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 rauliruegas

Dear Timeltel: The Acutex ones I own are exactly the two top Acutex in the BlueBros site, the only difference is in the 320 description that mine say: improved.

I will test the LPM first because I already have in hedashell where the 320 not. Btw, the BlueBros 320 stylus replacement comes at: 188.00!!

When I have my Acutex cartridge impression I will post about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Montepilot: This is the first time that I have a notice about Empire 1000 ZE/x. I thought ( as is my sample ) that the cartridge was designed/build with only one presentation: fully ready to mount ( 1/2" not P-mount. ) but with Empire we never know for sure.

I think that this same problem but with a different Empire model was posted by Dgarretson ( if I remember. ). My advise was and is that you try to find a D4000 I, II or III that are very similar in the metal body with other Empire cartridges.
The D4000 comes with a metalic " clip " made especially to mount in any tonearm, this clip is removable.
You can find D4000 on ebay and if you are lucky enough and find the D4000 III good because is top performer too.

Maybe some other person can put some better " light " on this Empire subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Royj: Thank you for your wide and usefull Empire explanation.

regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Timeltel: Good to know your Acutex experiences.
I'm already testing/hearing the LPM 315STR, I think I need a few more days on it to be sure what I will report about.
I'm testing against the Technics " The Best ", Empire, AT and the Grado. Yes, it is so god that I'm having hard time to discern on its quality level, even maybe I will do a official review.

In the mid-time my advise is that any one that " see " it somewuere in the net just buy it with confidence.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Kingmacaw: Btw, how wide isthe cartridge frequency response on cartridges and its deviation is an important factor on the cartridge quality performance but is only one factor inside several other cartridge characteristic.

IMHO the cartridge whole design and cartridge build execution are what determine its quality performance not the " sole " frequency response.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Jb0194: I can see that you are really in " deep " love with Stanton/Pickering, good because are great cartridges.

Btw, do you own other different MM/MI ones?

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: Thank you, I already had that link.

Keep in touch.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: These ones are highly recomemded, good luck:

http://cgi.ebay.com/SIGNET-TK10ML-moving-magnet-phono-cartridg-/220596917969?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item335c99d6d1#ht_500wt_1182

http://cgi.ebay.com/MMC1-Bang-Olufsen-Stereo-Phono-Cartridge-/120562281762?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1c12126d22#ht_1081wt_1165

http://cgi.ebay.com/EMPIRE-4000D-lll-GOLD-ORIGINAL-TURNTABLE-NEEDLE-/250622543896?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a5a448818#ht_500wt_1182

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: I find that in 1985 the Azden YM-P50VL had a price of 150.00 and that contrary of what the Azden line specs there were some differences other than the stylus shape with the other line models mainly in frequency response and separation at 1khz ( 30db ) and 10khz ( 25db. )

The other thing is that in that time Azden had the 50, 20 and 10 different line models going from 60.00 to 150.00 where the more expensive Azden cartridge was its LOMC one GM-P5L for 250.00.

Btw, Dgob please let me know which AT cartridge that was reserved to Japanese market was better that any other foreigner AT cartridge ( like you states on other thread. ), thank you in advance.

regards and enjoy the muusic,
Raul.
Dear friends: One info that i forgot about Azden company, Azden was/is a Division of Japan Piezo Co.Ltd.

In those times ( 1985 ) the Azden Equalizers ( Real-Time Spectrum Analyzer ), Headphones and mixers were very well respected along the phono cartridges.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: The AT 20SS was a favorite of mine cartridges for many years, can I say my reference?.

I own and owned almost every single top AT cartridge, I love AT.

Now, as good as the AT20SS is the time already pass on when you compare it against the 170/180 even against the AT24 that is very good too.

Now, Am I saying that the AT20SS is no any good today?, certainly not it still is a good performer, I still like it and keep with me this cartridge, but the 170/180 are in different level quality.

I would like that other AT20SS owners could share their opinion in this subject.

Now, I understand you own that cartridge ( right? ): do you already heard it? which are your experiences with?

