Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas

Showing 50 responses by nandric

Dear Lew, To express my gratitude for your compliment
this is a real story about the 'emotive meaning' of words. My older son told to his parents proudly to have learned a 'neat word' at school. 'And the word is?' we both asked.
'Penis' he proudly stated. I then thought: 'poor logicians with their substituvity theory salva veritate'.This theory states that any name with the same reference can be substituted for each other salva veritate. My mom would never agree with such a nonsense I am 100% sure.

Regards,
Dear Raul, Even your errors have value for us. The stylus
error in particulare has the therapeutic value. I bought at least 8 single styli but actually thought that this is very smart thing to do. Those are namely much more difficult to get then the 'bodies'. I have no idea how to write the plural by corpus.

Regards,
Dear Henry, Nikola does not agree with the 'curse'. On my
Kuzma there are the Reed 2A and the Triplanar VII in constant use.They just got as present Miyabi and Benz LP S. On my SP 10 there is (one of) my beloved FR-64s. So no problems of any kind with those. My problem are those which I own for the looks only. This number just increased because Thuchan seduced me to buy some old I-A SME arm, Raul seduced me to buy this JVC kind while I seduced myself to buy the IT-345 . The last one looks fantastic and is beautifuly made but I am curious if anyone knows anything about those first (steel) SME arms?

Regards,
Dear Henry, You got it wrong again. I am an Dutch lawyer but from Balkan origin. Otherwise I could not afford all those tonearms, not to mention all those carts (grin).

Regards,
Dear Lew, Your Grace (what a name!) 714 was in high regard
in Holland in the 80is. I would not mess with the pivot but only stiffen the headshell and than try. A friend of my owned one and was very fond about this tonearm. As far
as I remember it was not about the looks. But there must be something special with those wooden wands.

Regards,
Dear comrade Don, Imitation is usually interpreted as a compliment but this does not apply by the so called 'intellectual property'. Shibata was a trademark while nearly everybody wanted to participate in 4 channel adventure. That is why we got 'Sterohedron' and other peculiar names for the fake Shibatas. The shape is pretty
complex so one can easily change one or the other facet.
Mitachi corp. produced 'the same' cart for the Astatic and the Glanz .The only difference was Shibata for the Astatic MF 100 and 200 with Shibata and Glanz 71, 51 and 31 with
line contact. Vetterone and I were not able to hear any difference between MF 200 and Glanz 31 L (see the Glanz thread). We should also pay atention to the quality of the
used diamonds and the quality of the polishing as Raul already mentioned.

Regards,
Dear Dover,It is an old tradition to try to nail subject matters with categories or classifications. Those however are verbal and belong as such to language. The other part
is called 'reference' while the aim is to point to the so called 'reality'. We need both to discovere the truth. Well the reality is that among others our Lew is unbelievable eloquent and even more inquisitive. Why should he split his curiosity in different threads? I enjoy reading his post and prefer the same place or thread to find them. I am sure some other members will agree with me but, of course, not everyone. Those however can chose among many other threads to satisfy their 'categorical needs'.

Regards,
Dear Dover, I have no problem at all to admit that I was
wrong. Anyway if math. is involved I usualy skip the whole
subject matter. And I just started to like you. How about
'Fourier analysis' as a separate-separate thread?

Regards,
Hi all, Does anybody owns the Stanton TH 981 ? I just got
one. The prefix 'TH' refer to Thorens and means or imply
that Stanton made his 981 HZS for Thorens. As far as I know
the only Thorens worth mentioning were those which were sold
without the tonearm. Anyway the celibration data included by this cart are:

Tracking : 100 microns with 1 1/4 gr.;
Channel sep. : 35 dB ;
D.C. Resistance: 626 Ohms;
Inductance : 308 mH;
Vertical compl.: 30 mm/Newton
Output : 1.01 mV

I hope someone who owns the 981 HZS will compare those
data and report about possible differences.

This cart was designed as an improvement on the 881S and
I compared them. While the 881 S is a very good cart the
981 is much better. If the primary reason is the new cantilever
and stylus ( I have read this assumption somewhere) then we
should elaborate on the so called 'aluminum cantilever' first.
This means in my logic 'aluminum is not aluminum'.
Axel mentioned to me that those aluminum cantilevers differ
in 'quality' but was not specific in any way. I heard about
'aluminum alloy' but never what is mixed with aluminum
to get whatever aluminum alloy.
Looks to me something for our Professor, Fleib and Dover to enlighten us.

