Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


Dear friends: who really needs an MM type phono cartridge?, well I will try to share/explain with you what are my experiences about and I hope too that many of you could enrich the topic/subject with your own experiences.

For some years ( in this forum ) and time to time I posted that the MM type cartridge quality sound is better than we know or that we think and like four months ago I start a thread about: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1173550723&openusid&zzRauliruegas&4&5#Rauliruegas where we analyse some MM type cartridges.

Well, in the last 10-12 months I buy something like 30+ different MM type phono cartridges ( you can read in my virtual system which ones. ) and I’m still doing it. The purpose of this fact ( “ buy it “ ) is for one way to confirm or not if really those MM type cartridges are good for us ( music lovers ) and at the same time learn about MM vs MC cartridges, as a fact I learn many things other than MM/MC cartridge subject.

If we take a look to the Agon analog members at least 90% of them use ( only ) MC phono cartridges, if we take a look to the “ professional reviewers “ ( TAS, Stereophile, Positive Feedback, Enjoy the Music, etc, etc, ) 95% ( at least ) of them use only MC cartridges ( well I know that for example: REG and NG of TAS and RJR of Stereophile use only MM type cartridges!!!!!!!! ) , if we take a look to the phono cartridge manufacturers more than 90% of them build/design for MC cartridges and if you speak with audio dealers almost all will tell you that the MC cartridges is the way to go.

So, who are wrong/right, the few ( like me ) that speak that the MM type is a very good alternative or the “ whole “ cartridge industry that think and support the MC cartridge only valid alternative?

IMHO I think that both groups are not totally wrong/right and that the subject is not who is wrong/right but that the subject is : KNOW-HOW or NON KNOW-HOW about.

Many years ago when I was introduced to the “ high end “ the cartridges were almost MM type ones: Shure, Stanton, Pickering, Empire, etc, etc. In those time I remember that one dealer told me that if I really want to be nearest to the music I have to buy the Empire 4000 D ( they say for 4-channel reproduction as well. ) and this was truly my first encounter with a “ high end cartridge “, I buy the 4000D I for 70.00 dls ( I can’t pay 150.00 for the D III. ), btw the specs of these Empire cartridges were impressive even today, look: frequency response: 5-50,000Hz, channel separation: 35db, tracking force range: 0.25grs to 1.25grs!!!!!!!!, just impressive, but there are some cartridges which frequency response goes to 100,000Hz!!!!!!!!!!

I start to learn about and I follow to buying other MM type cartridges ( in those times I never imagine nothing about MC cartridges: I don’t imagine of its existence!!!. ) like AKG, Micro Acoustics, ADC, B&O, Audio Technica, Sonus, etc, etc.

Years latter the same dealer told me about the MC marvelous cartridges and he introduce me to the Denon-103 following with the 103-D and the Fulton High performance, so I start to buy and hear MC cartridges. I start to read audio magazines about either cartridge type: MM and Mc ones.

I have to make changes in my audio system ( because of the low output of the MC cartridges and because I was learning how to improve the performance of my audio system ) and I follow what the reviewers/audio dealers “ speak “ about, I was un-experienced !!!!!!!, I was learning ( well I’m yet. ).

I can tell you many good/bad histories about but I don’t want that the thread was/is boring for you, so please let me tell you what I learn and where I’m standing today about:

over the years I invested thousands of dollars on several top “ high end “ MC cartridges, from the Sumiko Celebration passing for Lyras, Koetsu, Van denHul, to Allaerts ones ( just name it and I can tell that I own or owned. ), what I already invest on MC cartridges represent almost 70-80% price of my audio system.

Suddenly I stop buying MC cartridges and decide to start again with some of the MM type cartridges that I already own and what I heard motivate me to start the search for more of those “ hidden jewels “ that are ( here and now ) the MM phono cartridges and learn why are so good and how to obtain its best quality sound reproduction ( as a fact I learn many things other than MM cartridge about. ).

I don’t start this “ finding “ like a contest between MC and MM type cartridges.
The MC cartridges are as good as we already know and this is not the subject here, the subject is about MM type quality performance and how achieve the best with those cartridges.

First than all I try to identify and understand the most important characteristics ( and what they “ means “. ) of the MM type cartridges ( something that in part I already have it because our phonolinepreamp design needs. ) and its differences with the MC ones.

Well, first than all is that are high output cartridges, very high compliance ones ( 50cu is not rare. ), low or very low tracking force ones, likes 47kOhms and up, susceptible to some capacitance changes, user stylus replacement, sometimes we can use a different replacement stylus making an improvement with out the necessity to buy the next top model in the cartridge line , low and very low weight cartridges, almost all of them are build of plastic material with aluminum cantilever and with eliptical or “ old “ line contact stylus ( shibata ) ( here we don’t find: Jade/Coral/Titanium/etc, bodies or sophisticated build material cantilevers and sophisticated stylus shape. ), very very… what I say? Extremely low prices from 40.00 to 300.00 dls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, well one of my cartridges I buy it for 8.99 dls ( one month ago ): WOW!!!!!!, so any one of you can/could have/buy ten to twenty MM cartridges for the price of one of the MC cartridge you own today and the good notice is that is a chance that those 10-20 MM type cartridges even the quality performance of your MC cartridge or beat it.

Other characteristics is that the builders show how proud they were/are on its MM type cartridges design, almost all those cartridges comes with a first rate box, comes with charts/diagrams of its frequency response and cartridge channel separation ( where they tell us which test recording use it, with which VTF, at which temperature, etc, etc. ), comes with a very wide explanation of the why’s and how’s of its design and the usual explanation to mount the cartridge along with a very wide list of specifications ( that were the envy of any of today MC ones where sometimes we really don’t know nothing about. ), comes with a set of screws/nuts, comes with a stylus brush and even with stylus cleaning fluid!!!!!!!!!, my GOD. Well, there are cartridges like the Supex SM 100MK2 that comes with two different stylus!!!! One with spherical and one with elliptical/shibata shape and dear friends all those in the same low low price!!!!!!!!!!!

Almost all the cartridges I own you can find it through Ebay and Agon and through cartridge dealers and don’t worry if you loose/broke the stylus cartridge or you find the cartridge but with out stylus, you always can/could find the stylus replacement, no problem about there are some stylus and cartridge sources.

When I’m talking about MM type cartridges I’m refer to different types: moving magnet, moving iron, moving flux, electret, variable reluctance, induced magnet, etc, etc. ( here is not the place to explain the differences on all those MM type cartridges. Maybe on other future thread. ).

I made all my very long ( time consuming ) cartridge tests using four different TT’s: Acoustic Signature Analog One MK2, Micro Seiki RX-5000, Luxman PD 310 and Technics SP-10 MK2, I use only removable headshell S and J shape tonearms with 15mm on overhang, I use different material build/ shape design /weight headshells. I test each cartridge in at least three different tonearms and some times in 3-4 different headshells till I find the “ right “ match where the cartridge perform the best, no I’m not saying that I already finish or that I already find the “ perfect “ match: cartridge/headshell/tonearm but I think I’m near that ideal target.

Through my testing experience I learn/ confirm that trying to find the right tonearm/headshell for any cartridge is well worth the effort and more important that be changing the TT. When I switch from a TT to another different one the changes on the quality cartridge performance were/are minimal in comparison to a change in the tonearm/headshell, this fact was consistent with any of those cartridges including MC ones.

So after the Phonolinepreamplifier IMHO the tonearm/headshell match for any cartridge is the more important subject, it is so important and complex that in the same tonearm ( with the same headshell wires ) but with different headshell ( even when the headshell weight were the same ) shape or build material headshell the quality cartridge performance can/could be way different.

All those experiences told me that chances are that the cartridge that you own ( MC or MM ) is not performing at its best because chances are that the tonearm you own is not the best match for that cartridge!!!!!!, so imagine what do you can/could hear when your cartridge is or will be on the right tonearm???!!!!!!!!, IMHO there are ( till today ) no single ( any type at any price ) perfect universal tonearm. IMHO there is no “ the best tonearm “, what exist or could exist is a “ best tonearm match for “ that “ cartridge “, but that’s all. Of course that are “ lucky “ tonearms that are very good match for more than one cartridge but don’t for every single cartridge.