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Please read the Acutex review and find what Dgarretson found.

The Technics is more hard to find than Acutex. If you really want the " last " analog source the bets one IMHO is this Acutex, so if you make your work I think you can find it.
Forget about the Astatic, Glanz or whatever: here and now IMHO Acutex is The One.

I never give up but you seems to me that already give up before begin the Acutex quest ?????

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Siniy123: Where do you heard that rumor?. My 205 and 100 have no trouble about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: After my test on the Elac 896 where I found that this cartridge performs really good I think that this opportunity on an Elac cartridge ( second step down the top of the line. ) could be good:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ELAC-D795E30-Germany-phono-cartridge-van-den-hul-needle-/130389883108?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1e5bd7b8e4#ht_500wt_1154

you don't see often Elac cartridges on sale, at least not this kind of Elac model.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Btw, this is what Downunder posted 10 days ago about this Elac cartridge he own:

+++++ " has a flow and musicality that is infecious " +++++

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear pryso: Now you can tell your friend that send his 100CMK4 to VdH that with this cartridge IMHO is the right " source " to fix it.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Downunder: I try to be extremely precise when I mount the tonearm: center of the TT spindle to center of toneram pivot distance.

Then I set the overhang and centered perfectly the cartridge body on the headshell and then I put on a two or one point protractor just to see if everything is ok. What I align is the cartridge body when the cantilever is centerd or with a small side deviation. If the cantilever has a wide deviation then I align with the cantilever and normally I send the cartridge back to the seller for a change or in second hand cartridges I send to re-tip.

I don't have cartridges with serious cantilever deviations, almost all the cartridges are right on target.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " I suspect you know all this already. " +++++

yes I know it. Next week I will receive a NOS LPM 315IIISTR.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " Overhang still seems the first priority, the most appropriate alignment system is the one that best preserves the elements of design. " +++++

well, a tonearm designer normally fix the effective lenght tonearm: this is the distance from the pivot tonearm center to the stylus tip and preserving always the tonearm design distance between TT spindle center and tonearm pivot center, in this way overhang will be always in " site "/place.

Any tonearm manufacturer always give all these three parameters. Why should we change them?
A tonearm is designed with an specific geometry and with that geometry was made the tonearm voicing.
The problem is that we don't know what were the tonearm designer targets under " motion ".

So, we begin to made changes about. I normally respect the manufacturer advise with great results.

I can't imagine why so many people have so many trouble on the cartridge/tonearm set up.
It is so " incredible " that today we " have " to buy a 100.00 to 600.00 protractor to be " there ": my God, where we don't understand the set up that we have to take " extreme " actions to made something so easy!!!!

Many times IMHO we are trying ( with out knowing or not on purpose. ) to correct some system distortions adding other distortions to compensate.
IMHO if we made with care the tonearm TT mount and the cartridge set up following the tonearm manufacturer advise and don't like what we heard then is possible that we have " problems " elsewhere our audio system.

It seems to me that now almost everybody are using the tonearm/cartridge set up like an " equalizer ", that's fine with me but...???????

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Could you post the VE link?

Thank you.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Till you find the humble Acutex 315III STR.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: From an after market stylus replacement yes I prefer VdH.

Btw, before you pull the triger on stylus replacement IMHO take it your time with that almost MC cartridge and then decide if its worth on the subject. I own the 981 low output and IMHO can't compare with the best other cartridges in the MM/MI alternative but like always maybe you like it more: who knows? till you test it.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: I was thinking these last days ( again and again ) on the quality level performance in the Technics EPC-P100CMK4 and the Acutex 315III STR and what I was thinking is mainly where are similar and where different and the importance of those " where " and how ner/far are those differences and I'm asking me: hey could be the other way around? that people could like more the Technics trade-offs against the Acutex?

Both cartridges have so high quality performance level and are more similar than differents that here maybe was/is a little unnfair to put one cartridge over the other on quality performance level.
It is true that the Technics has not that " live energy " that the Acutex shows ( no cartridge I know has it. ) but it is true too that the Technics has other characteristics that the Acutex can't shows at same level.