Regards,
Our musical vocabulary is not sufficiently rich and consequently the expressions we use pretty arbitrary.Those expressions which have positive connotation are easier to agree on then the 'negative' one. In linquistics there is this notion of the 'emotive meaning' of words. We all understand what this, uh, means but explanation, as is the case with the theory of meaning, is very difficult to provide.
Dear Acman, According to the calibration data sheet
each cart is individualy calibrated so the info provided by
a cart appllies specificaly to the measured cart. By my
specimen the vertical compliance is 30 mm/ Newton as I
already mentioned. The discrepancy with your specimen is
the resistance : 850 Ohm versus 626 Ohm (my specimen);
Inductance 450 mH versus 308 mH (my specimen) and output
0.8 mV versus 1.01 mV (my specimen). So there are
some obviuos 'deviations' between the two but I have no idea
how important those are. There are much more difficulties
by the so called 'identity relationship' while my quess is
that the cause are the names and not the objects themself.

Regards,
Dear Acman, There may be something wrong with your cart.
Why should you assume that your cart is ok and my 'wrong'?
Both are individualy measured with explicite mentioning that
those measurements apply only to the carts by which
the data are provided. 'The 980 is uncalibrated' according
to you but I don't see any relevance of this statement for
our two specimens because both have calibrated data sheets.
Anyway you are nearer to Texas than I.

Regards,
Dear Acman, If I understand you well you actually wanted
my 981 in Texas in order to switch your 980 for my calibrated
981 ? OK but what kind of compensation do you have in mind?
Dear comrade Don, Richardkrebs mentioned 'Pandoras box' while I know no better exampel than the identity relation.
What the logicians actually mean and need are the corefering names such that whatever is true about, say, Vienna is also true about Wien, Wenen, Bec, etc. They need this to make sense of substitution while quantification and substitution go hand in hand. But what about the real objects? I am not very fond of Wittgenstein but admire this statement of his:
'for two objects to say that they are identical make no sense and for one to say that it is identical with itsself says nothing'.
Well Acman fooled us both by substituting his 980 for my 981. Something like 'John owns the same dog as Peter'.
You are wondering about the 'real thing' because of the 'measured' discrepanties . However measured (aka celibrated) is my 981 but not his 980. I understand the
wish of the owners of the 980 to be identical with the 981 but this also apply to desire to winn the lottery. The dog which is meant by John and Peter is not the same dog but
the same kind of dog, say, a poodle. In this sense Acman owns an MM cart.
BTW you overlooked even the difference between the number 980 and 981.

Regards,
Dear Professor, 'Ask the professor' is a very understandable
question. The problem is what to do with the answer. I have
read somewhere that matalurgy is more an art than science.
But 1.475 registered alloys is not what I anticipated as your answer.
Because of the name my son was asked at school if he speaks
Serbo-Croatian. He was very disturbed to admit that he does
not. In Holland the kids always ask: 'who is this guy'
refering to their own dad. So probable the native languge
they speak should be called the 'mother tongue'. Despite
of this fact I was very suprised when my son asked me to
theach him Serbo-Croatian in the weekend such that he would
be able to demonstrate his new languge at school on Monday.
I started with what I thought was a very smart and funny
'definition' aka 'aluminum is not aluminum'. But my intention,
which was not hampered by any knowledge, was to
get some explantion about 'our own' aluminum cantilevers.
Beside I want toknow why I should pay 350 Euro to Axel for
one kind instead of 100 Euro for one other?
I feel now like my son but he was then 6 years old.

Regards,
Dear Fleib, 'the 981 IS a 980 with a matched stylus'...
The 'is' in your statement suggest the identity relation between the two except for the stylus. But from my and Acmans post from 12-29-12 it is obvious that there are
other differences which have no connection with the stylus whatever because the stylus was not even mentioned by us. I deed not quote all the measured data but only 3 of them.
By all 3 of them there were differences between his and my cart. By dismissing those differences as 'unimportant' you can't produce identity relation between them. By identity relation all the 'qualities' must be the same while any difference imply the opposite. I learned from Frege to be very careful with words and more in particular sentence
constructions with the connective 'IS' which has 4 different logical readings.Frege warned about common language traps and I must confess to have had my own hesitation because of the signs:'TH 981' looks different as '981 HZS'. But what is the relation or connection with the 'real things'? The signs are about the language the real things are not. When we compare two carts we are not I hope involved in some linguistic analysis but with the 'real things'. Or so I thought.