I posted several times that I’m not a tonearm collector, that I own all those tonearms to have alternatives for my cartridges and with removable headshells my 15 tonearms are really like 100+ tonearms : a very wide options/alternatives for almost any cartridge!!!!!!

You can find several of these MM type cartridges new brand or NOS like: Ortofon, Nagaoka, Audio Technica, Astatic, B&O, Rega, Empire, Sonus Reson,Goldring,Clearaudio, Grado, Shelter, Garrot, etc. and all of them second hand in very good operational condition. As a fact I buy two and even three cartridges of the same model in some of the cartridges ( so right now I have some samples that I think I don’t use any more. ) to prevent that one of them arrive in non operational condition but I’m glad to say that all them arrive in very fine conditions. I buy one or two of the cartridges with no stylus or with the stylus out of work but I don’t have any trouble because I could find the stylus replacement on different sources and in some case the original new replacement.

All these buy/find cartridges was very time consuming and we have to have a lot of patience and a little lucky to obtain what we are looking for but I can asure you that is worth of it.

Ok, I think it is time to share my performance cartridge findings:

first we have to have a Phonolinepreamplifier with a very good MM phono stage ( at least at the same level that the MC stage. ). I’m lucky because my Phonolinepreamplifier has two independent phono stages, one for the MM and one for MC: both were designed for the specifics needs of each cartridge type, MM or MC that have different needs.

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

we have to load the MM cartridges not at 47K but at 100K ( at least 75K not less. ).

I find that using 47K ( a standard manufacture recommendation ) prevent to obtain the best quality performance, 100K make the difference. I try this with all those MM type cartridges and in all of them I achieve the best performance with 100K load impedance.

I find too that using the manufacturer capacitance advise not always is for the better, till “ the end of the day “ I find that between 100-150pf ( total capacitance including cable capacitance. ) all the cartridges performs at its best.

I start to change the load impedance on MM cartridges like a synonymous that what many of us made with MC cartridges where we try with different load impedance values, latter I read on the Empire 4000 DIII that the precise load impedance must be 100kOhms and in a white paper of some Grace F9 tests the used impedance value was 100kOhms, the same that I read on other operational MM cartridge manual and my ears tell/told me that 100kOhms is “ the value “.

Before I go on I want to remember you that several of those MM type cartridges ( almost all ) were build more than 30+ years ago!!!!!!!! and today performs at the same top quality level than today MC/MM top quality cartridges!!!!!, any brand at any price and in some ways beat it.

I use 4-5 recordings that I know very well and that give me the right answers to know that any cartridge is performing at its best or near it. Many times what I heard through those recordings were fine: everything were on target however the music don’t come “ alive “ don’t “ tell me “ nothing, I was not feeling the emotion that the music can communicate. In those cartridge cases I have to try it in other tonearm and/or with a different headshell till the “ feelings comes “ and only when this was achieved I then was satisfied.

All the tests were made with a volume level ( SPL ) where the recording “ shines “ and comes alive like in a live event. Sometimes changing the volume level by 1-1.5 db fixed everything.

Of course that the people that in a regular manner attend to hear/heard live music it will be more easy to know when something is right or wrong.

Well, Raul go on!!: one characteristic on the MM cartridges set-up was that almost all them likes to ride with a positive ( little/small ) VTA only the Grace Ruby and F9E and Sonus Gold Blue likes a negative VTA , on the other hand with the Nagaoka MP 50 Super and the Ortofon’s I use a flat VTA.

Regarding the VTF I use the manufacturer advise and sometimes 0.1+grs.
Of course that I made fine tuning through moderate changes in the Azymuth and for anti-skate I use between half/third VTF value.

I use different material build headshells: aluminum, composite aluminum, magnesium, composite magnesium, ceramic, wood and non magnetic stainless steel, these cartridges comes from Audio Technica, Denon, SAEC, Technics, Fidelity Research, Belldream, Grace, Nagaoka, Koetsu, Dynavector and Audiocraft.
All of them but the wood made ( the wood does not likes to any cartridge. ) very good job . It is here where a cartridge could seems good or very good depending of the headshell where is mounted and the tonearm.
Example, I have hard time with some of those cartridge like the Audio Technica AT 20SS where its performance was on the bright sound that sometimes was harsh till I find that the ceramic headshell was/is the right match now this cartridge perform beautiful, something similar happen with the Nagaoka ( Jeweltone in Japan ), Shelter , Grace, Garrot , AKG and B&O but when were mounted in the right headshell/tonearm all them performs great.

Other things that you have to know: I use two different cooper headshell wires, both very neutral and with similar “ sound “ and I use three different phono cables, all three very neutral too with some differences on the sound performance but nothing that “ makes the difference “ on the quality sound of any of my cartridges, either MM or MC, btw I know extremely well those phono cables: Analysis Plus, Harmonic Technologies and Kimber Kable ( all three the silver models. ), finally and don’t less important is that those phono cables were wired in balanced way to take advantage of my Phonolinepreamp fully balanced design.

What do you note the first time you put your MM cartridge on the record?, well a total absence of noise/hum or the like that you have through your MC cartridges ( and that is not a cartridge problem but a Phonolinepreamp problem due to the low output of the MC cartridges. ), a dead silent black ( beautiful ) soundstage where appear the MUSIC performance, this experience alone is worth it.

The second and maybe the most important MM cartridge characteristic is that you hear/heard the MUSIC flow/run extremely “ easy “ with no distracting sound distortions/artifacts ( I can’t explain exactly this very important subject but it is wonderful ) even you can hear/heard “ sounds/notes “ that you never before heard it and you even don’t know exist on the recording: what a experience!!!!!!!!!!!

IMHO I think that the MUSIC run so easily through a MM cartridge due ( between other facts ) to its very high compliance characteristic on almost any MM cartridge.

This very high compliance permit ( between other things like be less sensitive to out-center hole records. ) to these cartridges stay always in contact with the groove and never loose that groove contact not even on the grooves that were recorded at very high velocity, something that a low/medium cartridge compliance can’t achieve, due to this low/medium compliance characteristic the MC cartridges loose ( time to time and depending of the recorded velocity ) groove contact ( minute extremely minute loose contact, but exist. ) and the quality sound performance suffer about and we can hear it, the same pass with the MC cartridges when are playing the inner grooves on a record instead the very high compliance MM cartridges because has better tracking drive perform better than the MC ones at inner record grooves and here too we can hear it.

Btw, some Agoners ask very worried ( on more than one Agon thread ) that its cartridge can’t track ( clean ) the cannons on the 1812 Telarc recording and usually the answers that different people posted were something like this: “””” don’t worry about other than that Telarc recording no other commercial recording comes recorded at that so high velocity, if you don’t have trouble with other of your LP’s then stay calm. “””””

Well, this standard answer have some “ sense “ but the people ( like me ) that already has/have the experience to hear/heard a MM or MC ( like the Ortofon MC 2000 or the Denon DS1, high compliance Mc cartridges. ) cartridge that pass easily the 1812 Telarc test can tell us that those cartridges make a huge difference in the quality sound reproduction of any “ normal “ recording, so it is more important that what we think to have a better cartridge tracking groove drive!!!!

There are many facts around the MM cartridge subject but till we try it in the right set-up it will be ( for some people ) difficult to understand “ those beauties “. Something that I admire on the MM cartridges is how ( almost all of them ) they handle the frequency extremes: the low bass with the right pitch/heft/tight/vivid with no colorations of the kind “ organic !!” that many non know-how people speak about, the highs neutral/open/transparent/airy believable like the live music, these frequency extremes handle make that the MUSIC flow in our minds to wake up our feelings/emotions that at “ the end of the day “ is all what a music lover is looking for.
These not means that these cartridges don’t shine on the midrange because they do too and they have very good soundstage but here is more system/room dependent.

