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 33 responses by timeltel

Regards, Acman3: Good to hear you're pleased with the Frankencart. A stable and forward soundstage with solid imaging were the 1st features to catch my attention. Impression is front & center in an intimate venue, layering stays locked in and a sense of ambience without phasing is well delivered.

The cart itself is of solid construction, ringing derived from self-resonance is not evident. I suspect (imagine?) a slight midrange resonance consequent to the 13Ea's 1200 Ohm output inductance. If so, this transitions nicely through the mids, merging smoothly with the 14k natural resonance of beryllium.

With the 155lc assembly hfs are, as expected, extended while avoiding exaggeration. Bass is appropriate with good clarity and clean transitions. There is little evidence of either overshoot or overhang throughout the range of response. Voice is slightly on the warm side with a suggestion of that elusive quality described as "air", detailed with no suggestion of the acerbic. This cart may be a mutt but IMHO most listeners would find it a musical mutt.

Peace,
Regards, Acman3, Fleib. Danny: Checked, the Akai RS-180 (AT14Sa) assembly is a drop-in for the AT13Ea. Have been casually seeking an orphaned 14Sa motor for trial with the 13Ea/155Lc stylus upgrade. At 2.7mv output, the 14Sa (Sa = Shibata) should offer slightly more robust response characteristics than the AT15/20 carts with the SS styli. It appears the configuration of the grip, impedance/output and of course the "Super Shibata" as being the currently identifiable differences. Please post your impression of the 160ML stylus, I believe it will work with any of the AT-120/150 series, and any of the later Signets. The ML150-180 OCC carts are not compatible.

Fleib-thanks for the impedance/inductance info., an interesting insight. The 13-14Ea/Sa motors are rarely mentioned on this board. Contemporary to their production, these were not considered bottom-of-the-barrel carts. Problem is, don't wish to alter either of my superb ATN20SS assembles and am close to running out of AT155LC styli. Down to my last two NOS examples, which will be retained as replacements for the very listenable TK7LCa. Many would be pleased if AT were to put these back into production!

Peace,
Regards, Fleib: Although undeniably teleological, some listeners are more interested in relating to music in terms of immediacy, not what went before.

Informed now of my error, Bach, Mark Knofler or even the frivolous Mozart are to be henceforth considered scientists.

And as you have clearly perceived, I continue to fumble through the audio environment and have not yet managed to subrogate variety and diversity in favor of homogeneity and exclusivism. If this renders one a "gadfly", mea culpa.

Peace,
Poem. By Henry Gibson

The fashionable audiophile has no answer,
Distracted by analytical pale and shrill;
The record does not meet the arm,
With MM carts we'll no longer deal;

The industry is anchor’d now in digitals' sound,
With all others we're closed and done;
Should one furtively the ADC from the arm strip,
Then conformity comes in with object won;

Exult, O strings, and ring, O bells!
The Garrott tracks with enthusiastic tread,
Invest the deck with what you please.
Opinion shifting like the winds.
This ship now sails on a different head,

If consistency a virtue surrendered,
Questions now of past opinion are rendered,
So cue up your AT and hear the bells;
Match cart to arm, the bugle trills;

For fifty years bequeathed the final wreaths;
Exaggerated death of the moving magnet cart?
Can't leave the records in their sleeves!

This arm beneath your hand;
Is a dream that on the deck,
A MM Caruso, a MI Pavarotti,
Not digital cold and dead.

So listen as you please,
When all is done and said,
To the rhythm rejoice,
Remember:

This pleasure is all in your head!

;)

And,

Peace,
Regards, Audpulse: Empire experienced four incarnations.

Empire Scientific
Audio Empire
Empire

In its' early history, there was a strong association with Benz Micro. It's likely the better cantilevers/styli from that era were sourced from Benz. Reorganized, Empire marketing began offering cartridges for private brands, replacement styli were from both second party suppliers as well as OEM Empires. Among these providers was Walco, which offered parabolic, elliptical, and conical styli. The better Walcos are of very good quality.

With such helter-skelter QC and diminished consumer confidence, Empire began losing it's market share and in it's fourth identity Audio Empire was sold, along with Walco and TAE to Russell Industries, the "elephants graveyard" of audio. Still marketed on the red plastic "Empire" card, a replacement stylus might have come from any of the above three makers, the TAE branded styli were of unpredictable quality. Some of you "graybeards" might remember the R. Crumb-like character in ads promoting the 4000D, this was from 1975.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=empire+4000+cartridge&LH_Complete=1&rt=nc

Considering the number of possible sources for the stylus it's not surprising that those who have several examples comment that one rides closer to the surface than another.

From the AK post Dlcockrum thoughtfully referenced, it appears the VTA between the two shown styli differs, considering the 1975(+-) production date, this should be a nom. 20-22 degrees. Three posts later, this comment:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=6843686&postcount=404

defines the concern. (Been a while since I've posted here, hope the links work).