Regards,
Dear all, At present I have some real 'luxury problems'.
I just got the Benz LP S which is in my Triplanar on my
Kuzma in my main system in the living room. To test carts
I have a second system in my bedroom with SP 10 and FR-64
where I can change carts in 5 min. time.There I have the
Thorens 981 which substituted the Glanz 5 for the moment.
Then I also just got the 'Spotify'. Invented by Sweeds it is actually a music library with high resolution digital source and an unbelievable choice of records. I am not sure if all records ever produced are in the library but I discoverd that while very good records sound fantastic I also can enjoy Enrico Caruso despite the terrible sounding accompaniment.
One needs a separate PC and a very good sound card for the
purpose while the whole idea and installment is done by my
son. The same one who is still not capable to speak Serbo-Croatian.
BTW he is 37 years old meanwhile.
I come from a poor country in which there was not much choice at all. But this 'capitalistic abundance of choice' is not only very confusing but is actually 'killing me'.
I have no idea what to start with (grin).

Regards,
Addendum, a good friend of my wrote to me and asked:'what
has your 6 years old son and his Serbo-Croatian to do with aluminum?'
Well my son wanted to learn Serbo-Croatian in two days time while his (much older) dad wanted to learn everything about aluminum alloy in two days time. It is obvious from whom the kid inherited such a optimistic nature. But it is not my fault that Herr Professor was not able to provide.
Dear Fleib, I have the same problem with you as Lew with Dover. Not sure if I should feel insulted or that your sarcasm is a kind of obstruction for your humor to come
through. I know that you are obsessed with cantilevers and styli but I don't see how whatever stylus can explain the differences in D.C. resistance and Inductance which
I mentioned twice. I know what passion means but speaking about 'overdue' you should temper ,uh, your temper. We both called the 'higher powers' for help but that is how the so called 'authority' is created. We already have Raul so why should we put such a burden on our kind Herr Professor? He may btw put again some 'big numers' forward while I alrady have difficulties with the small one.
My TH 981 sounds fantastic but all the fine adjustments need still to be made while I also intend, if I am allowed to say this, to use Dertonarms Arche headshell for the purpose. I have still no idea what the difference is between VTA and SRA but on this headshell there is a SRA provision and I of course want to know what the optimal SRA is about. All this efforts in service to your beloved styli. At your service so to speak.

Regards,
Dear Professor, A good professor needs especialy patience
because the most students are not very bright. Besides by
teaching only the bright one he would not earn sufficient
money to survive. It is in his own and , more in particular,
in public interest to 'make something' from
the majority of students. I myself am of course thankful
for your patience with me. But despite of my ignorance reg.
the carts construction and working I am wondering about the
following. Your kind lecture contains , I assume, specific
knowledge about this subject matter with which in particular
the cart producers should be familiar.
Why are then so many carts mediocre?

Kind regards,
Dear comrade Don, Raul is in our vocabulary like party
secretary in the central committee. So he is a priori right
in anything. You should consult your older comrade before
making such contradictory statements. BTW the easy way to
live the party is simple by not paying the contribution.
The excommunication is the hard way.
Dear Fleib, I grow up in a culture in which it was not done
to hug or, thank God, kiss your frieds. No idea why but
we invented teasing as a way to express our love
and solidarity with each other. Probable something to
do with the warriors mentality. But as is the case
with warriors they are not very sensitive for the
nuances of the 'border lines' such that teasing
may result in a fight. In the process of learning
I discovered that 'pretending to be insulted' always
give good results. Sometimes even presents as peace
offering. While this was in no way may intention I am glad
to see that this strategy still works: you offered to me your
low output 981. But what if I, like Lew, but contrary
to Raul prefer the low output version? May I then keep the 'present'?

Regards,
Dear Fleib, You provided the answer to this Serbian enigma
regarding the teasing custom. It can be very good combined
with humour as you kindly demonstrated. Regarding
Raul's influence I need to point out that I purchased at least
3 carts on my own. But all other, which are about 30,
I bought as fast as I could after his recommendation.
That is why I am now able to even make some profit
on those carts. All my cart listings begin
with the phrase: 'According to Raul...the authority in all
carts matters....' and then adding by implicition : only
a moron will waste such an opportunity. However it is
also some kind of custom by warriors to keep what
they have got as loot and at the same time claim
patriotic behaviour. Ie in no way I intend to post my
981 to the USA custom. I lost nearly all my profit
because of the phone cost with the Dutch Post
asking about those tracktrace nr. connected with
my American packets...

