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 20 responses by griffithds

Lewm,

"Collecting tonearms in northern Europe"!

Is the world shrinking or what? My comrades lineage seems to have spread roots everywhere!
Never though tonearm collecting would be something that would run in the family! (grin)
Neo,

You stated that Stanton made 3 different LZ models.
See your own statement.
I Quote:
"Stanton made 3 different LZ models".

In fact, Stanton made 4 models of just the Epoch. The LZ6, LZ7, LZ8 and the LZ9. If we include the 3 your post eludes to, that would make 7 in total, not your stated 3.
Neo, I am not sure I understand what you are referring to with your statement "mater of lauguage"? I never said these were copies of M/C's or that Stanton was trying to 'Copy' M/C's. Only that he was trying to replicate what a M/C does to the signal it receives.
I do understand the it is physically impossible to make a M/M cartridge suddenly become a M/C. It is either one or the other. That is unless it's a Micro Acoustic! (grin)
Regards,
Hi Fleib,

I have a ad page from JVC which describes the X-1 and the Z-1, both on the same ad page. Therefore they are quite similar. The Z-1 is the later model and has a slightly higher output. I hope this is due to the magnets, and not additional winding's on the coils. I have one of each. The SAS for the Z-1 is on order from Jico. The stylus holders are not the same but as you have stated, perhaps a bit of trimming will cure that. But we are assuming that the Z-1 is the lesser of the two and that has not been established. JICO only supplies the SAS for the Z-1. Now why is that? Perhaps because it is the better of the two? Perhaps because it was a much larger seller so their would be a larger market for replacements? Unanswered question as far as I know! But I am going to find out! The X-1 with the JICO DT-X1 MKII stylus or even the surprising Tonar's replacement for this X-1 makes this cartridge the best M/M I have ever heard. Better than the Grace Fe, better than the Technics 205C MK IV, better than the AT 150 Anv., and as good as my London Decca Jubilee. I own many of Raul's cartridge of the week. None, and I "mean" none of them can compare to this X-1. I'm hoping that the Z-1 is as good. I say this because there are many of them that pop up on the auction sites. As my comrade Nikola (Nandric), has stated, you can spend years looking for an X-1. I would have liked to have waited and found a backup for the one that I have before I alerted anyone but Nikola has 'spilled the beans' sort of to speak! I will keep all informed when the SAS from JICO arrives for the Z-1 as to how it will perform and if it will be a contender. I do have high hopes! If you run across a JVC X-1, buy it if it has exceptable coils. Either the Elliptical Tonar or the Shibata Jico are availabe for stylus's. Both are absolutely stunning performers.
Regards
Hi David,

Nikola (Nandric), is quite fluent in German. Perhaps you could send a copy of it to him for translation. I also would like to hear what is said.
You make a very good point about being able to hand pick the best of the bunch by buying multiple bodies. I wish now that I had bought those 3 just to do this hand picking!
I have seen more of the MK2 versions on various sites than I have of the original. I have yet to see an X1 or a Z1 on a US auction site. Nandric found my X1 on the European market. All of the X1 MK2 versions that I run across, are on the Japanese auction markets. This fact does make sense because the 4 channel music market really took hold in Japan. Quad records and equipment still can be found and bought there (Used of course).
The Japan auction site is where I bought both of my X1 MK2's. This is also where Nandric got his 'NOS' JVC X1 MK2. The "Lucky Bastard"! (grin)
I have found that the Z1-S with the SAS stylus is every bid as good as the original X1(or X1 MK2). I'm not saying identical. There are ever so slight differences but I am not anal retentive so the enjoyment I receive from either of them is equal! This really is good news, because this Z1-S body can be found on any auction site around the World.
For general information purpose. Their are 3 versions of the X1 or Z1. The X1 or Z1 are Beryllium cantilevers with a Shibata tip. The 'E" version or MK2'E' is elliptical, and the 'S' version in spherical (conical).
The JICO SAS stylus is a must if you expect the Z1-S to perform at the same level as the X1.
I hope you have kept those Z1-S bodies with the better measurements David. You could be in for quite a surprise.
BTW: It needs to be stated that the X1 and Z1 stylus's are not interchangeable. The brass round tube that inserts into the cartridge bodies are of different diameters.
One thing that puzzles me is the fact that JICO has chosen to provide the SAS only for the Z1. As David has stated, the X1 is suppose to be the top of the line with the Z1 being #2. The best replacement stylus that JICO sells for the X1 is the Nivico DT X1 MK2. I have one of these and consider it as good as the X1 original.
JICO also has a Shibata replacement for the Z1. It is the DT-Z1. But for only $33 more, you can buy the SAS with the Boron cantilever and the Super MicroRidge stylus. Doesn't make much of a business sense to me for them to have both?
Fleib,