Peace,
Regards, Lewm: Offered for sale by a college classmate, a 1958 Giulietta Spider Normale, $400. I declined because a broken motor mount had been replaced with a piece of 2x4" lumber and tied down with a coat hanger. Wish I had it now!

Your F9-E rebuild--- Picked up an AT ML150 OCC & had the S. Smith optimized LC/ruby rebuild. Somewhat clinical, exceedingly accurate transient response. Diminished/moved upwards cantilever resonance is a likely suspect. Recalled from a Peter L. comment a number of years ago, (paraphrase) "Some may prefer the elliptical stylus on aluminum cantilever".

Early reviews of the F9-E referred to a forwardness in the hfs. This may account for the two figures given for output impedance, 1.7k & (later?) 2.4k.

Maybe Fleib has an opinion?

Peace,
Regards, Fleib: El Diablo's peeve was with the TK7SU, not the TK7LCa. Due I believe to a poorly fitting stylus assembly. From his comments ("distortions", naturally) it was possibly not as tight a fit as would be desired. Raul would never revisit the SU with some blue tack or other mastic applied as would benefit this circumstance. AT carts are prone to lessening their grip on the stylus carrier after numerous stylus exchanges. I found it curious in as much as the AT20SS was one of his "carts of the month", rating an official Raul "review". Same generator n'est-ce pas? I run a TK7SU with either an Akai RS-180 implant or an AT20SS stylus assembly. The Akai rebranded ATN14(S) on the 7SU is a little on the organic side. With the 20SS stylus there's little to which a discerning listener might find fault.

The TK3Ea is a lower induction cart (IIRC, someone correct me if I'm in error). A lively bass and mids that are easy to listen to. Keep in mind, when some mention the TKxxEa carts, they're possibly fitted with an ATN155lc and that stylus is commendable.

Thanks to Griffiths, I've now a JVC Z1. Much enjoyed his example with the SAS stylus & found it quick in the transients and no objectionable emphasis throughout the audible range. Mids seemed a little warm but that's much to my taste. Found an Astatic elliptical replacement for the cart I extorted from Don, it's very listenable.

Peace,
Regards, Fleib: You wrote: "Get out your load resistors." Just teasing, sorry if it was overly obscure. Again, thanks for your response.

As it is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put it back in, MM phono section is 2.5mV sensitivity. The low output of the TK9/10 is the likely culprit. At 2.7mV, the AT 15/20 carts offer more (as opposed to distant) presence but I've observed that carts with 3.5 to 5.5mV output play with authority. There are, however trade-offs. (BTW, styli for the TK9 & AT22 are fairly new, less than 100 hrs.) Otherwise, a less refined cart seems preferable in long-term listening. Excessive emphasis on critical listening might intrude on enjoyment of the recording?

About those trade-offs: Faraday states that "a voltage is induced in a circuit whenever relative motion exists between a conductor and a magnetic field and that the magnitude of this voltage is proportional to the rate of change of the flux". In compliance with the laws of conservation of energy, then would not any increase of magnetic attraction affect leading and trailing transients, dynamic sweep will most likely also suffer? Compliance/mechanical damping, effective tip mass, cantilever length, cross-section diameter, length and rigidity are factors to be taken into consideration. Overall, a balance of entertainment value versus the audiophile goals of transient snap and decay, tonal accuracy and extraction of detail and nuance seem unavoidable.

"DJ" carts with their 5-9mV output, thick cantilevers and rugged suspensions in comparison to the "audiophile" qualities may lead one to conclude that there is an inverse relation between emf and SQ. A balance of entertainment value versus the audiophile goals of transient snap and decay, tonal accuracy, the extraction of detail and nuance as well as integration with the system and listening environment are factors to be considered.

Equipped with the ATN155LC, the Signet TK3Ea meets many of the entertainment/audiophile requirements (on the ancient gear I listen with). The TK9/AT22 extract the finest detail and nuance but remain, well, distant.

Peace,
Regards, Chakster:

You wrote: "The Signet and Precept are just an export brands of the Audio-Technica, those cartridges are not for sale in Japan, but normally sells in the USA and Europe, but it does not make them better than Japanese Audio-Technica top models!"

Signet cartridges were hand assembled in Stow, Ohio. Coils hand wound and then the assembly bench tested to exacting specs.

The AT 22/23/24 and 25 are of Japanese origin. The AT22 and AT24 were of traditional 1/2" mount bodies, the AT23 and 25 engines were mounted into an integral headshell. The ATN22 and 24 styli were of a 
slightly greater length and consequently greater mass than the ATN23 and 25 "miniature" styli, all were elliptical styli mounted to a beryllium cantilever. This was inserted into an aluminum monoblock which was then installed with a screw to the cartridge body. 