Well we have a very good alternative on the ( very low price ) MM type cartridges to achieve that music target and I’m not saying that you change your MC cartridge for a MM one: NO, what I’m trying to tell you is that it is worth to have ( as many you can buy/find ) the MM type cartridges along your MC ones

I want to tell you that I can live happy with any of those MM cartridges and I’m not saying with this that all of them perform at the same quality level NO!! what I’m saying is that all of them are very good performers, all of them approach you nearest to the music.

If you ask me which one is the best I can tell you that this will be a very hard “ call “ an almost impossible to decide, I think that I can make a difference between the very good ones and the stellar ones where IMHO the next cartridges belongs to this group:

Audio Technica ATML 170 and 180 OCC, Grado The Amber Tribute, Grace Ruby, Garrot P77, Nagaoka MP-50 Super, B&O MMC2 and MMC20CL, AKG P8ES SuperNova, Reson Reca ,Astatic MF-100 and Stanton LZS 981.

There are other ones that are really near this group: ADC Astrion, Supex MF-100 MK2, Micro Acoustics MA630/830, Empire 750 LTD and 600LAC, Sonus Dimension 5, Astatic MF-200 and 300 and the Acutex 320III.

The other ones are very good too but less refined ones.
I try too ( owned or borrowed for a friend ) the Shure IV and VMR, Music maker 2-3 and Clearaudio Virtuoso/Maestro, from these I could recommended only the Clearaudios the Shure’s and Music Maker are almost mediocre ones performers.
I forgot I try to the B&O Soundsmith versions, well this cartridges are good but are different from the original B&O ( that I prefer. ) due that the Sounsmith ones use ruby cantilevers instead the original B&O sapphire ones that for what I tested sounds more natural and less hi-fi like the ruby ones.

What I learn other that the importance on the quality sound reproduction through MM type cartridges?, well that unfortunately the advance in the design looking for a better quality cartridge performers advance almost nothing either on MM and MC cartridges.

Yes, today we have different/advanced body cartridge materials, different cantilever build materials, different stylus shape/profile, different, different,,,,different, but the quality sound reproduction is almost the same with cartridges build 30+ years ago and this is a fact. The same occur with TT’s and tonearms. Is sad to speak in this way but it is what we have today. Please, I’m not saying that some cartridges designs don’t grow up because they did it, example: Koetsu they today Koetsu’s are better performers that the old ones but against other cartridges the Koetsu ones don’t advance and many old and today cartridges MM/MC beat them easily.

Where I think the audio industry grow-up for the better are in electronic audio items ( like the Phonolinepreamps ), speakers and room treatment, but this is only my HO.

I know that there are many things that I forgot and many other things that we have to think about but what you can read here is IMHO a good point to start.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas

Showing 50 responses by timeltel

BlasFleibmy, says my audiophile cat Pi'sant! She says cartridges, like mullet or sparrows, when well prepared are separate but neither is necessary inferior. It's a matter of time, taste and setting. This differs from scientific classification, which is not necessarily a high-class concern. When scientific categorization occurs we come to know it as science. Art is another matter.

Either science or art require a profundity of views for study and evaluation. There are artists and scientists of excellence, one more concerned with theory, the other with execution. Pi'sant says a cat of her acquaintance, one excommunicated to the woods, barn and bottomland, knows only the cacophony of nature's presentations and cannot know the pleasurable purity of chilled artesian water served in sterling. Such a cat, she says, might as well exist on a stunted island of misconception, never knowing the glory of the heavens viewed from another hemisphere.

Although Pi'sant finds kitty krunchies adequate, the opening of a can will produce summersaults of anticipation. It seems her hearing is so finely attuned she can differentiate between beef & liver or seafood banquet. Being of an open mind is important, she often reminds me. She finds alternate pleasure in the crunch of a grasshopper, the rich liquidity of a frogs' head or tidbits carved from a ribeye steak served rare.

She also observes that in spite of the fondness of a certain others for calamari, the juxtaposition of taste and texture are a personal matter, and in a cultured society a matter for critique rather than personal criticism, no matter how eccentric. As Raul wrote, experience is to be shared, to assert one's self as an uncredentialed expert is cause for skepticism.

Beauty is, after all, in the eye of the beer holder.

Fleib my friend, although Pi'sant must on occasion deal with an assertive cat, one who seeks the status of an alpha male, she maintains that preference is a matter relative to experience and insists she is entitled to her own opinion and doing what confident cats do so well, she remains independent and aloof to the proclamations of the other, apprehension being relative to experience and environment.

Other than Raul, another denizen of the southern hemisphere has sent a Garrott modified AR-77/SAS for audition. Consequent to renovations underway to my 170 yr. old "manor", my as nearly ancient rig is dismantled, the opportunity to enjoy the cart has not yet presented. This fine fellow mentions I can return it if not to my taste, how likely will this be?

Peace,
Regards, Stltrains: Audio magazine reviewed the TK7lca in 1984, tested to within 1db, 20 to 20k and balance 0.5db 20 to 20k. Other observations were excellent separation, extremely smooth response curve and uncolored response. Closing comments: "We considered it exceptional on every record we subjected it to and a challenge for any cartridge on the market -fixed-coil or moving-coil- at any price.

Take this snip from the review as you wish, Audio mag. had a good reputation.

I find it non-fatiguing and involving, a favorite.

Glad you are enjoying yours, did you happen to note the serial # ?

Peace,
Regards, Stltrains: Mike, might take a look HERE for reference, any of group "K" or "L" will work with the 120 through 160 family of carts, as will the ATN440MLa. Carts ending with "OCC", such as Stoney's ML180 OCC require a different fitment.

Peace,
Regards, Acman3: Unpublished works, Danny. It's probably best they stay that way.

Intend to revisit the Shure ML140HE, the Garrott/SAS and AT13Ea/155LC mongrel are getting a lot of play.

Peace,
My sense of humor Fleib has thoroughly provoked,
Henry Gibson's poetic license should be revoked---

Peace,
Regards, Stltrains: Arm connection is good, be sure to keep the fixing screw tight or the arm will hummm. Neutral/damped enough to identify the sonic footprint of headshells or cables. In spite of the "proprietary" configuration of the supplied cables, suggest you experiment. IMHO they can be improved upon.

For cartridges with a metal mount I like the Ortofon LH-8000 Japanese Oak headshell on the 250 arm. With a plastic mount you might prefer a metal headshell, the mid-weight ADC magnesium model works well with the arm.

Also have the EPA-500H arm, seems to have a resonance boost in the upper bass, rarely implement it.

Peace,
Regards, Stltrains: De nada. Most would agree with Raul concerning the general quality of Technic R&B gear. The Signet is a favorite, good to hear you're enjoying the arm/cart combination.

Should you wish to do so, substitute an ATN155LC stylus for the OEM Signet. Under magnification my example of the Signet stylus is slightly longer than the AT, brilliant under a light and absolutely colorless. You'll need to listen closely to detect a difference.

Peace,
Regards, Raul: Last used the EPA-500H on a SP-15 TT, much preferred the EPA-250. The difference between the two arms is noticeable. The 500H arm still has an ADC RZL set up on it, not listened to for two years.

I've not tried the 500H arm on the JVC TT-71. Equipped with a Boston Audio Mat-2, I'd not be surprised if response differed.

The EPA-100 mk 2 is admired by many.

Peace,
Regards, Fleib: LOL.

13Ea/155LC. Good dynamic swing.Tonally balanced, "sweet" without conveying congestion. Very easy to listen to for extended sessions, imaging is noteworthy. Cohesive in character, does Steely Dan well.

The Garrott is more aggressive in transients, upper mids & hfs. A good cart for instrumental recordings. I need to thank Halcro again for bringing the Garrott modified Cambridge cart to my attention.

include the TK7LCa & some might think it a very pleasing trio of MM carts.

Peace,
Poem. By Henry Gibson.

A new cartridge would be nice
And thank you my old Shure friend.
Since the Koetsu died I've felt quite lost,
But duct tape has not helped things mend.

I guess what hurt the most
Was finding the Goldring collapsed;
Not much left for me on the vinyl to coast;
Just found out the Lyra you see, it's toast.