A Quote from :"The Handbook for Stanton and Pickering Phonograph Cartridges and Styli"
by Richard Steinfeld

This is from page 20. Low-Impedance (Low Z) Cartridges

Quote" The concept for these cartridges was contributed by Walter Stanton himself. Walter Stanton did not like the moving coil principal that's been so dear to many audiophiles. Stanton reasoned that the performance of the best moving coil cartridges was due, not to special physical properties, but to their electrical characteristics. Why not turn the moving coil concept, in essence, "'inside-out?" In other words, make a moving magnet cartridge that shared the electrical qualities of the best moving coil cartridges." End of Quote"!
Neo, I hope this answers your question,
"What gives you that idea, the low output? Did Stanton say that was a design goal?
There is much more said in this regards Neo but I don't intent to quote the entire chapter due to the possible copy right infringements!
BTW: If you, or anyone reading this post doesn't have this have handbook, you should contact Richard for the purchase of one. A factual read of one of our greatest cartridge designers.
Regards,
Chakster,

I have forgotten to mention a cartridge (M/M), that I own that does compete with my "best" M/C. Let me be clear here. I am saying competes!
This M/M is the London Decca Jubilee. In some regards it does better my best M/C's but there is no perfect cartridge. That is why some of us own so many! (grin)
BTW: The Jubilee is #2 in London's lineup. I have only had the opportunity to hear London Decca's best. That is the "London Decca Reference". I intend to buy one when I can find one at the right price.
Hum can be an issue with these so be prepared to try various grounding methods if you ever decide to buy one.
It will put a smile on your face that is damn near impossible to remove!
Regards,
Some interesting read below from posts about our favorite stylus's.

muovimies said: ↑
AFAIK the actual manufacturer of Jico styli (at least the diamonds, perhaps the cantilever as well) is Namiki, what their relationship with Jico is I have no idea - it's possible that Jico is their subcompany for making the rest of the stylus assembly or marketing the aftermarket styli, or it could be Jico is a completely separate entity that just happens to source their stuff from Namiki. Namiki also makes the AT styli, and interestingly enough the last I checked Jico doesn't offer advanced styli for AT carts. Also the SAS looks very similar to the Audio Technica MicroLine stylus - it seems either it's identical or a variation of it.
Namiki Jewel make (and originally designed in the 1980's) the SAS/ML/MR stylus tip - all pretty much the same thing, with different names by the companies Namiki supply it to. Microridge is Namiki's original name for it, SAS is Jico's name for it, and Microline is Audio Technica's name for it. Other companies including Dynavector, Grace, Lyra, Shure and a few others I've forgotten used Namiki's microridge name as well, but Namiki is the only company with the technology to make the most advanced ridge-type shapes. They almost certainly have agreements with cartridge manufacturers which buy their tips that they don't supply them to aftermarket manufacturers to make cheaper aftermarket styli for their cartridges, as it wasn't until Shure stopped making microridge styli (due mainly to their beryllium cantilevers no longer being available), that Jico offered SAS styli for the Shure V15's (III, IV, V and Vx) which had previously had Shure MR styli. Likewise, you'll notice that Jico doesn't offer SAS stylus options for AT cartridges which have ML tips - they're obviously prevented from making them by Namiki or AT, or both, since they have the technology, and the Namiki-made tips.