The Signet TK-9 and TK-10 shared the same monoblock stylus assembly design, styli are interchangeable with the AT22 - 25 cartridges. These are well regarded cartridges. There has been some lively discussion in respect to resonance and alignment factors with  the AT23/25 integral headshell.

Signet TK1ea through TK7lca were contemporary with the above mentioned cartridges. The TK1Ea has a plastic body and seems overly susceptible to resonance. Although they were equipped with laminated rather than toroidal core generators, all were finished to the highest standards. Cantilever assemblies for these cartridges have been considered to be of a higher quality compared to the typical AT offerings. I once ran a very informal assessment of the serialized production for the TK7ea and 7lca. With the limited information available it appeared there were six of these bodies assembled in a month's time.

The TK7Lca offers a richly textured midrange, a nicely rendered bass  quick to rise and with no immediately discernible overshoot. The HF's are slightly recessed but not lacking in extension, as seems typical of a LC stylus. The cartridge is very listenable. The TK7-Lca avoids (IMHO) inducement of listener fatigue and does well on a Yamamoto HS-1 ebony headshell. For those seeking a slightly warmer performance the Japanese oak Ortofon LH8000 might be considered. The ATN155lc as replacement stylus is practicably indistinguishable from the OEM. The P-mount equivalent ATN-152 is still available http://www.ebay.com/itm/AUDIO-TECHNICA-ATN-152LP-Replacement-Original-Stylus-JAPAN-New-in-Box-/26314..., As to the ATN-155lc, good luck finding a NIB example.     

Although the TK10ml was offered beyond 1989, Signet discontinued production of the venerable "TK" series somewhere in that time frame. They were replaced with the MR (Maximum Resolution) and the AM (Analog Master) series. The AM cartridges were offered as the successor of the TK9/10.

Styli for the MR/AM carts started with a 4 x 7 bonded elliptical. TOTL included LC or ML styli fixed to beryllium, ML cantilevers for either the MR or AM cartridges were gold sputtered. Other than the entry-level models, styli are nude mounted, grain oriented and of jewel quality.

The MR bodies were of the typical AT alloy frame. The AM generators were attached to a rectangular mounting block in the same manner as were the TK9-10 cartridges. Other than a lower inductance for the AM10, all specs for the remainder of the range were the same. Due to this decrease in mass damping, both the TK9/10 or the AM cartridges are greatly influenced by headshell build, more so than any cartridge I'm familiar with, the possible exception being the somewhat flimsy Acutex LPM cartridges. With either the Signet AM or Acutex LPM every setup factor has a detectable influence.

Although cantilevers can be transplanted to/from earlier designs, there is no stylus assembly interchangeability with cartridges lacking the "e" in their designation. If considering a cantilever transplant, care should be taken in determining correct SRA.

The Ohio Signet assembly facility was closed late in 1992 and sold to a warehousing company in 1993. I corresponded with a Signet representative some while ago. Benches, assembly jigs, microscopes,  electronic gear as well as all finished components in inventory were piled in dumpsters and sold for scrap.

Peace,
Regards, Harold-not the -barrel:

First, a correction: Next to last paragraph, post above, the distinction between the two generations of Signets is the suffix "a", not the "e" (elliptical).

Harald, the 20SS (SS= Super Shibata) is, I believe, the only AT15 or 20 to be provided with a beryllium cantilever. This, as with the miss-type above, is subject to correction.

Peace,
Regards, dlcochrum:

Thanks, Dave. I've been following the thread so not precisely MIA, you guys have been offering some interesting and informative discussions.

Peace, 
Regards, Jessica/Steverino (Hi, Henry): 

It appears a certain Aussie has cornered the market for the now unobtainable ATN-155lc stylus. The one referenced above is the identical LC stylus/beryllium cantilever assembly but configured for a P-mount cartridge. It lacks the built-in stylus protector and will consequently be of lower mass. Compliance should be tuned for 1.25 gram VTF, as this is the upper end of recommended VTF for the ATN-155LC this should not be a problem. The asking price is as reasonable as any offered in a number of years past. (Hint: if Raul were to suggest it, available stock would evaporate quickly.) 

The AT-7V (Japan only but sometimes exported to the US) is spec and build-wise comparable to the TK7Lca and is a good chassis for exploring the range of compatible AT family styli. 

Steverino:
Response limits are effected when a state of electromotive force exists. A force at either end of the stylus affects cantilever motion, Lenz's Law states that: "the direction of an induced emf is such that it will always oppose the change that is causing it".

In dealing with increasingly higher output cartridges, an electromagnetically induced current will proportionately OPPOSE the motion or change which started the induced current. Due to increased magnetic attraction, leading and trailing transients as well as dynamic sweep suffer. Compliance/mechanical damping, effective tip mass, cantilever length, cross-section diameter, length and rigidity are factors to be taken into consideration.