Unfortunatelly I can't edit the Acutex review but through this post I want to make a correction ( My mistake, the Technics deserve that correction. ) in the quality performance level of the Acutex in the cartridge ladder level performance.

The Acutex 315III STR belongs at 10+ ( not 10++ like I posted. ) level sharing this position along the Technics EPC-P100CMK4: Honor to whom deserve Honor!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Siniy123: Maybe you are right about your Empire because in an old Audio magazine ad it comes that MC along the Empire MM Azden YM50 clone.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Very good and fair price opportunity:
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1278177734&/ADC-ZLM-Improved

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Along the Acutex/Technics I'm testing an Elac cartridge and someday next week a friend of a friend that comes to México city will bring with him a Technics non-P-mount but headshell integrated sample and I will have the opportunity to test and enjoy for a few hours.

In the mid-time I'm still enjoying the Acutex but I need to go on.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Looking to VE site I found that the Grace tonearm pictures on the G-945 are similar to my Grace tonearm that I was thinking was the G-940.

I don't know for sure which are the differences ( other than different counterweight shape. ) between the G-940 and the G-945 that's the real one I own.

This post only to clarify about.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Headsnappin: A little late.
Yes my Grace G-945 comes in that way but I'm using an external tonearm wire directly to the preamp. Lewm advise could help you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Yesterday I had the opportunity to heard in my system the Technics EPC-100C MK4.
This is the same model ( same cartridge design characteristics ) than my P-4 mount one but comes integrated with own Technics headshell.

Like the P-4 model this one exude Technics quality on its build. It is on the heavyweight with 18grs+.

This sample was re-tiped by VdH last January and is fully broken.

Own it the Technics EPC-P100C MK4 I was not waiting for any " surprise " with its " twin ".

I mounted on the Grace G-945, almost level but positive VTA/SRA, 1.25grs and ususal impedance/capacitance.

I follow my recording tracks testing process followed by almost the same recordings I used on the Technics EPC-P100CMK4 review.

It is more easy and less boring speak on the main differences between the " twins " than in its similar quality performance characteristics.

It is a great cartridge that shows a little less transparency on the highs, with little less definition on the bass and with little less energy on the low mid-bass and seems to me that the 4P-mount is a little better tracker.
All this performance differences are against the top 10+ Technics twin.

Please don't take these " differences " like a sensible " drawback ", the cartridge has first rate performance and I know for sure that any one ( but the happy owners ) of you will be pleased with. A top 10 ranking level.

Btw, this Technics integrated model is more " easy " to find than the 4P-mount model.

Almost nothing more to add other that was is on the Technics original review.

regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Lewm: I never try those cartridges you are asking.

Now, I almost can say that NO you can't use those cartridge bodies with a 100C stylus assembly.

I have in hand a NOS EPS-P205ED3 stylus replacement for a top ( one step down the 100C. ) 4P-mount 205MK3 or MK4 Technics cartridges ( Btw, I will put on sale through ebay in next 48 hours. ), well you can't mount this stylus in the 100CMK4 because the stylus male assembly is wider than the female ( hole ) in the 100C.

Lewm, the 100C is unique and I think Technics want to make sure the cartridge maintain in that unique status.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Montepilot: I'm only want to tell you that the 20E needs 1.0grs on VTF and its needs are a little different than the 20FL not only on VTF but VTA/SRA.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: This opportunity comes to me by Michael a good Agon friend and I share it if some one is interested on this Technics 100C MK3:

http://page10.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/m77540861

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Before you dialed in tonearm today geometry ( Stevenson ) which one was you using? are you saying that the manufacturer that comes in the tonearm mounting template does not works?

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Dgob: +++++ " I wonder if different and superior are always so easily distinguished! " +++++

that " process " is not easy as a fact IMHO is almost always a hard task in especial when two items has near the same characteristics/performance.