Regards,
Dear Frogman, Our Professor and in some sense Raul give
already the answer for the 'mediocrity' question. I thought only in the context of the available knowledge and was wondering about 'mediocrity' in this connection. Our Professor deed not mention the labour productivity question explicit but well the time prescribed in the manufacturing process for each individual part which means
the same. Raul's 'hand selected' parts obviously also involve time spend in
production. In contradistinction to this manufacturing process there are individuals like Takeda, Allearts and some others who spend much time and effort to each detail
by production of an cart. No wonder that such carts are much more expensive. Looking from this aspect of the production process we may wonder about the fact that there
are also very good carts produced despite the time restrictions which labour productivity determine.
Regarding my debts to you are you interested in some tonearms? I plundered my own bank account lately so I can only pay in natura at the moment (smile).

Regards,
Dear Nickiquy, This Richard Steinfeld is probable wrongly
quoted by you. BTW my ount Natalija also wrote a book. To
me the qualification 'art' for the measured performance of
the individual 981 carts make no sense at all.I would say that
this is a typical technical work with all kinds of instruments
and is consquently called as such. Besides from
what you or he have to say about the differences between 980
versus 981 I am not able to discovere a single one. The strange thing
is that we have only 3 members who mentioned data
about their own carts: Acman, Raul and I.
Those mentioned by Raul and me about our 981 samples are
very similar (nearly identical). Those mentioned by Acman
are probable from some general info about the 980 because
those are not individualy measured.Instead of speculating
about 'possible differences' it would be more
interesting if other members provide their data about their
own 981 HZS carts. The other question about
the preference between the low output versus the high output
981 is a totally different one. There whatever one
likes better is relevant to him in a subjective way.
We don't need nor can reach any consensus about this question.

Regards,
Dear Fleib, I already mentioned some danger involved by
theasing & joking and can add the free interpretation of
what is actually stated .Regarding Raul's influence
I thought that my exaggeration (30!) was obvious but if one
chose to interprete my statement literar one can
also state that I obvioulsy adore the Mexican. However as an
'ex lawyer' (your invention?) I need to correct your way
out regarding the postage problems. My statement about the
problems with the USA customs does not necesseraly imply
a symmetrical relationship with Holland. This namely
says nothing about the postage to Holland. First there is our
flying Dutchman the KLM and than our ages old and professional
custom as well as the irreproachable Dutch Post. You
can sleep well when posting your low output 981 to me.

Regards,
Can anybody explain what kind of forces are involved with
the stylus drag? To my mind those thiny cantilevers + styli
are very furnerable so only 'thiny forces' can be involved.
The inertia force of an, say, 15 kgr. platter is such that
I have difficulty to imagine any influence of the stylus drag.
Measurements data please please no philosophy.
Dear Acman, You was succesful by your first attempt to
confuse some of us with your 'comparison' between 981
versus 980. To try the same joke twice is a proof that you
are a brave man. Your conclusion that both are 'the same'
qua measured parameters is not so much 'brave' but more
clairvoyant because there are no individual measurements by
any 980. Except, then, if you measured both by yourself(grin).
Dear Henry & Dover, I admire critical minds in general
those who are also technicaly 'grounded' even more.
As an amateur I can only think in assumptions like anybody
else. My first regarding the stylus drag is that the poor
thing irrespective of all of 'its' capabilties is not,uh,
very strong. That is why we handle this object of our desire
even more tenter and cautious then 'some other'(sorry ladies).
Looking at some platters I realy get the (mental)picture of an
elephant next to a mice. What I am then wondering about is
how this mice can hinder the other one?

Regards,
Dear Raul, I must again state that I as a amateur can only think with or in assumptions. Those are anybody's quess. The facts are assumptions which are proven to be true. This
difference seems to be very important. Now my assumption is that to measure platters inertia as well what forces a cantilever/stylus combo can bear or endure don't belong to the field of the rocket science. I even assume that the producers of both objects for our hobby need to have some idea about those forces. That is why I asked for,uh, data
and not for philosophical opinions. I myself am very fond of philosophical discurs but in my case this is because of my 'not technical grounding'. I spend or lost , depending on perspective, much time reading in this forum about the 'stylus drag' and learned like in my philosophical reading as much as when I started with this study. So whatever the merit or sense of my questions I somehow thought that those are not very difficult to answer.This
of course is also one of my assumptions.