Effectively, influences on wiggle at the stylus end are introduced by magnetic forces at work at the generator end. And vice-versa. As the mass of magnets diminishes inertia lessens, or as the number of windings is decreased, resistance is lessened. In either instance, lower output is the outcome. 

Lewm or MIA forum contributor Neobop can explain this better than I.

Peace,


Regards, chakster/Jessica:

You wrote:  "Without Japanese know-how it would be impossible to make high-end cartridges in the 70s/80s era. Most of the American cartridges were made in Japan, even if the brand registered in the USA---"

Thanks for your considerate comments. The long retired Signet Rep. I spoke with (telephone) stated simply that parts were received from AT; tested, assembled and shipped from the Stow Ohio (ATUSA) facility. 

An examination of ANY Signet stylus assembly will reveal "Japan" as the source. It is unlikely the Stow facility (considering the complexity of equipment and considerations of redundancy in production) ever manufactured stylus assemblies or complete cartridges. There is no cause for disagreement with any of your comments.

Jessica:

Search "Stereoneedles.com". The site offers a useful grouping of cross-compatible styli. It might be mentioned, there may be  difficulties with overseas orders?

Just a FYI:

Specs from a brochure accompanying a TK7Lca:
FResponse: 5 - 35,000 Hz.
Ch. balance: 0.5 dB.
Ch seperation: 33 dB min.
Output: 5.0 mV.
VTA: 20*
Cart. inductance: 58 mH ( ! )
DC resistance: 580 Ohms


 
Regards, Lewm:

Good to hear from you.

 "Do you have any idea how Signet seems to have side-stepped a law of physics?" 

Umm, because Signets are magical?   

Seriously, a year or so ago I thought myself fortunate in locating a NOS TK7Lca. #140, a very early serial number. Apparently never removed from the presentation case, all documentation included.

Those numbers were taken from the accompanying brochure, I did (figuratively) scratch my head. 

I wasn't there when the figures were transcribed but best guess is the "0" that *most probably* followed the "58" (mH) was eclipsed in translation from Japanese.

No excuses for not thinking it through, mea culpa but theya culpa first. 

Peace, 


Regards, dlcockrum:

What a gracious post---

Those who would be arbiters of taste rarely receive the appreciation they earn.

Peace,


Regards, Nandric:

It's the "is it science or is it art" discussion.


From a post to this thread, quite a while ago: "Immanuel Kant (Kritik der Urteilskraftwork), maintained that taste is autonomous." If I'm allowed to paraphrase Kant, appreciation of art is subjective, a reflection of personal interpretation. 

There are those who see homogenization of value as detrimental. A distinction of "omnivore/univore" might be proposed. A division separates those who prefer a wide range of musical experience from univores, whose tastes are more restricted, (some might say refined).

If the empiricist were to propose that an objective evaluation can define value, a subjectivist might counter that an exclusivist attitude results in rigid hierarchies, a narrow description of that which constitutes a rewarding experience and unnecessarily restrictive. Others assert that if what is heard does not reflect the original performance then the rendering is an artificial construct and of little value.

It has been said that mathematical progressions are observed in Bach's compositions. Mozart's contemporaries characterized his works as frivolous and lacking in substance. There are those who find reason to appreciate either composer. Even with those having a formal appointment as "arbiter" assume a delicate, sometimes divisive role. It remains difficult to exonerate the arbiter in the event of a wrong judgement. Particularly (IMHO) in matters of taste.

Those who would be arbiters of taste rarely receive the appreciation they earn.

Peace,


Regards, Nandric:

It's the "is it science or is it art" discussion.


From a post to this thread, quite a while ago: "Immanuel Kant (Kritik der Urteilskraftwork), maintained that taste is autonomous." If I'm allowed to paraphrase Kant, appreciation of art is subjective, a reflection of personal interpretation.

There are those who see homogenization of value as detrimental. A distinction of "omnivore/univore" might be proposed. A division separates those who prefer a wide range of musical experience from univores, whose tastes are more restricted, (some might say refined).

If the empiricist were to propose that an objective evaluation can define value, a subjectivist might counter that an exclusivist attitude results in rigid hierarchies, a narrow description of that which constitutes a rewarding experience as unnecessarily restrictive. Others assert that if what is heard does not reflect the original performance then the rendering is an artificial construct and of little value.

It has been said that mathematical progressions are observed in Bach's compositions. Mozart's contemporaries characterized his works as frivolous and lacking in substance. There are those who find reason to appreciate either composer. Even with those having a formal appointment as arbiter assume a delicate, sometimes divisive role. It remains difficult to exonerate the arbiter in the event of a wrong judgement. Particularly (IMHO) in matters of taste. 