Now I hear there's a new cart, or some such thing
The virtues of which Fremmer will sing,
But that diamond stylus is not new
It's the cantilever made of what before no one knew.

Well let me put it this way my audiophile friend
Best in the world, haven't you heard it yet?
Five grand for a stone doesn't seem fair
It's that cantilever made from a redheaded maiden's hair.

Peace,
Regards, Fleib: To answer a question you didn't ask in this thread: I've both the Grace F9-E and gold bodied F9-L. Output (relative to volume) travels with the stylus assembly. The manual that accompanied the 9-L gives 3.5mV output for all F9's except the L at 5.5. Output impedance for all is 1.7k Ohms.

There are two manuals available for download at VE. Curiously one states 1.7K Ohms, the other 2.4k. Specs "may change without notice" printed at the bottom. In the cartridge Database the Ruby which was introduced at a later date is shown at 2.4k.

Lew (OT): I've a car enthusiast friend who says one needs two Alphas- one to drive while the other's in the garage. Good luck with your resto.

Peace,
Regards, Fleib: Gold plated beryllium cantilevers for 150-180, not sure about the 140 which IIRC is an elliptical.

AT ML150 OCC:

MicroLine stylus
Output voltage 4mV / 1kHz 5cm / sec
0.95 ~ 1.55g needle pressure (optimal 1.25g)
Playback frequency 10-30,000Hz
Channel separation 30dB / 1kHz
Channel balance 1.0dB / 1kHz
Compliance 10 — 10 -6 cm / dyne
Load resistance 47kΩ
Internal impedance 2.5k
7.0g weight

Purchased with snapped cantilever. S.Smith reported a challenging repair, there was very little left to work with. The Optimized LC diamond gives definition to the need for good setup practices, perhaps as demanding as those Acutex LPM 4xx STR carts Henry recently rediscovered :).

Prace,
Regards, Fleib. Had the manual downloaded, lost when the magic smoke escaped from my previous laptop. Found these specs elsewhere, seem to be from reliable sources.

ML140-170 OCC: Coil impedance 2.5 kOhm @ 1kHz.
Inductance: 380 mH @ 1kHz.

ML180 OCC: Coil impedance: 1.4 kOhm @ 1 kHz
Inductance: 240 mH @ 1kHz.

Cantilever for 170/180, gold spluttered boron pipe, beryllium rod for the 140/150.

Raul wrote of the ML180 in this thread, he thought highly of it.

Peace,
Regards, Fleib: I've both the TK-9LC & AT-22. Both are able to capture nuance and detail and well suited to orchestral and chamber music. ML styli sometimes seem overly analytical, much prefer Shibata, HE, or preferably, LC on beryllium. Highly regarded by some, I've not sought the TK10ML.

Halcro--- also have Signet 5.0 Basic and 5.0E carts, they seem a little on the "hot" side, especially the Basic. After your 5.0Lc comments, wondering now why I've not been tried either with an ATN155Lc stylus? Thanks, Henry.

Peace,
Hi, Halcro: I'd tried the 5.0 with an AM20 (3 x 7 nude elliptical), not sure why the 155Lc never made it to the 5.0?

Fleib: The Signet 5.0 carts (from Signet spec sheet) are 550 mH & 750k Ohm, 5mV output for all. "Para" denotes alteration or modification. Current AT carts with "Para"toroidal coils are the 150MLx, 440MLa, 120e and 100e.

That 440MLa--- picked one up when they were introduced. Like your TK10ML, perhaps five hours on it. 4mV & 3200 Ohm output inductance with a noticeably bright midrange. (Available.)

Peace,
Regards, Griffithds: Thanks, Don. JVC literature declares neither the Z or X carts are (were) not marketed in Canada or the U.S., will cast my internets a little wider.

Peace,
Regards, Griffiths: It's said "There's no fuel like an old fuel" (did I get that right?), so here's some "old fuel" to throw on the fire.

From "OldADC", Prichard's successor (1978) as cartridge designer:
"Those other (cantilever designs) required a tie wire to assemble the stylus assemblies. A small wire was soldered in the back of the stylus tube and pulled toward the rear of the cartridge to a specific load and then soldered off to hold the assembly together. The load plane and the tension defined that center point of rotation for the assembly. All well and good until you consider a couple of factors.
1) That assembly is now by definition imbalanced in motional impedance fore and aft of the pressure defined pivot point. Constrained, held hostage, on a freaking leash!
2) That tie wire has a resonance of its very own. Almost all of them, based on length and diameter of the wire ended up somewhere around 17kHz. Many designs went to great lenght to dampen and tame that resonance but....and here is the big deal....even if you tame the amplitude resonance so flat you can't see it in a swept sine wave plot....you haven't done a dang thing for the 180 phase shift that must occur when that wire passes through its resonance, damped or not. I swear I could always hear a tie wire in the desperate confusion of attack on top hat symbols.

The Omnipivot design was very carefully calculated so that the balance of masses fore and aft of the designed point of rotation meant that the point of rotation as defined by the assembly is the same point as the point of percussion (ie that point of rotation were the assembly to be in free space). Thus the assembly wanted to rotate about the same point that we were asking it to. And when you got them wrong in assembly, you could tell. The Astrion was hand built and tweaked for this very reason. Every stylus assembly was truly balanced point of rotation to point of percussion and had not tie wire therefore no phase shift through resonance."

Other interesting observations concerning assemblies without tie wires identified a "pistoning" of the canitlever. This specific circumstance illustrates the need to match TA/cart compliances, the consequences of which were sometimes so severe as to result in the plucking of the cantilever assembly from the grip. ADC's low compliance suspensions when mounted to a "bulldozer" tonearm sometimes had this outcome, this phenomena was observed with the (MK 1) XLM. Prichard denied it's occurance.

Vibrations in a beam are influenced when constrained, a concern in industries ranging from architectural engineering "Galloping Gertie, the Tacoma Narrows Bridge) to fiber optics. In analog audio, the addition of a tie wire (see OldADC's comments above) illustrates this phenomena.

Just some fun info.

Peace,
Regards,Griffithds: Hi, Don. Have been searching, no cart yet. Did find a JVC DT-Z1E stylus. Should be here tomorrow. Thanks for your kind attention, it's much appreciated.

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: Technics EPC-U25, an etch for which there is no cure.

Now the cart of the biennium (COTB), a NOS Shibata seems unobtainable for the JVC Z1.
As an alternative to the SAS assembly, would anyone have any experience of the OEM elliptical on beryllium?

Peace,
Technics EPC-U25: This cartridge has been periodically tormenting my ears for three years. Trying a fifth stylus now. Two generic, a Nagaoka replacement, a SAS and finally what is represented as an OEM example. This will be the last stylus tried for this abominable (so far) performer.

Some may remember from several months ago a thread rating one hundred cartridges? This one was (IIRC) the 98th place holder. Althouth nearly inconceivable, if #'s 99 & 100 are less musical they might best be avoided?

Admittedly slow to learn and determination now exhausted, next action for this cacophony generator will be a slow boat to Oz. There, hopefully, a certain Agoner will test this miserable specimens' build quality with his size 9 steel-toed hunting boots.

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: RE the Z1, I settled on 50K Ohms & 200pF. 300pF (from my listening) is possibly correct but as mentioned above I do enjoy a slightly prominent midrange.

Fleib: Mea culpa, my poorly phrased post! Seems I'm incapable of grouping the TK9/TK10 or the 20SS with the remainder of the Signet family of carts. Thanks for the stats.

Peace,
Regards, fleib: Old Toshiba went kaput a while back, took out such saved data with it, some of which it is now not likely to be recovered.

Learned tonight that snoring may lead to early memory loss and Alzhimers. Double whammy, 'puter crashed & the IIRC's aren't as accurate as one might wish.

Have both TK9LC and AT22 equipped with the lower mass ATN25 stylus. both seem a little distant. Think it's a loading issue?

Thanks again for the data.

Abrew 19, thread will make 12,000 posts soon.