Namiki also made (and helped design with JVC) the Shibata tip for JVC (and others) in the 1970's. So it's almost certain that they make other stylus tip shapes as well as the advanced shapes.

muovimies said: ↑
Shibata is patented by another company, was it Victor / JVC if I recall correctly? I don't know how long patents like that are valid in Japan, but if they still have to pay for making it and using the name, that might explain the relatively high prices of Shibata styli. The "VividLine" dimensions seem very close to the original Shibata dimensions (VividLine 5x76µm vs Shibata 6x75µm) so I think it's possible the VividLine is a clone/variation of the Shibata shape that they don't have to pay any royalties for. There's also a 2nd variation of the Shibata stylus with a smaller major radius (something along the lines of 50µm) that is used at least by Ortofon in some of their cartridges.
Yes, it was JVC, who designed (in conjuction with Namiki) the Shibata stylus for the CD-4 quadraphonic system they designed with RCA, and it was named after the JVC engineer responsible, Norio Shibata. While testing it, JVC discovered it had advantages for stereo reproduction as well, including lower distortion, lower stylus wear, and lower record wear, so they patented it.

That's the reason why many other cartridge manufacturers had to design similar extended line contact tips, to avoid paying higher prices to use the Shibata, so we had Hyperbolic (Shure), Hyperelliptical (both Nagaoka and Shure used that name), Parabolic (EEI/Elite Electronic Industries), Pramanik (B&O), Quadrahedron and Sterehedron (Pickering and Stanton), Van den Hul (A.J. van den Hul), PARabolic Oval Cone/Paroc (Dr Weinz). Ortofon have sourced stylus tips from a number of different suppliers over the years, including Fritz Gyger, van den Hul and Namiki (who made the Shibata).

muovimies said: ↑
Btw. I think there at least used to be another big company still making styli besides Namiki, I think it was probably Nagaoka since they also marketed a lot of replacement styli in the past - don't know if they still do in Japan. Probably they at least make their own diamond tips. Ok here's a quote from their website: As the main manufacturer of this kind in Japan, we produce diamond styli. The machining process involves first joining a diamond to a metallic titanium shank in a vacuum deposition furnace, then polishing the diamond to a circular cone and shaping the tip to a radius of 15 microns.
Like a lot of companies which diverted into audio equipment manufacture, Nagaoka were originally a jewel company like Namiki, cutting jewels for watch bearings, and it was a natural progression into cutting diamond stylus tips, as a lot of the Swiss stylus masters (e.g. Fritz Gyger) did.

It was rare that cartridge manufacturers made all parts of their cartridges – most contracted out parts to specialists, and the only manufacturer who made everything in their cartridges was Nagaoka. In 1981 they made more than 70% of the styli on sale in Japan, despite only having a 5% share of the Japanese cartridge market (source Nagaoka’s International Operations Director, 1981). So the styli they made also appeared in many other Japanese cartridge brands, although of course they didn’t say who! So it’s a fair bet that they still make styli for other manufacturers too, although being a large company, audio isn’t the only thing they do.