Those who would be arbiters of taste rarely receive the appreciation they earn.

Peace,


Regards, Travbrow:

You wrote: "is it possible a later version of the stylus?"

Empire went through a number of transitions. Originally Dyna-Empire, then Audio-Empire, finally  Empire Scientific in the mid 1960’s. According to Stereophile (December 1990), Ernest Benz bought Empire Scientific sometime between 1981/1982. Russel Industries then  acquired the operation sometime in the mid '80's. The availability of replacement styli and cartridges utilizing the Empire brand continued for a while but quality was thought to not be that of the original offerings.

I have a 1000ZE/X stylus, purchased NOS quite a while ago.  This example is packaged in a hinged walnut box, this in a pasteboard sleeve labeled from "Empire Scientific". The cantilever is a fine straight tube of approximately .75mm wide, 3.5mm exposed length. The accompanying pamphlet refers to "The new 598 turntable". Supplanted by the Model 698 in 1976, the 598 was introduced in late 1969. The 1000ZE/X  cart. was supplied with that TT.

1000ZE/X specs (Emp. Sci.) :
Fr. Resp: 4-40k
output:    5.0mv
ch. sep:  35+
tr. force: 1/4 to 1-1/4gm
stylus:    .2x.7 hand polished micro elliptical.

The specs. given on the B. Bros. listing differ. It is possible your stylus is a "genuine" Empire replacement but the values given by B. Bro. are not the equivalent of the original from Emp. Sci. 



Regards, all:

Ebullient is the word.

Empire 999S/EX cartridge lounging without a stylus in a drawer for I can't remember how long. "Gary" at VOM (Voice Of Music) site offered two genuine Empire stylus options for the old guy, Pfanstiel #'s 235 DE .02 x .07 ellipt./.75 - 2.0 downforce & 235 SDE, also 2x7 ellipt., 0.5 - 1.5 down. Freq. response for the SDE listed by Empire Scientific at 8-32k Hz. 

The 235 SDE arrived yesterday, today got it plugged it in & laid Hewy Lewis' "Sports" on the platter.

The 999S/EX motor is listed at 8.0mv. First playback is robust with prodigious bass. Midrange was nicely conveyed and the Hf's were there but just a little less evident than expected from the nice elliptical.

Moved on to Ricky Lee Jones' eponymous Lp. Very, very good center image, layering and soundstage. Deep and wide. No stridency in her vocals but evidence of mild mistracking. A reduction in tracking force and a bump in VTA brought the Hf's a little more into the mix. Played with loading, much better.

Santana Borboletta next. Third album and there's a noticeable lifting in the upper registers as the cart warms. Guitar is fluid, percussion rise is sharp. No noticeable  overshoot but there's a little more overhang than I'd like to hear.

Fifth Lp. Hf's starting to get a little sparkle. Gaining fine detail, bass more proportionate. Dubious at first, I'm beginning to like this rather bold cart. With an appellation like S/EX, how could I not?

The cantilever is a fine al. tube just over 3mm in length, appears to be anodized. The nude diamond is crystal clear and cleanly affixed.    

Now at 1.1 VTF, 300pF, 100k Ohm and a raucous 8.0mv output. a rocker of a cartridge.


Peace,

   

  
Regards, Raul:

Yes, the D/111 followed the 999S/EX, The D/111 is excellent. 

The 999S/EX was exceedingly "musical" but woefully lacking in definition. I found the mistracking due to a mis-match of cart/arm, Suzanne Vegas' "Solitude Standing", side two, blew the stylus out of the groove several times for the first three revolutions I allowed the cart to engage. An excellent recording, I'll check later for any damage to the vinyl.

Dire Straits "Love Over Gold" wasn't as propulsive but the cart did react to a mild warp with woofer flutter. For the record (pun?), the arm is the Tec. EPA 250. Better results might be found with either the 500H wand or trying the stylus on the less muscular 1000Z/EX cart. My impression is the stylus is good, perhaps very good but due to the 8.0mv output it is not compatible with the 12 gm effective mass (IIRC) of the 250 wand. 

A similar experience with an Acutex LPM 315 STR, also with the S. Vega album. The 315 is another cart evidencing strong bass, increasing VTF to 1.75gm corrected the phenomena. Not sure the Empire stylus can deal with the increased downforce, compliance is 30(ish).

Relative to the preceding discussion relating to cantilevers, a NOS Signet AM-40LC was obtained last year, beryllium cantilever/LC stylus. It's in rotation with a Signet TK7Lca, either the OEM stylus or N155LCa. Not a fan of ML styli, probably due to the vintage SS amplification in the rig.