Peace,
Regards, Jbethree: A comparison of the LPM 312 and 412 illustrates the qualities one might expect when describing typical qualities of a moving iron relative to a comparable moving magnet cartridge. In spite of being MM (as are all the 4xx series) the 412 retains the width and depth of soundstage demonstrated by the 3xx tri-pole Acutexes (Acutexi?) but is somewhat brighter.

As Acman3 (hi, Danny!) wrote; "They are both pretty good.".

Peace,
Apologies, Raul: Mr. Colloms' (1977 production only) recommended/not lists and your choices are not far apart. The info. concerning cartridge loading is somewhat technical, but agrees with your findings.

www.bostonaudiosociety.org/pdf/bass/BASS-06-01-7710b.pdf, (dosn't work for me either)

Can be accessed by: Google-> Boston Audio Society-> click on BAS Speaker, scroll well down and click on 06-01-7710b. Lots of good reference reading to be found there, I keep the BAS link in "favorites".
Greetings,Lewm: Good question. Excuse,please, I presumed all who had followed Raul's thread had adopted 100k Ohm resistance. I didn't say, my bad. Capacitance at 300 pico Farads includes tonearm and IC's. 400pF total really pushed the cartridge, great for R&R though. A nominal value of 100pF for tonearm and IC's is typical, mine at 97pF, some tonearms alone at over 200pF, this from the Boston Audio Society, sometime in the '70's.

Six degrees of VTA seems severe. Please check my casual math but for an effective tonearm length of ten inches, rise then is .55 inches, just at 9/16", 13+ mm. I refered to angle rather than a measure in mm's, not all tonearms are the same length making elevation in mm's a variable. Angle is a more universal standard. 1 1/2 deg. is noticable, almost at 3mm positive with my 250mm eff. length arm. Check this math too, I confess to being barely proficient and I don't mind correction.

Bass and treble extension are commendable features with the Azden. Rather than calling midrange "good", I would say it is robust, even more excellent when the cartridge is broken in. Midrange and hf's do seem somewhat challenged by the attention the bass draws to itself. Capacitance, hot and loaded like a good woman or a $3 pistol, along with careful (for me, anyway) VTA and tracking force adjustment, tightened the bass and promoted the mids and hf's to what seemed a nicely balanced presentation.
You're right, there is an interaction between these applications, the important thing is acheiving the voicing needed for one's system requirements.
Link dosn't seem to work. Google "Mother of Tone". Index on left, second or third down, click on "Listening, Levels & Truth". For those interested, it's a short read echoing thoughts certian others have expressed in this thread.

Raul, looking forward to your review of the Empire 4000d/111, if the Technics EPC and Acutex are 10+ (10.1), will this one make it to a 10.2?

Siniyl123: The ML140HE: Musical it is. New to me and not yet settled in, I've not formed a strong sense of it's performance but I like what I hear. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I'm enjoying it at 100k Ohm, 300pF total cap. and 1.05gm VTF. Somewhat positive VTA for now as the bass response is still moving around.
Regards, Dgob. From Bluz Broz site:

R-4HE
Replacement Stylus for: 660.
It will also fit Point 4, 770 & 809.
Can Replace Other ADC Styli: R-4, R-6E & R-770.
Stylus Type: Hyperelliptical Configuration.
Tracking Force Range: 0.5 to 1.5 grams.
Recommended Tracking Force: 0.75 grams.
Manufacturer: Audio Dynamics Corporation
Code: 100-D7

R-6E
Replacement Stylus for: 770. It will also fit Point 4, 660 & 809.
Can Replace Other ADC Styli: R-4, R-4HE & R-770.
Stylus Type: 0.3 x 0.7 mil. Elliptical Configuration.
Tracking Force Range: 0.75 to 2.0 grams.
Recommended Tracking Force: 1.5 grams.
Manufacturer: Audio Dynamics Corporation
Code: 100-D7

Possibly there is some error in the Bluz Broz listings, specs and prices differ even though the same code is given for these two styli, as well as for the R-4E replacement. Caveat emptor.

I've been searching for information concerning ADC cartridges and other than the XLM, Astrion and TRX cartridges there is very little comment concerning other models.

I do think the magnesium LMG-1 and -2 headshells are comprable to many of the better contemporary headshells, excluding the exotics. I have purchaced several equipped with ADC cartridges. I did not care for a QLM-30, there was little about it that encouraged me to spend much time with it, it seemed very much an entry-level pickup. A QLM-36I with a nude elliptical stylus had respectable performance in the mids and highs, the bass lacked presence. Both had original styli/suspension and I confess I gave neither the neccessary time to "run back in" after an unknown period of laying idle as the Acutex LPM 315/320 currently commands all my attention.

I'm not sure any of this helps, but like you I would be appreciative of any information or experience with ADC cartridges anyone would care to contribute.
Regards, Raul. As always, I appreciate the high level of knowledge and information expressed in this thread, as well as your gentlemanly manner in seeking confirmation.

A copy/paste from:

http://www.audiotools.com/oldcart_f.html.

"There was nota bene also a version of the F9 with a line contact stylus called F-9L and that model could be bought with an integrated headshell as SF-90. There was also a classic MC called F45D that Japanese enthusiasts talk about at times but I have not been able to find any info on it.

The technical specification of the F9-E are : Frequency response: 10Hz~45Khz Output @5cm/sec, 45°: 3,5 mV @ 1KHz. Tracking force: 0,5 to 2 grams. Reccommended Tracking force: 1,2 grams. Channel balance: Less than +-0,5dB @ 1KHz. Compliance: 26 x 10-6 cm/dyne. Stylus: Elliptical. Weight: 6 grams. Impedance: 1700 ohms.

The technical specification of the SF-90 (F9-L w/integrated headshell) are : Frequency response: 10Hz~40Khz Output @5cm/sec, 45°: 5,5 mV @ 1KHz. Tracking force: 0,5 to 2 grams. Reccommended Tracking force: 1,2 grams. Channel separation: -30dB @1KHz or better. Channel balance: Less than +-0,5dB @ 1KHz. Compliance: 20e-6 cm/dyne. Effective Moving Mass: 0,4mV. Stylus: Lx Line Contact. Weight: 15,5 grams. Impedance: 1700 ohms @ 1KHz. Resistance: 30 - 100 ohms."

From original Shinagawa Musen material, 90% is in Japaneese, the English portions I can relate.
Grace F9-F: 10-60khz. Stylus, "Discrete 4". Compliance 25x10-6 cm/dyne.
F9-E: 10-45khz, stylus, "Extended Range". 25x10-6 cm/dyne
F9-L: 10-40khz, 5.5mV, stylus, "Advanced Luminal Trace", 20x10-6 cm/dyne.
F9-U: 10-50khz, "Utility Trace", 25x10-6 cm/dyne.
F9-D: 10-35khz, 0.65 mil. conical, 25x10-6 cm/dyne.
F9-P: 20-20khz, 0.65 conical, 10x10-6 cm/dyne.
Output for all is 3.5mV (5cm/sec., 1000Hz) except for the F9-L which is given as 5.5mV. Tracking 0.5-2gr., recommemded is 1.2 for all except the F9-P at 1-4gm., rec. 2.5. Resistance is 30-100k Ohm, universal.
The distinction I hear between the F9-E/L is one of energy or articlation, another might hear other differences. As you mention, Raul, both are worthy of appreciation.
You guys are sharp.

Lew: Don't underestimate the impact a 4dbl. (2dbl +/-) difference will make. Mark Twain: "There are lies, d-mn lies, and statistics". I've been misled by "spec. wars" too many times. In this situation the difference in hf. extension is obvious. You might compare bass transitions too. Best of luck, looking forward to reading your impressions.
Regards, Raul: Looking forward to your impressions (when you find the time) of the Shure. IIRC, I provided this link before, comments from the designer of the ML 140HE.

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=126549&page=3&highlight=Shure+ML+140HE

For insights in tonearm damping from the Boston Audio Society, 1975:

http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/pdf/bass/BASS-03-05-7502b.pdf

Previous issues have tonearm damping suggestions from Tom Holman and Bob Mitchel, also worth reading.
Regards, Acman.
Several comments I've read indicate the MR 5.0 is a good one, but then I've not read anything negative about any Signet. Some approving comments about their tonearms too.