Regards,
   A few years ago, Nandric scored a NOS X-1 MKII.  It was I who purchased it for him from the Jauce auction site in Japan.  It was therefor sent to me and I forwarded it to him.  I spent quite a bit of time listening to it and did determine that it sounded better than my X-1 MKII.  Mine obviously must of had much use.  But when compared to the Z-1 SAS, the differences were not that apparent.  I spent many hours trying to determine their differences. In the purest sense, the X-1 is slightly more open sounding.
But overall, they are so close in performance to each other, that I had on several occasions, had to get up and go over the the turntable to see which of the JVC's ( whether it was the X-1 or the Z-1 SAS), that I had mounted.  But finding a good X-1 is nearly impossible.  Finding a replacement Beryllium cantilever actually is impossible.  But finding a
Z-1 is easy with an unlimited supply of SAS stylus's available from Jico. For me then, the decision as to which is the more desirable (the Z-1 SAS), becomes quite easy to decide.
   The X-1 has a Beryllium cantilever.  Japan stopped manufacturing the Beryllium cantilevers due to environmental reasons. So JVC stopped producing the X-1 and came out with the Z-1 which has a Borron cantilever. Same generator, same stylus, but they removed the flip down stylus guard from the body.  It became their new top of the line cartridge. So what you really are comparing between the two is the difference between the Beryllium/Shibata and Jico's Borron/MicroRidge. 
Regards,
Raul, I also have a NOS Beryllium cantilever for the Z-1.  I have not used it do to the excellent results I receive from the SAS.  I also have the  X-1 mKII  so what would be the point?  These are being run by a highly modified phono stage with resistance set at 100K.  It is beyond any doubt that it is quite a find for the meager price of it parts!
Regards,
Raul,

  I find it quite interesting what you have stated in regards the Victor and JVC.  It has been my understand that they are the same company.  I have heard though that the Victor Nivico, the stylus replacement arm of Victor might have been something other than what it appeared to be.  I do understand that you feel, ''enough for now on this topic''  but if there is additional information that pertains to this topic, I am sure many of us would like to know. It is the Shibata tip that allowed JVC to develop the CD4 channel medium for public consumption.  The format itself, the CD4 might be a dead horse, never to be ridden again, but both the Shibata and the 100K resistance loading  remain with us so this JVC/Victor/Shibata history is a bit interesting. When you add in the re-discovery of the X-1 (or Z-1), it makes one wonder if there are perhaps other un-discovered gems out there just waiting to be stumbled upon.
Regards,
johnnyb53,

  Very good point.  I had forgotten about half speed mastering.  There has been a lot of things that came out of that short lived format. 
In regards to the Shibata.  In many respects, I prefer it over some of the  other advanced profiles.  It presents more of a sweetness or romantic presentation than a profile like lets say the "Vital Line'.  A sweetness in which I find quite pleasant.  Whether that sweetness is more distortions or not, doesn't matter to me.  After all, this entire hobby is about the enjoyment of music and not the enjoyment of equipment measurements!
Regards,
Fleib,

  Interesting comment in regards to the LpGear's Vivid Line.  Back when we were experimenting with transplants to the ClearAudio Virtuoso, a couple of my transplants consisted of the LP/Gears Vivid Line and also the Jico Shibata.  I much preferred the Jico in the Virtuoso.   At the time, I also had a Azden YM-P50VL.  The Azden was also Vivid Line.  That stylus on the Azden had to be perfectly aligned to preform correctly and I spent many hours adjusting it.  My opinion of the Vivid Line had been formed based upon the experience I had with the Adzen. When set up wrong, it, the Vivid Line would sound at bit tinny.  LP/Gear also sold the Jico Shibata so I wonder who was selling them that Vivid Line?  Perhaps Nagaoka.
Jico buys their tips from someone. I think that someone is also Nagaoka?  This makes me wonder why LP/Gear would offer the same stylus but under two different names?  That Vivid Line from LP/Gear was also cheaper than the Jico Shibata.  They must have been buying direct from the source and was therefore getting it cheaper than what Jico would sell them the Shibata for.  That just might explain why even though it was the same as the Jico Shibata, they gave it a different name.
Sorry for the rambling Fleib.  Just thinking out loud.
I think I need to revisit that Virtuoso and that VL transplant.  I do recall that I never had the problems getting it set up correctly like I ''always'' had with the Azden. It not being an actual ''Vivid Line" but actually a Shibata would explain that also!
Regards, 
Raul,

I own 2 of the X-1 MKII's.  One is NOS.  I also own an original Z-1 with a NOS beryllium cantilever/shabita tip.  Also own the Z-1 SAS.  I question anyone's sanity looking for a X-1 MKII (which they might never find in uasble condition), when they can have 99.9% of its performance with a
Z-1 SAS and have it today.  Yes, I understand that to some, that last 0.1 % is worth all the effort but life is just to short for me and most others to sweat the small stuff!  They are btw all mounted on magnesium head shells and I have no intentions of un-mounting them only to see whether they are labeled JVC or Victor.
Regards,