Relative to matching the cart to the arm, my son is enjoying my old  SP-25 with black widow arm, my first foray into "high end" analog circa 1979. Offered a choice of several of my less used carts he selected an AT 15e with a fresh 15ex (nude ellipt.) stylus. Aligned & spun up, performance was excellent with fluid mids and delicate highs. On the EPA 250/JVC TT71 it sounded distant and lacking in ambience and dynamic range.

One might be wise to examine circumstances and explore options  before drawing conclusions.


Peace, 



 
Regards, Nandric:

Not AWOL, just sitting contentedly on the sidelines enjoying the usual "good-better-best" debates inevitable with committed audiophiles. On occasion, when a thing is sufficiently heated a little light is emitted.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

That Empire 999S/EX rocket ship:

System synergy impacts performance. Can I say that? Component interaction and listening environment are two major factors. I've not experimented with a Frankencart for several years, the mistracking experienced with this high horsepower Empire leaves me curious as to why specific frequencies cause this cart/stylus combination to literally boost itself several grooves over.

I'm considering two factors, harmonic and mechanical.

Harmonic osculation is inevitable in the interaction between groove modulation and the springiness of the cartridge suspension, and, to a lesser degree cantilever flexation. Boundary resonance, tip/tonearm mass and damping also each have an impact. A mismatch in any of these considerations can result in euphonic distortion. Sometimes a large amplitude resonance is the outcome. Woofer pumping in the 6-10 Hz range is the most frequently observed evidence of this phenomena. Consider the vibration of a tuning fork. or the "twang" of an archery bow string.

Some guy, Newton I think was his name, said every action has its consequences. 

Perhaps justifiably disregarded, it seems (to me) EMF has its own  contribution in tracking groove modulation.

(I've posted similar thoughts before): Lenz's Law states that: "the direction of an induced emf is such that it will always oppose the change that is causing it". In dealing with higher output cartridges, an induced current will always OPPOSE the motion or change which generated the induced current. This to a greater degree that observed with a cartridge of lower output. Makes sense? 

One may observe a gain in presence but let's not forget Newt's law of conservation of energy. Conditions being otherwise the same, due to increased magnetic attraction leading and trailing transients as well as dynamic sweep should suffer. Compliance/mechanical damping, effective tip mass, cantilever length, cross-section diameter, length and rigidity are responsive factors to be taken into consideration. 

It's seems likely that with this hashed together high output cart mismatched with a high compliance stylus suspension, there is a  high amplitude oscillation in conjunction with a relatively large generation of EMF which combine to exaggerate these factors. There're just too many "highs" there needs to be a "mid" or "low" in the mix? What should be a simple harmonic motion and oscillation and the ability to damp these continuously occurring oscillations is not adequately constrained, as a consequence it launches itself out of the groove.

A conclusion in a somewhat non-sequential manner is that in  consequence the "good-better-best" debate is relative to synergistic factors, these being unique to each series of components, environment and listener. 


Peace,







Regards, Harold N.T.B.
Sounds like you're doing well, always appreciate the experience reflected in your posts.

Peace, 




Poem
By Henry Gibson


Audiophile's Lament

I bought the gear they said I wanted,
whether I needed it or not.
PayPal the scourge of our time.
Ended up with a rig,    
What it cost should be a crime

Worked 12 hours a day,
Found little time my music to play.
So stayed up nights and weekends
Listening to all that high end gear.
Then there was this cartridge they said I wanted.

No time for Sly and the Family Stone,
Never caught up on my sleep,
Always tired to the bone.
But you must have this cartridge they said.
Before you capture all nuance in Live Grateful Dead

How to buy that cartridge I stressed over all the time,
They said I had to have it, it was better than mine. 
So distracted I lost the wife 
And the cottage, house and my job.
So now in cars I listen to radios,
Not all bad, sometimes it's a Bose.
Regards, Raul:

It appears you are positing each of the Stanton "Hand Calibrated" cartridges were individually tweaked by hand, I'd be interested in any information you have as to the processes involved.

I do recall a reference to assemblers selecting stylus assemblies to obtain best outcome but this can be dismissed as rumor. Again, if you can add information relating to the processes involved, please do so. Documentation would be especially useful.

Ultimately, adjustment is not calibration. When a thing is adjusted its behavior is changed. When a thing is calibrated it is to measure its behavior so that it can then be adjusted.

If you care to follow the link offered above there are copies of pages showing the calibrated characteristics for a number of sample cartridges, each signed by the technician responsible for obtaining those figures.

And yes, I'm familiar with the qualities of both Stanton "Hand Calibrated" cartridges as well as those selected by AT for AT20 designation.

If you please, none of the above is a construct of my imagination.


Peace,
Regards, Raul:

For the sake of clarity it should be realized that "calibration" refers to testing to ensure a substance or product meets specific standards.  In the case of Stanton "hand calibrated cartridges", these are pickups that have been tested and found to meet those specified standards.