Regards,
Dear Fleib, Your assumptions are 'one way only' like the
postage to the USA (aka US custom). BTW I now understand why the Americans are regarded to be so generous. They expect to get their presents back. Strange custom I must say.
Now what happens if the measured 981 does not satisfy the conditions which are formulated in advance? I would say: try some other which is actually the same as 'selecting' or 'hand picking' as Raul prefer to describe the possible procedure. In this 'possible world' all 980 may be those which deed not satisfy the prescribed conditions . One may even say that those are rejected in quality terms ( Acman this is what you get when joking with 'some' Bakanese).

Regards,
Dear Fleib, I am aware of your inclination to attribute to the styli more influence then they possible CAN have. But that those innocente things can be accused to change the resistance and inductance of an cart is new for me and probable everybody else. And my leagal training is also needed to defend the innocent. Only the opposite party which was not as succesful in a case would call such outcome a result of 'manipulation'. This qualification should be used for those who tell untruth about the objects
described. Then there is this phrase about the identity: 'it looks like a duck, quacks (sounds)like a duck then it probable is a duck'. Well I posted the data about my duck and those are nearly identical with those posted by Raul about his duck.
But it may be the case that both samples got the same stylus in the sense of the same quality.

Regards,

Dear Raul, Who is Stanton? Your 'curious' finding about the
VTF by which the 981 is tested is the same as by my sample:
1 mN. But this apply to the measurements marked above the
part 'specifications'. In this (lower)part ,by tracking,
I have 100 micron by 1.1/4 grams,compliance 30 mm/Newton, etc.
The above part is about individual calibration by 5 Khz
( 1/2 dB), 10 Khz ( 1.2 dB), 15 Khz (1 dB) and 20 Khz(1. 1/2 dB).
Those data in the above part are reached by 1mN.
By your advice to our Professor you mentioned JVC UA- 245.
Are you sure about this? I bought an fantastic specimen by Foxtan ;
the UA 7054 which to me looks as new. On my specimen
there is no marking of any kind. But by the template only UA 7082;
UA 7054 and UA 5045 are mentioned.There is no mentioning of UA 245.
I was wondering about the price and asked Alex (Foxtan) about that.
He told me to intend to keep this (low) price. As Raul I can recommend
those arms but in my case based on the looks. Really unbelievable for the price.

Regards,
Dear Raul& Fleib, The ladies call this 'the man thing' probable refering to our obsession with our hobbies. I would add as such the 'curious' behaviour regarding the
user manuals and technical specifications included. It looks as if reading those is somehow undignified for a man. If Raul has not mentioned 'curious fact' about 1g
VTF versus 1.1/4 g. by 981 specs. I would not bother to check the specs. again. Only then I noticed the partition in this small card between 'calibration' and 'specification' .Despite my legal training Fleib which presuppose careful reading. And I nearly started a war against you about those specs. and what those 'actually mean'. Some Mexican made very strange omissions because of this 'man thing': writing repeatedly '981 S' instead of
'981 HZS' and even UA 245 instead of UA-7045. I feel ashamed of this as a lawyer but somehow proud as a man.

Regards,
Dear comrade Don, I was not as brave with my Goldring 800
and asked Axel for my 'usual upgrade': line contact pressure fitted in a aluminum alloy cantilever. My 'bravery' limit for the retip is 175 euro btw. The result is , say, 'nice' but not staggering in my opinion. However you got support from an unexpected 'source'. Axel is still busy with my Shiraz cart while the Shiraz is a modify EMT SDS 15 by Touraj Mogaddan from the Roksan brand. Touraj is a graduate from Imperial College of Engineering. According to him the stylus is the most important part in a cart and he thinks that Gyger II is the best there is. He made no statements about the cantilevers that I am aware of but in our forum we already have had some discussion about this subject matter. Anyway your berylliun/ Gyger II combo may explain the results you reported. When I bought Shiraz my intention was to get the EMT SDS 15 suitable for a SME kind of headshell. However I also got the Gyger II with this cart unintentionaly. Dover already praise the Shiraz and your comment about your Goldring is also encouraging. I will report about my Shiraz when I get the cart back from Axel.