I've been listening to the AM20 cartridge for a week now. Sometimes with the 0.2 x 0.7 "minature elliptical", nude mount stylus you mention for the MR5.0-me, they exchange nicely. A friend listened to it, comment was "I want one". The AM series may sound a little softer than the 5.0, I'm still trying to determine cartridge res. & impedence figures and haven't heard the 5.0 so don't take this as gospel. The AM series extends to AM50, I think this one may be the AT25 in Signet clothing. This stylus is a curious little metal insert that secures into the cartridge's socket with a screw. Lots of guessing going on here for now, I'm not sure I can afford real knowledge until next year.

Anyway Danny, I've found another of the AM series bodys, perhaps we can anticipate an exchange for sampling, when it arrives. Since you asked and it is informational, the styli are original & I won't forget you asked about a replacement. Some are labeled Signet, Stow, Ohio. Others are Signet Division, A.T. U.S., Inc., made in Japan. Knowing the time-frame would be of interest.
Regards, Raul: I'm hopeing for the best with this but if things don't work out it wouldn't be the first time the thrill of the chase exceeded the reward at the (turn)table.

VE cartridge database shows the same tracking downforce, output and impedance (2.2mv & 550 Ohms) for the AT22-25 and Signet Tk9-10 cartridges using this stylus configuration, except for the Tk9LCa @ 2.0mv output, 550 Ohms imp. Ttn.com lists their replacement as applicable for all the above models. Your observation and Travbrow's experience are taken into account and I thank you both. As of now "'alea iacta est", the die have been cast, the Rubicon is several days behind me.

I'm still puzzled by variations in color of the cantilever mounting block, will know more next week (not a difficult achievement) when I have opportunity to examine the AT22 and will report observations then.

How goes your progress with sampling the ADC line?
Greetings, Edainwestoc: You've made a statement that perhaps a quote from an informative thread at VE would help answer:

"Increasing the capacitance will lower the frequency of the resonant peak and start the high frequency roll off at a lower frequency. It is usually high inductance cartridges that need low capacitance the most. I know capacitance loading was used in the past to tame treble, but it doesn't work to good. It produces a peak closer to the midrange. It will eliminate very high frequencies, depending on the cartridge, but it's really not an ideal solution as a filter for a ringing preamp or to realize the high frequency capabilities of a phono cartridge. For high fidelity, the best filter is no filter.
As stated previously, 47K is NOT a real standard. It's there by default."

From a (my) layman's perspective, adjusting loading and capacitance of MM cartridges is a requirement in matching the inductive and resistive qualities of a cartridge. Dismissing the electrical/mechanical parameters of a specific cartridge's design as irrelevent results in deviations from RIAA equalization and less than optimum cartridge performance.

Those interested might refer to:

http://www.vinylengine.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6674&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Pages 14 through 17 are especially informative.

Edainwestoc, please be aware any loading or capacitive adjustments are effective prior to preamplification. Alternative capacitors or resistors simply offer a different value and do not act as "filters" or in any way serve to introduce additional circuits or connections contributing to further degradation of cartridge signal. As there are many who are more qualified to respond, any corrections or additional insight regarding the above are welcome.

Regards, Lew: The assumption is that unless intended for Quad/4channel use, and relative to mass production of audio devices intended to be used by the typical home-owner, 47k is the universal standard. This has much to do with the low or mid-fi quality of these consumer intended systems and the fact that most listeners of the period didn't care to invest in the requirements to maximize cartridge performance. To the best of my recollection and viewed as a unit, turntable capacitance (arm & IC's) was typified at 100pF and many of these had the patch cords soldered in place to prevent the uninformed from changing intended capacitance. Consequently head units were usually supplied at 47k and 200pF, popular cartridges of the era (Stanton 681EEE is a good example, 47k/275pF) reflect this. IIRC, many Empire cartridges were intended for 100k, consequently their reputation for warmth but deficiency in hf's. This, to establish a background.

If a phono section or preamp offers the options of 10/50/100k res. and 100/200/300/400pF cap., there are then twelve possible combinations. Introduce cartridge output inductance (the Shure V15-111 was 1280, again, IIRC) and resistance there are then so many interactions lengthy computation is required to make any remote assertions about correctly loading for a specific pickup.

Considerations involved are resistance induced roll-off of hf's, cantilever/tie-wire introduced roll-ups derived from uncontrolled mechanical resonance (distortion) and the design characteristics of any feedback loops, gain or resistance inherent to the phono section involved.

Harmonics, intermodulation and the acceleration of the stylus also contribute, infrasonic frequencies affect both the charge on capacitors and the impact on harmonics in the intrasonic range, capacitance will affect not only midrange harmonics and hf rolloff but have influence on harmonics through the mid bass frequencies too, and it's consequential overflow into lowest bass.

The short answer to your premise is "possibly". Read the above referenced Holman paper, draw your own conclusions and again, politely, allow me to bow out of this particular discussion as my familiarity is experiential, it's complexity exceeds my mathmatical proficiency and this is where it's ultimately heading.

Regards, Raul: Welcome back from your sabatical, your thread is just not the same without your (sometimes controversial) input. Pleased to hear you've finished your upgrades, also your exploration of the impact of capacitance matching for your cartridges. When right, distortion is minimal and resonances support each other, possibly why you find improvement in apparent bass/hf response. As noted in the previous discussions, there is a point of "just right".

Thanks for giving your opinion on stylus profiles, as you know my (antique but well maintained) SS rig is not lacking in accuracy but there is perhaps a neutrality involved that results in the somewhat softer presentation of the Shibata/line contact styli being more appealing to me than the bolder ellipticals or the overachieving "micro" varieties. As Lew(m) mentioned, we are each blessed/cursed with our own preferences, "perfect" in this situation is possibly as much organic as mechanical.

Acman3: Danny, I anticipate you'll be pleased with the Signet/AT marriage. The suspension for mine settled in after 20 hrs.+ -, 47k & shunted 200pF (a hint of the infamous AT hf brittleness at 100k Ohm, slight breakup of mids at 300pF). Tonearm/IC cap. is add'l 53pF. 1.1 gm VTF is right for the 12gm eff. mass EPA-250 TA, headshell is important. Post or let me know your thoughts, if not to your taste I'll be pleased to rescue you from it for one of my alternate TT's.
Regards, Headsnappin: More information than you asked for but there may be some considerations others would find interesting so please pardon this post's length.

First question, will the 7ea work- the ea series require the rectangular alignment post, the bottom of the cartridge body is angled, not flat like the previous "e" series which accept the round post (AT14-20 styli are an exact fit). The 140-155lc styli fit all "ea" bodys, as will the extermely detailed 152ml nude/berillium stylus assembly.

Second question, are they the same- dimensionally, yes. Performance- the TK1ea and the 3 are production models, the 1 has a plastic mount and is disturbingly microphonic, the 3's mount is alu. and is well isolated from airborne and mech. related disruption. OFC windings, channel bal. is 1.5 & 1.0 respectively. 5.0mV output for all "ea" carts.

Starting with the 5, windings are LC-OFC, continuous from the laminated four coil pole pieces to the pins out, progressively more refined through the 7ea. Mfr. specs for the 7ea/7LCa respectively (this is the part you'll be interested in):

Response: 5-30k/5-35k. Balance: 0.75/0.5. Recco. cap, 1-100, both. Imped. @ 1kHZ, 900 Ohm., both. Inductance, 550, both. D. C. res, 800 Ohm, both. Sep. at 10kHz: 22 min/23 min. At 1kHz, 33, both. The 3 and 5ea approach the quality of the 7 progressively, the 1ea is definately an entry-level cartridge (comp. to AT120e) and I'd suggest avoidance for those with high end performance expectations.

The line contact stylus has good groove wall contact of 4.5 x 70um, a good 0.2 x 0.7 elliptical would be 3.5 x 18um, a micro-linear at 2.5 x 75um, placing percieved character of the line contact variety nicely between the "muscular" sound of an elliptical of good quality and the low-level detail retrieval qualities of the "micro" types. Some Shibata (can be 50-75um major radius), Paratrace and Ortofon "replicant" styli have even greater major radius engagement of 80 to 90um, the smaller the minor radius the better it reads hf's. The given figures are from AT data and other sources, they are not universal. The styli response characteristics are "IMO".