Not all Stanton carts were tested and not all met requirements for identification as "hand calibrated units. Those that were tested and met requirements were marketed with a data sheet describing the measured performance of that specific cartridge, a label was applied to the cartridge body identifying it as having met those standards. Those that failed or not tested lacked the "Hand Calibrated" identification. An example might be a 681 released for mass market sale. Although it might meet Stanton's specifications, because it was not tested (calibrated) it would lack that description.

It should be observed that should the original stylus be replaced it is possible the cartridge would no longer meet Stanton's specifications. Unless the cartridge retained the stylus supplied with the cartridge, without the calibration  procedures to ensure its performance the cart could not be guaranteed to meet those standards.

A similar procedure is observed with the AT20 cartridge. Those that did not meet specified measurement were labeled the "15" series.

Stanton specifications are to be found here:

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/master/mbrs/recording_preservation/manuals/Stanton%20(Misc.).pdf


Peace,
 
Regards, Raul:

A generic stylus for my AT 20SS? 

Purchased from TTNeedles seven or eight years past, one of the last offered in their catalog. Beryllium cantilever and longish Shibata stylus of gem quality. 

I confess I do prefer the Signet TK-7LCa. Listener fatigue with the Signet has never been a factor. Perhaps it's my antique SS rig, I cannot say the same of the 20SS.

Peace,  

.


   
Regards, Raul:
I remember those spirited discussions as well as the generous sharing of information common to the MM thread at the time. 
In your most recent post addressed to me you wrote:

Dear @timeltel  : This is what you posted in 2012:

"""  Relating to the AT20SS, Henry and I were in communication at the time, he and had both found the 20SS carts. Both of our carts were supplied with generic styli. """

Your words not mines: generic styli ".

R.

Yes, I remember that post, it was from dgobs "Glanz" thread. It continues:
"Both of our carts were supplied with generic styli. There was little commendable about the performance. Based on the evidence on hand, Henry elected to sell his. I'm sure Raul is unaware of this."

You responded that "Henry" in a separate correspondence indicated his 20SS stylus was OEM.

Regarding "Henry" (who I hold in high regard), apparently I was in error and should not have made such a comment without his acknowledgement.

That same month I posted to the  Who Needs a MM Cartridge thread:

"09-07-2012 6:50pmRegards, Raul: Lucky you! I'm going through nearly the same situation with an EPC-U25. Same family as the Technics P23 or EPC-205 and with a solid 1/2" mount. One stylus from Nagaoaka, another "generic" (TTN ViVid Line), not impressed. Have ordered a JICO SAS for the U25. With laminated cores, single point cantilever suspension and relatively low inductance, the cart should perform better than it does now. Jico shipping notification last Fri.

A red generic for the AT-20SS? Want it?"


You didn't reply, apparently you didn't want it either. Raul, I've received a number of carts equipped with generic styli. There is no mandate they remain so.

The SAS stylus for the EPC U25 did arrive. Contrary to every effort the U25 refused a rewarding presentation, somewhat abrasive in character when listened to for any length of time, 

I do have one might consider a generic, a Jico replacement for the AKG P8E. The suspension had hardened on my low mileage original, inner grove response was grainy.

Initial impressions are good but I've not run the Jico replacement enough to feel comfortable with either a recommendation or otherwise.

I did notice several of your recent posts have been edited, evidence that "one is never too old to learn"?

Peace,  

    
04-07-2019 8:04pm"" edited " because I forgot something or not explained corectly. That's all.

R.

Of course "That's all".

Peace,






Regards, Raul:

About generic styli: I had also obtained an AT13ea, a 14s and a 15sa. All came with after market styli. I still recall TTN's description for the ATN20SS: "For those who are committed to the exquisite sound of the AT20SS---". 

AT provided Akai with the 15sa, rebranded as the PC180. The RS 180 stylus, nude Shibata on tapered al. alloy cantilever was available and so the generic was replaced. The Akai 180 is identical to the 15sa. Research it if you must. The generic is around here somewhere, if you want it just let me know.

For the 14s, a NOS ATN14 (Shibata) replaced that one. The generic, same offer. Just let me know.

The 13ea is a different case. The stylus holder was original but the cantilever broken. A cantilever from an ATN155LCa was transplanted with good effect so that one is not available for your  adoption.

Also a Shure M75 & M95ED and V15 type 3 came with generics. All now have OEM styli, the V15 is particularly nice with the OEM HE stylus, At one time I had two of the HE styli but sent one to a good friend. I prefer it to the Jico SAS.

Every once in a while the M75ED gets a workout, With its non-laminated coils it brings forward that classic Shure warmth that was so remarked on when it was introduced. Not sure where the generics supplied with these are at this time but I can make an effort to find them if you're interested.

And that 20ss generic, still have it. Offer stands.