What can/could help to make more " easy " that process is if we have a precise/confident method and training to discern about.

Btw, thank you for that ECM recording recoemndation I will take in count.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: I ask because I always use the Dynavector values that comes in the 505 mounting template and operation manual ( http://www.vinylengine.com/library/dynavector/dv-505.shtml ) with always good results and with out problems.

The Stevenson geometry is near the Dyna manufacturer specs but certainly is different.

I don't like to much the Stevenson geometry because if it is true that has the lower inner groove distortion it is true too that all over the the middle and out grooves the distortion is higher so I can't see any real advantage on Stevenson and less with MM/MI that are so good inner grooves trackers.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: According with my Stevenson Calculator and taking the Dynavector 241mm tonearm effective length the overhang is 15.173mm instead Dynavector spec: 15.00mm.

That overhang value means that the pivot to spindle distance must be: 225.827mm. Your tonearm is it mounted at this distance value/measure?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " There is at least that much error built in to any cartridge alignment procedure done by any normal human, probably more. " +++++

agree.

Btw, Masaaki Sasa Dynavector Technical Director told me that vintage Japanese tonearms designers prefer Minimum Inner Groove Distortion and the Stevenson is the " match " but this not preclude that with those tonearms ( including the 505 ) the customer try other geometry set up.

So what you decided using Stevenson geometry was spot on, good.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: I can give you one of my samples for 10K+Paypal fee and free shipping.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Siniy123: I see.

Btw, do you know which differences are ( if exist any ) between the 205s with out the L and the ones with? what means that L?

You and Travbrow own Technics L samples and I'm curious about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Only for the " records ": a NOS stylus replacement on that Empire 4000DIII set you back 250.00, so I think that due to its very high quality performance the cartridge NOS seller rpice is really fair. Don't miss it.

Btw, as always I don't have any relationship with the seller, I insist on the cartridge because IMHO is worth the " investment ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear T_bone: Very good information indeed.

I always say that every single day must be a learning one if you are not afraid to lear.

Ok, the 205C MK4 ( that I own ) is a totally different design that the 205C..L line models.
The 205C MK4 was designed in 1984 and its performance is very close to the P100C MK4.

Thank you to put some kight about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
It has to read: learn instead lear and light instead kight.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear T_bone: I wonder what do you want to tell me with your post.

The facts are: even that the 205CMK4 is half the price of the 100CMK4 ( btw, the price per se can't tell you the cartridge quality performance. ) its quality performance is really close. Do you already made a comparison between both cartridges? as you know I already did because I own both.

These are some specs on the 205CMK4, FR 5hz to 100,000 khz ( close to the 100c. ),
same channel balance: 0.5db, same separation : 25db, same compliance: 12cu, same VTF: 1.25grs.
As you can read these Technics cartridges are more similar than different.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Yes, as I stated in the review it is mounted with positive VTA/SRA, maybe 1cm-1.5cm at the pivot but maybe too this could different with cartridge sample to sample due to that Clip.

Let me explain a little on this: during my cartridge tests and when I was changing the stylus suddenly the cartridge goes dawn/fall ( fortunatelly ) in my hand and the headshell/clip stay in the tonearm.
So I unmount the headshell/clip and take a look why that happened and I fix the Clip doing pressure ( down ) on it and in this way the cartridge was/is more " firm " there but not tight, this is not posible. If the Clip take hold of the cartridge with different pressure seems to me that the stylus angle change a little/tiny.

Lewm, no that never happen with my 981.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear T_bone: I like more the 100C too, I never said other thing.

Btw, where do you read a different opinion of mine or by other person on the 100C against the U205CMK4?

Anyway, good luck with your 100CMK4.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Sear Lewm: I owned the Denon 307 that comes in that way but if I remember this 308 is a little different. You can ask about to the seller if are interested on the Denon.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: This one is very good:

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgtnrm&1277732405&/Denon-DA-308

along the Audio Technica AT-1503-III/IV, and both are removable headshell designs. The new Ortofon tonearms could be a good choice too.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.