My dear comrade Nandric,

  This ''infection''  that you are spreading is getting expensive!  (grin)
This all began innocently enough with those M/M's.  It was and still is fun to return to those old cartridges from our youth.  Many of those I lusted after but could not afford at the time.  Life is strange.  We should be born rich, proceed through life spending it, and then struggle to have sufficient  finances as we become old. This is just the opposite as how life is.
  It is not possible for you and I to live long enough to wear out even one stylus tip from our beloved harem members of cartridges. We will be more than likely be replacing those cantilevers and stylus's due to accidents created by our feeble, shaking, weak hands and our poor eyesight!  (grin)  
Regards, 
I guess we all should discard our Marantz's, McIntosh's, and Dynaco amps because of all that old  bad sounding wire that is in those transformers! 
Surprising that Electrical Engineers (certified, not so called self taught), feel that it is this old wire ( aged),  in these transformers that are the reason for their lifelike presentations.  But what the hell do Electrical Engineers know about wire???   They need to spend time with our resident expert and be educated.
Regards,
normansizemore,

  I wish I had a dollar for every time I have head that statement, "I wish I had kept my Dynaco's".  It's the "Sansui" that I miss!  Those old amps are almost 'spellbinding' in how they capture your senses!
Regards,
chakster, 

Yes, many nice improvements but still one missing.  It would be great if pictures could be posted.   Sometimes it is hard to describe something and having a picture makes it so much more understandable.  
Perhaps the next improvement cycle will be the charm but much thanks need to go the caretakers of this forum.  Thankless job I am sure so I do tip my hat to those responsible.
ddriveman,

I also read that 'shootout' and found it quite informative.  I honestly do not remember on what forum it was posted on but I sure would like to re-read it again.  I had at the time, the FR-7.  After that read, I bought a NOS FR-7fz.  What an absolutely amazing cartridge that 'fz' is.  I was so impressed with it and what Ikeda (the designer), creates, that I have bought a Ikeda 9C.  Their is magic in that air core design when coupled with those Anico magnets.  The Ikeda 9C will find very good company with my London Decca Jubilee!  I think the term in Japanese, translated into English is "Happy Family''!  (grin)
Regards,

Dear Raul,

  Then would you also agree that we should discard all those old M/M cartridges that are surely full of the same old and bad sounding wire that is wrapped around their coils?  Yes, the very ones that you have been raving about since the start of this thread!  
Regards,
Raul,

Quote:
""In the other side you can’t compare the kind and length of the wire used in the cartridge coils against an amplifier.""

Why not? Wire is wire! Only difference between the wire in coils and the wire in amps is the diameter. Same goes for those old head shell leads. Nothing different other than the diameter.

You stated that this old wire, (based on your 400 test examples of head shell leads), is not good. Is this just your ’opinion’ or do you have something you care to share with us to support this statement because articles written by actual Electrical Engineers, do not agree with what you have stated. The difference being, they have test results that have been verified through repeated lab testing. Their statements are based on Scientific Technics. Is this statement just ’your opinion’ or do you have something a little more concrete?
You see Raul, ’opinions’ are something everyone has, so to state your ’opinions’ as if it is some kind fact, is not helpful in our quest to eliminate ’voodoo’ audio!

Quote:
" Please read again my post to you where I said that I agree only with that " sentence ". I don’t posted about wires ?????"

A ’sentence’ begins with a capital letter and ends with a period. My ’sentence’ that you answered contained a question in regards to wires. So are you saying you only directed you answer to ’part’ of the sentence?  The first part of the sentence  and no answer to the second part of the sentence?  Then why do you think those old amps should be discarded.  
Maybe you did you not read my ’entire’ sentence?
Regards,