM cartridges with damaged styli occasionally show up at the "big auction site", IIRC within the 3xx & 4xx series all cartridges are the same, as in any 3xx stylus will work with the corresponding body, 4xx with 4xx bodies. During the heyday of Raul's MM thread I recollect a report of an output pin pulled off when removing the cart from a Saturn V headshell, a touch of teflon lube to the pins might be proactive. Occasionally a NOS pops up:

I've lately been listening to an AT-22, Signet TK9LCa and an AT OCC160ML rebuilt  with Soundsmith's optimized LC stylus on "ruby" cantilever. A NOS Acutex 420, after some burn in, hangs with them.

Regards, Lewm:

The 320 has been listed for more than a week, I'm surprised it's still available.

I have the Soundsmith stylus for Grace F-9 as well as the OCC160. For retrieval of micro detail, rise and decay without overshoot the AT cart is superb. With bowed instruments, resonance from wrapped strings is distinct from simple tone. Bass has presence without overwhelming the upper registers. The F-9, while delightful to listen to lacks the snap and separation of the AT. I believe there are two factors (at least) contributing to the difference. The Grace generates 3.5 mV, output impedance is 1700 Ohm. The AT, 4mV / 2300 Ohm output. More significant (IMHO) is the ceramic cap the cart body is fastened to. Resonances are apparently contained to the cart itself. 

Years ago Edgar Villchur experimented with placing two small ball bearings and a section of sewing needle between cart and headshell. So to speak, tiptoes for your cart. I don't recall his exact words but he suggested the experiment was worth a listener's time. Seems terribly "fiddly" to me, never tried the application.

A while back Grado included a triangular aluminum spacer with their carts, a dimple raised in each of the three corners. No one could say exactly what it did but those who were familiar with it were pretty eager to obtain another. For several years they commanded a premium. On the Korf Blog, there is a test of the NLA AT ceramic spacer, the controlled testing it was put through found improved bass and reduced ringing:

http://korfaudio.com/blog75

The point is? On the Lenco Heaven site, the Acutex LPM315 STR was referred to as "the bass monster". I found the bass improved when the 315 was separated from the headshell with a spacer fashioned from a ten cent peice, drilled to accommodate the one-half inch mounting. Perhaps I was just bored? None the less, for a little effort and minimal expense, with the Acutex there was a positive outcome. There is noticeable ringing when mounted to either the standard Technics or a magnesium SAEC headshell, the Ortofon LH-8000 is well damped and to my taste, complements the Acutex LPM carts,  

Anyway, the B & O MMC1 is very sought after. Regrets expressed for the wounding of your carts, I'm pretty sure SoundSmith is the right choice to return them to their  glory.

Forgive me for rambling, and,

Peace, 

Regards:

Least Possible Mass (LPM), Shibata Tri-Radial (STR). "LPM" is obvious, "STR" refers to Acutex’s additional cut to the stylus.

Maxson, early literature states the LPM carts track at 1.2gm (+ -). Practical application reveals best results are to be had at a nominal 1.7gm, later literature was changed to reflect increase in downforce. The 3 and 4 "15" series were equipped with titanium cantilevers, it is reasonable to presume Ti for the "20" carts. Maxson, with break in, you’ll hopefully appreciate the soundstage the 320 is capable of. Both depth and breadth are just about as good as it gets.

Lew(m), your comments on bass response with the MMC20 remind me of my first impression of the Grace F-9 when the stylus was received from SoundSmith; "where’s the bass?". With more exposure, a certain delicacy in rise time, decay and controlled overshoot were evident. First impressions are not always lasting impressions.

When SoundSmith first announced the Grace replacement styli, Peter commented the optimized LC / ruby version might not be to everyone’s taste. Once acclimated to the subtleties this configuration is capable of, first listen to another cart bass may seem somewhat ponderous.

IIRC, when the MM cartridge thread was active the B&O 1, 2 and 20 carts garnered high praise. When Peter returns your carts, would you consider reporting a "shootout"?

Peace,