For another opinion of a TK3ea/140lc mutt:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=334298

Peace,

Regards, Raul: Thanks for taking the time to respond. I'd recently revisited my Grace F9-E and the Shure 140HE, two cartridges I have trouble in assesing, largely because I listen to them so infrequently. Although the paperwork that came with the Grace is largely in Japaneese, I can determine Shingawa Musens' intentions were for 300pF cap., 100k Ohm res. & 1.2gm VTF.

Due to a very difficult and, after four weeks of trying, unsuccesful attempt at communication with StereoNeedles I've come to the conclusion they have no intention of accepting return of their faulty AT25e stylus. I will keep my thoughts to myself concerning their business practices but you can draw your own conclusions as to their commitment to customer support. Ordered Sept. 18th, three months of distortion and frustration. The positive outcome is the locating of another less costly source and I'm anticipating the arrival of the correct stylus for my Signet TK9LCa and a TK10ML MK3 stylus to upgrade the AT22 cartridge. Your and Travbrows' positive comments regarding the TK10ML are encouraging. Should anyone need styli for the AT22, 23, 24, 25 or Signet TK9LCa and TK10ML, NeedleDepot offers all of these at a (relatively) reasonable price.

Currently, two days into running-in a TK7e cartridge with an AT180 Shibata stylus, 2.7mV output. Extension and definition are good, tonal balance has not yet settled. This makes it difficult to refrain from allowing the Signet TK3ea/140LC & TK5ea/155LC hybrids to monopolize the tonearm. Except for the MR series, I've now a representative cartridge for each of Signet's American market classes and other than the entry level TK1, with either the OEM or comperable AT styli they're all commendable. Music is good.

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: Wash the octopus, drain well... and use the water in the garden.

The TK5ea is slightly more resolving than the 3ea, four coil, 6n's OFC copper winding instead of the production wound 3ea's 5n. Hand wound coils for the 5ea, individually tested and inspected before leaving the craftsman's bench. Nice catch.

Working from memory, the Signet TK7SU, 7ea and 7LCa are 2.7mv output, the TK9 & 10 are 2.2mv out, 550 ohms impedance. These excel in subtlety and rendition of low level detail. There is (IMHO) a consistent trade-off when exchanging between the three roughly described categories in a previous "long" (hi, Lew) post, refinement for involvment or articulation. Travbrow suggested a higher tracking downforce, following his recommendation of 1.3gm (or more) VTF may help. Also, either it's the ear or cartridge, seems to take a while to warm up.

On thin ice here, when reading between the lines of an earlier exchange between Lew and Frogman regarding cartridge output/phono in, you may find some insight. Hopefully, Raul will chime in.

Peace,
Regards, Lew(m): I recall from perhaps fourty years ago the narration by an audiophile who kept his "best stylus" carefully stored and used it only on special occasion. Your 320STR may be one of these exceptional styli. No experience with the Acutex integrated headshell, I do remember your agony when your first example came apart while being removed from the shell for cleaning. Coil wire seperated at the pin? Perhap an obliging jeweler can take a look at it, he'll have both the tools and technique. Exploded view of the cartridge at TTNeedles.com for reference.

You've not said much about your EPA-500 TA. I'd wager you've considered it for a "Copernican" (TM) application, the "Heresy" model available in kit form soon. As a discerning audiophile, I'm sure you're waiting for the release of the lexan "Whirlitzer" with the classic stroboscopic red, yellow and blue LED's? For the DIY'rs, there are plans for the "CMU" (concrete music unit), soup can & masonry bits not included.

Excuse me Lew (Henry, you didn't think I was alluding to you?), back to fairly serious. I'm curious enough to try nudeing a back-up SP-25 with an EPA-500 arm. Considering an "L" shaped wooden pod, drilled & weighted with lead shot. Encompass a corner of the deck, iso/vibrapods to register to & isolate from. Have the OEM jig for Pvt-Spndl distance and the correct hole saw, several handsfull of spikes. I understand the rationale & imagine this quick/simple affair will be insightful. If it weren't seven degrees F. out there, a three dog night for sure.

Lew, I've been so pleased with the FrankenSignets I've not listened to the Acutex for several months. Due to your praise of the Acutex I'll do an overdue exchange this evening, a pleasurable prospect.

For those intrigued by your well justified enthusiasm for the cartridge, the Acutex LPM body is offered on "that auction site" about every six weeks. The rock 'n roll 310E and more detailed 312STR styli are still available. AFAIK, the 315-320 styli (NOS), like Elvis, have left the building.

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: Four coils, hand wound from pole to pin. Like a recriprical steam engine, works on the push/pull, never stops to take a breath (c'est moi, c'est moi) ;-).

Lew, A/B'ing between the Acutex & Sigmutt can't say either is better. The Acutex a joyful Bach to the Siggie's confident Beethoven. It's possible to distinguish between them but both are so capable it shouldn't matter to any but the most discriminating & that ain't me. "Twin brothers from different mothers". Again, thanks for the kind thoughts.

Dlaloum: David, can you tell us more about this phase thing?

Gotta' go, retrieve my loved-for-thirty-two-years first generation 1980 RX-7, stem to stern mechanical bebuild & a little plastic surgery, a two year project as of last week. If the new Wankel will crank, magic eight ball says day-trip in the near future. How 'bout that for a time warp, from carts to chariots in just four paragraphs.

Peace,
Regards, Raul: I have great affection for the old Pio. Weighs 79 lbs. & consumes 1400 watts AC, when pushed it'll heat a room. As there are no neg. feedback circuits, the phono section is quiet & clean, maybe a little too much so for some. Adjustable for cap. & res., how handy! After thirty three years (new, 1979) one gains a measure of familarity, small differences in source are apparent. TOTL and nearly the price of a VW when new, the old vetern still performs fairly capably. IMHO, anyway.

Cantilevers & styli: An advantage, this being the propensity to "swap" styli has resulted in numerous styli for the same cartridge, wether it be AT, Signet, ADC, Shure, Empire, enough to have some awareness of the difference. My perception is, as posted earlier, the stylus for character, the cantilever for quality. None the less and as you say, performance is a consequence of all factors. Raul, please continue to express your thoughts, perhaps we might learn a thing or two?

Headsnappin: Regards. I really don't hear the Sigmutt as having diminished mids, rather one of it's best features. Wonder if it's system (my antique SS gear, aren't you running tubes?) or loading. Halcro?

Dlaloum, thanks for the follow-up.

Peace,
Regards, Dlaloum: You left a message? Too much going on with the numerous r/m influences for an exact accounting. In broad strokes, output impedance 500-700 ohm, 100-200pF cap. 700-1200 ohm, 200-300pF. 1200-3xxx ohm, 300-400pF(+). In the good ol' days, the in-betweens were achieved with various IC's, except they were called patch cords back when. Next you dialed in some resistance & bumped the hf's, yes you did. Now there's that pesky "watershed" effect slopeing from the center of the increased frequency peak, oopsie!

And then, bonded styli, cantilever damping, boundary resonances, effects of mechanical ringing up and (suspect but cannot substantiate) down the harmonics, the unwanted sum and difference frequencies of the original frequencies spawned by those rascally intermodulations, got to find a fix for that too. Yada---.

Lotsa' luck. Be sure to post a link when conclusions are reached.

Peace,
Regards, all and thanks for your comments. Pleased to see movement in the thread as Lew's reference to Ricky Nelson has resulted in the verse running constantly through my mind.