Regards,
Dear all, I need to defend Raul. He was with me the only one who quoted the data from his 981 'calibration performance data' card. It would be strange to own the card and not the cart. His and my sample are nearly identical as I already mentioned. There are no such calibration data for the 980. So those can be only compared by listening test. I don't see why his comparison between the original 981 stylus and the Pickering 5000 should be so strange. Our Fleib, for example, does such comparison all the time. Raul is still the 'Emperor' of this thread and his contributions the most valuable. I deed not purchased 30 MM carts thanks to him but certainly about 15. So I still feel very obliged to him.

Regards,
Swampwalker, Your obvious intention was to make my English
writing rediculous.But you only succeed to make yoursef
laughable. This was my point about your 'humour'. I don't
feel insulted by your comment because I speak and write five languages.
Dear Dover, As you see Raul is not willing to actually share carts but only his opinion about them. I was, I think, the first one who put forward that Glanz and Astatic
are 'the same' carts. I first got the Astatic MF 200 and
then the Glanz 31 l (l=line contact). To my suprise I was
not able to hear any difference between them. Then I discovered the user manual included by my Glanz 31L and
got , what the German call 'Aha Erlebnis'. For both (import) brands Mitachi Corp. in Japan made the those cart.
All the corpusses or corpora (thanks Lew) are the same while the only difference are the styli. Shibata by MF
100 and 200 and line contact by Glanz 71, 51 and 31. There
are also models with elliptical styli MF 300 -400 while the
most Glanz models have both choices. But my MF 200 was more
than $200 while my Glanz 31 l was about $50. I sold my MF
200 for $380! That is how Raul's 'Ahe' works. If you are
curious about about Glanz you can get my Glanz 31 l and 31E
to compare. My Glanz 5 I am not willing to lend out even to
Tuchan, Henry or Lew.

Regards,
Dear Dover, I am not the right person to judge Lew's
English but I always enjoy his English prose. In his
'Dostojevski time' he even hesitated between literature
and medicine. But regarding his post about the Magic
Diamond he had, according to me, some logical problems
as I already mentioned.

Regards,
Dear comrade Don, I am sorry to report that I am excommmunicated as a party member because of my capitalistic inclination and petit bourgeois mentality (LOL). The Shiraz
is, I hope , on the way to me but meanwhile I got the 'problematic' Stanton 981, the less problematic Benz LP S and the misterious Magic Diamond made by even more
misterious Reti Andreoli the 'kid' who learned this trade by the Bross brothers for two years. He was probable more fanatic about carts than our Raul. He come to Australia as
kid specifically to meet the brothers. He was then not able to speak English. To reinforce the mystery his cheapest cart is the Magic diamond ($5000) the next one $ 15000 and the next to the next $ 25000. For the last two mentioned the waiting time is 6 months. BTW I got my for much less because, despite the fact that his native languge is German , very few Germans have ever heard about him.Otherwise I would have much more competitors on the German 'audio-markt'. But it may be the case that they don't trust the Swiss. Because of the 981 my Benz is still in its box while Siraz, Kiseki and Magic Diamnod I hope to receive next week. So I have much to report about.

Regards,
Dear Raul, To me this Magic diamond looks like a modify EMT TSD 15. The strange thing is that so many designers are somehow chalenged by this 'oldfashioned' German cart. Van den Hul, Brinkmann, Einstein, Touraj Mogaddan (Roksan) and possible some others all try to improve on the original design. My friend Tuchan was the first who recommended this EMT cart to me but mentioned some LZI model made for the Japanese market. Difficult to find and very expensive. So I used your method,so to speak, and bought defective kinds for cheap with intention to post them to Axel and then see what he can make of them. This way I bought the Shiraz and Kiseki blue for about 250 GBP
and posted to Axel. He was at first very sceptical about the possibilities for reapair but somehow 'invented' the way or the method to repair them. So I am very curious about those carts. The other curious thing is that Andreoli quasi pretended to believe that conical styli are superior to other kinds but designed some special shape for
his own Magic diamond and other carts which can reach 40 Khz. I am not a technical guy but dont believe that any conical stylus can reach 40 Khz. BTW that is what Axel told me also. So dear Raul we have obviously the same 'disease' but yours is much worse than my (grin).
Dear Dover, If one assume that conical= spherical then either can be substituted for each other salva veritate. That is to say if the premise is also true (LOL). No idea how and why but I was the first to mention Anderoli in this thread asking implict for the 'rehabilitation' for the poor old innocente conical thing. I have then just read this paper of Andreoli in some Swiss Magazine. Well I may also have read some papers about particle physics...So I forwarded this article to Axel , Tuchan and Dertonarm but,
alas, never got any comment except from Axel who was not interested but mentioned to me that 'only elliptical, etc styli are capable to reach fr. above 20 Khz'.
I see now that I should post this article to you but back then I had no idea who you was as well that German is an official languge in New Zealand (LOL).