The M95 is a horse of different coloration. Good bass without bloom, the Hf's defined and crisp. Not that the mids are lacking but it's the  warmth of LC styli on beryllium that draws this midrange gourmand to upper echelon Signet carts. Joni Mitchel's "Don Juan's Reckless Daughter" is captivating when heard courtesy of the TK-7ea.

For those delectable mids, the V15-3/HE isn't far behind. Loaded as intended, the V15 presents easy bass and subtle, possibly superior Hf's, the agility and ease of presentation with LC on beryllium still has me strap on the Signet in preference. 

Really Raul, you are intentionally taking out of context a comment made seven years past. Although you navigate admirably between at least two languages there is little reason to promote dispute because your misuse of a term in a foreign language was brought to your attention. There was no ill will intended.

The thought occurs, do you just not comprehend the connotations of "if you want it, just let me know"? As I'm not "calibrated" for interminable argument for no good purpose I'll address the matter no further, that dog don't hunt. 


Peace,     
Regards, Raul
Had the 4000-111 up last week, seems to be some debate wether the long tapered cantilever is the first released or is it the shorter one?  

This week, the 1000X/RD, also a rather long tapered cantilever. Both are rewarding.

Eventually the Signet TK-7LCa will demand a hearing. It's currently in competition with a Signet AM40, also beryllium & sporting a nude LC stylus.

Looked at the reference you cited, the 15Sa shows "tapered" cantilever. I'll leave the determination as to wether be. or al. to you.

Error in my last post--- involved in the College Bball championship, distracted & typed "non-laminated coils", obviously it should have read "core" instead.

The M75ed with OEM ED stylus is an interesting listen. Warm, almost woodish but once demand for detail is dismissed a very musical transducer. Just relax & forget about critique. The 75 was brought out with the Sure V15T11. The type 111, along with the M95-97, were equipped with laminated core (not coil).

Peace,
Regards, Raul:

There was something bothering me about my post RE: The Akai's equivalence to the AT15Sa.

I needed to rummage through a box of carts laid aside for too long. Pulled out the Akai 180 stylus. It had an AT14s firmly in its grasp.

Wheels now set in motion, seemed like a good time for some experimentation. With one exception, there is a physical cross-compatibility with the 13(ea)/14/15/20 AT carts but the 15/20 stylus grips need a little trimming to the back of the plastic to accommodate a small haunch on the 13ea cartridge body. 

So, the AT14s was also marketed as the Akai PC180. Mea culpa, I had the Akai stylus on the 20SS at one time, a source of my error.

Listening to the Akai Shibata on the 13ea/Akai180 stylus, not a match,  J. J. Cale's "Troubadour" is grainy, exaggerated upper-mids.  

The stylus pulled from the 13 has a transplanted 155LCa cantilever with LC diamond, the 20SS is of course, Shibata on beryllium. Moved it to the 14s. 

The transplanted 155LCa stylus on the 14s motor is quite good. Maybe more on this at a later date?


Your turn.
You wrote:  So it’s non-true that the 15Sa came with alluminum alloy cantilever as the Akai or the source of that information is non-precise. The 15Sa comes with beryllium cantilever as the 20SLa, 20SS and 15SS models."

Looked around, found this:
https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?attachments/at-specifications-jpg.545459/
For the AT15SA/20SLa it's the tapered aluminum cantilever that separates these from the beryllium equipped "SS" designation.

And yes, my Akai PC180 information was "non-precise".

Listening to the AT14s/ATN155Lca leaves me pleased with the effort of correcting that error. This Frankencart is very good. "Sweet Baby James", J. T. is here, strumming away. Abraxas next.

Peace,
Regards. Raul
it amazes me to observe you persist in your wrong-headedness.
From AT printed documents, please note the 15Sa is Shibata mounted on thin wall tapered tube. The 15SS "upgrade", beryllium:

http://www.gammaelectronics.xyz/audio_02-1977_AT15Sa.html
"And the AT15Sa Shibata stylus is mounted on a thin-wall tapered tube".

http://www.gammaelectronics.xyz/audio_04-1979_audio-technica_ad.html
"Extremely low distortion results from a new ultra-rigid Beryllium cantilever which transmits stylus movement without flexing. And flatter response plus better tracking is achieved by a new method of mounting our tiny Dual Magnets to further minimize moving mass.

Four tiny differences, yes. But listen to the new AT15SS or the hand-selected AT20SS for ultra-critical listening. You'll find out that less IS more. At your Audio-Technica dealer now.

Note: If you own a current AT15Sa or AT20SLa, you can simply replace your present stylus assembly with a new "SS" stylus assembly to bring your phono system up to date."


For the education of us all, please document the 15Sa or 20SLa were ever provided with a "thin-wall tapered tube" cantilever fabricated of beryllium. Until then I regard the matter resolved.


Peace,