Dgob: As I remember, Kant was a believer in moral duty. The refered to "maxim" implies external compulsion whereas absolute imperatives are internal, such as food, water, music. "This is what I want and to gain my objective, I must perform these acts". The presupposition is that all rational humans should be able to conclude the same moral laws. The difficulty with the application of categorical imperatives relates to the circumstance that there are those who would presume to ignore Kant's position that human beings are not to be used as a means to an ends. Kant makes a distinction between duty and inclination, there are those who, historically, seek to assert their "will" on others and impose "universal law" regardless of the consideration of contradictory moral dilemas. Rousseau takes a different tact, that of the social contract and "volunte' generale", which meets it's own demise in excessive application resulting in a "popular totalarianism". From "Discourse On Inequality": "From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch,----the fruits of the earth belong to us all---." I prefer Aristotle's company. Unfortunately the sage is also not currently in vouge.

Most esteemed Nikola: Regarding universalities, I can only say that in my humble and limited existence, I've yet to encounter a recognized example. Permit my refuge in another of Voltaire's observations: "Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd". I have a cat named Schrödinger.

A matter of curiosity provoked by communication with another. Most headshells are provided with a rubber o-ring where the shell joins the collet, some recommend it's removal. Would doing so result in a "universal" improvment, or is it a situational condition?

Peace,
Regards, Henry: Sorry my friend, the cat is more easily let out of the bag than put back in.

Lew made some good observations about reflected resonance, the paper quoted above dealt with the intensification of resonance consequent to two undamped (similar) materials in association. The logic of both situations is obvious, proof of both are readily available with a little research, as is the probability that increased resistance from the fine gauge wire necessary for Litz configured headshell tags results in a noticeable effect on cartridge performance.

"The fraction of the window area occupied by copper in a litz-wire winding will be less than it could be with a solidwire winding. This leads to higher dc resistance than that of a solid wire of the same outside diameter." From IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 14, no. 2.

Litz wire.com-applications: "Simple twisted bunched conductor wire can accomplish this adequately where proximity effect would be the only significant problem with solid wire." And: From a table of application to DC frequencies, from "10 KHZ - 20 KHZ, 33 AWG" is sufficient to avoid skin effect, from "20 KHZ - 50 KHZ, 36 AWG."

Trusty ol' Wikipedia: "At 60 Hz, the skin depth of a copper wire is about 1⁄3 inches (8.5 mm). At 60 kHz, the skin depth of copper is about 0.01 inches (0.25 mm). With Litz bundling, the magnetic fields generated by current flowing in the strands are in directions such that they have a reduced tendency to generate an opposing e.m.f. in the other strands. The ratio of distributed inductance to distributed resistance is increased, relative to a solid conductor, resulting in a higher Q factor at these frequencies." In this example, critical damping (loading) is needed to ensure the fastest response (approach to the final value) possible without overshoot. For your reflection, a bell that rings forever has an infinite Q factor.

The boring details: In the past several years numerous headshells focusing on low mass magnesium designs have been obtained. Various replacment leads tried resulted in a preference for twisted (bunched) silver or thick copper tags. Curiousity led to a bit of research, the clips above reflect the gist.

No desire to become involved in a lengthy debate but this seems a matter deserving consideration. IMHO, antique gear, ears, etc. Emf, eddy currents and proximity effects in tonearm wiring are not being addressed.

Peace,
Regards, Lewm: "In the end, you just have to listen. There's too much conflicting scientific theory to make a decision based on it."

Lew, with selective effort one can find references to "prove" nearly anything desired, but let's keep this under our hats. I'm having too much fun doing it ;-).

Meanwhile, those hearing the difference with either the o-ring present/removed or different headshell leadwire configurations and interested enough to do so are surely justified in seeking information as to why?

One of my favorites, (on terrorism) from former Sec. of St., Donald Rumsfeld:

“There are things we know we know about. There are things we know we don’t know. And there are things that are unknown unknowns. We don’t know that we don’t know.”

He got a lot of grief for that. When read carefully, it's absolutely brilliant.

Peace,
Regards, Dgarretson: Begging the pardon of Raul/others for persisting in OT, a follow up. When you get to the mention of "Rummy", you'll ignore?

Dunning and Kruger report, "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments".[Cornell Univ., 1999.]

The source for the Rumsfeld quote, Dr. Dunning said: "perhaps the idea
would resonate with other people if they knew that it originally came
from the world of design and engineering rather than Rumsfeld. "I kept
wondering if (the) real problem was with the unknown unknowns; or was
it instead --- thinking that you know something that you don’t know. A
problem of hubris, not epistemology".

Canadian philosopher Bernard Lonergan mentions "unknown unknowns" as
early as 1959. Socrates did say: "And as for me, all I know is that I
know nothing". The sage, Rumsfeld(?), Lonergan, Dunning and Kruger;
Shultzie is in pretty good company.

Would it improve your humor if it was mentioned the D & K paper recieved Harvards' sometimes coveted "Ig Nobel Prize" for works that "make you laugh or make you think"?

Do be do be do,
Regards, Halcro: Your description of the 7SU/7e as seductive is indicitive of the cart's elusive nature, easy to dismiss as bland at first listen. Imagine a Chenin Blanc, bringing to the table a subtle balance without excessive delicacy, an earthy body with a taste of the oak barrel, managing a blend of the dry and sweet. It took several days of it's subtle infusions before a real appreciation was found, it is appropriate for those with a taste for a velvety presentation.

The TK7LCa is my Chateau d'Yquemm, a fine desert blend. Crispness is noticable without being overwhelming, there is nothing of the "fruit bomb" or lightness of body about it. A most pleasing mid palate presence which serves as a structure to illuminate the extremes. Body in the middle, but no froth at the top or dregs at the bottom. Delicate where important, robust and powerful when appropriate.

One just sufficiently sweet to be at the threshold of perception, an organic presentation of classic nature. The other almost a Torrontés - racy and radiating an aura of real character. From the same vinyard but of different vintage, each presents a different aspect. Much like arguing which is best, a Ferrari 599 GTB or the regal Bentley Arnage.

Peace,
Regards, Raul, all. So, Axpona and then further south for two days at the tight infield road track at Daytona for SCCA (Sports Car Club of Am.) competition were really interesting. For those with an interest in such, a race prepared Subaru WRX shamed all other entries including numerous 'Vettes, Porches and BMW's. And, a certain vintage RX-7.

Returned to find an ADC mag. headshell from a succesful ebay transaction had arrived with a stylus berift Empire 8000 X/VE already mounted, an unexpected bonus. Found I already had an OEM 2000E stylus to fit. With the .3 x .7 elliptical it plays much like the Azden YM-P50VL without the the "VL"'s subtle hf finesse and speed. Bass is very solid with bottom-end transients well defined. Even at 300pF shunted cap. & 100k res. mids are warm, the Empire classic lushness to the point of near euphonia. Hopeing for a little more in the hf's.

Wondering if anyone knows the cartridge--- with a finer stylus (Shibata? .2 x .7 elliptical?) would the 8000 sound twice as good as the vaunted 4000D-111 ;-)?

Peace,
Regards, Lew(m): Cannot answer to the B&O MMC1, but did have a relisten to the two NOS MMC4's that were picked up in a lot purchase last year.

Not impressed with the B&O's at that time, first thought was "what's all the fuss about?", but you asked so out they came for another listen. On my antique SS rig the MMC4 is an exceedingly neutral cart. Resolution is good with no overhang in the bass, the mids are accurate and there is no edgy "splash" in the hf's. Layering is also good and there is a very nice sense of air or openness. Unwelcome resonance is controled, as is surface noise. Quality of the bass is excellent but I prefer it to be a little more evident, the subs never broke a sweat.

What I did miss was a sense of weight or body. The soundstage was mid-hall and although there was no confusion or lack of insturmental seperation (or distortion) in congested passages, I did miss the quality of midrange presence that in some cartridges renders the rasp of the bow or the hammerstrike heard in a forte piano when closely mic'ed.

Both of the MMC4's exibited similar voices, they were a pleasing cartridge and may have needed more than the five or so hours each was used to be considered broken in. Once I was under the impression of a cantilever resonance in the 1500hz range. It was not repeated so break-in is a definite factor, take the above with the proverbial grain of salt. I do think it safe to say these are definitely not "mid-fi" carts, but will require close attention in system matching for best results.

SP-15/constrained layer plinth, EPA-250 TA, 1.2gm VTF @ 100k & 250pF. IMHO, etc.

Peace,