Regards,
Hi Dgob, From the qualification 'the top Astatic MF 2500'
by Lharasim I deduce that Astatic has something similar
to Glanz 5 or 7 . But because of Raul I am reluctant to
mention the headshell.

Regards,
Dear Lharasim, I am sorry for us both but according to Dover we have no idea what we are talking about. This seems to (logicaly ) follow from our assumptions about the conical stylus. I was all the time aware how dangerous this New Zealand guy is but I learned from Frege that there is no mercy in the truth questions. I even like the guy probable because of this strange Slavic inclination towards suffering.

Regards,
Dear Dover, You must be joking. The Vetere tonearm? Any
idea what I have spend the last month only? My sons
are seriously thinking to consult some (other) lawyer about
their legal rights. BTW , as I already mentioned, the whole
'Artillery' is still on the way to Holland: Shiraz, Kiseki
and Magic Diamond. Why is your Andreoli pre 'on the shelf'?
Would the Sony XL 44 l be of any help?

Regards,
Dear Lew, There is no logic in your post: 'I never owned a Magic Diamond or heard one.' Then you quote some others opinions because you have non of your own but your first sentence starts with: 'I think the issue with the Magic Diamond was..' I am sure you wrote those lines not just before you go to bed but probale early in the morning.
Do you really think that others are so stupid to pay 10-15 times more for a Denon in disquise?

Regards,
Dear Professor, By universal quantification 'all' each
and every single object needs to satisfy the given condition(s) in order to make the statement true. By 'existential' quantification 'some' just one object which satisfy the given condition(s) is needed to make this statement true. BTW 'a duck' is not a determinated object so very difficult to own. You probable mean the word 'duck' but a real duck is not an expression but an object. You are still by Aristoteles logic of classes so whatever operations you try you get classes as result. The modern logic started by Frege. Also the logic of quantification which he called the logic of 'generality'.

Regards,
Dear Lew, those hearsay 'árguments' of yours are called
'propostional attitudes' (Russel)and there is no consistent
logical interpretation of them possible (see Quine:
Quantifiers and Propositional Attitudes).

Regards,
Dear Lew, I am really sorry for your, say, disturbance. I assumed that you are familiar with the terminology I used. It is actually very easy to explain. Your attitude
towards some statements made about Magic Diamond is as you stated. Say a,b, c...n. I assume that you have also seen and read other statements about this same cart with different valuation then yours. So other persons have different attitude than you have reg. those statements. But the statements made are obviously mutual contradictory. Ergo it is logicaly impossible for the contadictory statements to be true. BTW attitudes mean in
this context : believing , hoping. wishing ,etc. that such and such is the case. Ié :
'x believes that p is true'.
This is a kind of model or general exampel for this kind of statements.

Regards,
Dear Dover, all those people are masters in adjectives.
My dear friend Dertonarm is unsurpassed in this capability.
BTW the lawyers are not to be underrated in this sense.
We may wonder: 'who would believe such nonsense
or exaggeration ?' but the fact seems to be that
this somehow works otherwise nobody would do it. Or so I think.
Many of your and Lew's post are 'to technical' for me but
I also enjoy good prose and admire critical minds. So my
expectations are the probable cause that I was, say, dissappointed
with his last post. BTW he himself is also critical about his own
previous post and as scientist used to critical remarks. My own
psychology may also be involved because I just bought the
'damn thing'. My description 'not very expensive' may be
a(weak?) way out.
But if Andreoli is an 'artist' or a person with some new ideas
I would say he deserves our support because we all hope for
some improvement 'in' the objects of our 'desire'.
However I am not qualify to judge about Andreoli the 'artist' or
the 'technician' and can only hope to like his cart.
We will soon see about that.

Regards,