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.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas

Showing 50 responses by pryso

Dgob, sorry to hear of your Technics loss. One of my audio buddies has a 100 Mk 4 which he bought new (not NOS). A couple of years ago he brought it out of retirement to listen to again after upgrading his TT but his suspension had also failed. He sent it to Soundsmith but got back the same report as you did -- it could not be repaired.

This is really frustrating when a cartridge receives so many positive reports, yet appears to be so fragile.
Lew, and others interested in stylus shape, back in the last days when Gordon Holt was still at the helm of the good ship Stereophile, his preferred cartridge was a Shure V-15 something-or-other with a conical (spherical) stylus. As I recall he wrote up his comparison with the elliptical version and found the conical to better replicate his master tapes. Since Gordon was so much into Fulton products (speakers, wire) at the time, that might also relate to Raul's comment.

As for the Denon 103 (basic conical version), I appreciate that Raul may not favor it but there remain a good many hobbyists who do.

Like EVERYTHING in this hobby, we can take guidance for others who we respect but ultimately we must listen for ourselves.
Lew, as Fleib suggested, the Teres motor seems to have sufficient mass to maintain its position. I did not heft the one my friend owns but I've seen/heard it in playback several times. In the current set-up with the heavy Micro Seiki, he had a large 2" cutting board (purchased from a hard wood store) routed out for the Teres to provide the proper height. I'm not certain of the string material he uses to drive the MS platter but I think it may be a type of fish line leader.

My friend is very sensitive to speed fluctuations since he played piano and has decades of experience recording classical and jazz performances.
Fleib, if you were referring to the Teres used by my friend, it is a rim drive model, as I described initially.

My friend adapted it using some sort of string to the Micro Seiki.
Dialoum, while I appreciate your research and descriptions, you make one assumption that I wonder about -

"The mechanical resonance is just barely outside the audible area (21k to 23k) "

I realize the 20K audible area is a long-standing assumption, but there has been quite a bit of research in the past few decades that challenges the perspective of high frequency perception. James Boyk was a professor at Cal Tech, audio reviewer, and a concert pianist. He has written articles on research that identifies perception of musical tones well above 20K.

http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm

This is offered not to diminish your findings but to suggest a revised consideration for cause and effect.
Lew, here's a thought. An audio buddy bought a Teres rim-drive motor and controller to try with his Scout. It produced a wonderful (fill in audio adjectives here) improvement over the stock belt drive. That experience encouraged him to try DD so he then progressed though a Kenwood 650, then a Luxman 4xx, each time hearing small but worthwhile improvements.

Most recently he found a belt drive Micro Seiki table (exterior motor, not sure of model #) but was having problems with accurate speed. On an inspiration he set up the Teres in place of the MS motor, using some specialized cord drive rather than direct rim contact. With the Teres motor/controller he was able to achieve correct speed, and what he believes to be the best vinyl playback he ever experienced. For the curious this set up includes a new Ortofon arm, Oyaide headshell, and Dynavector XX-2.
Lew, with your stable of thoroughbreds I wouldn't be looking for any other turntable either. My comments to relate my friend's experiments were just to describe a different application of the very fine Teres motor and control unit.
T_bone, I certainly understand these are all personal choices, but I must admit to some surprise seeing your inclusion of the Triplanar on your list after stating candidates for your museum should "have the design simplicity to make them truly great design".

From that perspective, the MOMA inclusion of the original AR table/arm seems appropriate, except perhaps for that plastic headshell. ;-)
Halcro, do you have the "Seinfeld" reruns on Oz TV? Your "Up is down.....right is wrong" fits perfectly into the Bizarro World. This concept from the DC comics of the '50s and '60s was famously resurrected by Jerry Seinfeld and his writers -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcjSDZNbOs0

Like "furphy", it certainly fits our audio hobby sometimes.

Cheers!
Hi Raul, Since Lew was not the first to ask about your "specific action . . . to achieve your level of perception", others of us might find it to be of interest as well. So why not post it here for all to read?

Regards,
Hearing loss -- I first noticed some hearing loss 20 years ago, so as that increased I got fitted with hearing aids (professionally done, not the $395 specials advertised on TV and in newspapers). Unfortunately the hearing industry has not progressed nearly as far with music reproduction as they have with speech. However, with persistence I've been able to have my devices fine-tuned to the point where they do sound natural for acoustic music. I say it that way since what is "natural" for electronic music?

While I must admit my hearing perceptions are not now (aided) what they were more than 20 years ago, I am still able to enjoy music and perceive differences in reproduction. After all, it is still relative. I regularly attend live music presentations so that I maintain a reference (albeit different than the past) when listening to my or any other playback system. In fact, a couple of my audio buddies have expressed their amazement at my perceptions and comments when we are auditioning any new component.

My advice for any hobbyist realizing hearing loss? Don't expect quality from cheap hearing aids, and exercise persistence and patience with the adjustment process.
OK Raul, I'll ask . . .

Which of your many tables/arms/cartridges provided this "can't quit" experience?
Fleib, you beat me to it. So far as I know Mexico remains in North America. It did not pass Central America and collect 100 pesos while shifting southward.

And while we're on that thought, do turntables in the Southern Hemisphere rotate counter-clockwise? ;-)
Since experiencing the sonic quality DD and rim-drive tables within the past couple of years, I've accepted statements about the importance of (minimizing) stylus drag and constant platter rotation. Earlier this year Michael Fremer made an interesting statement in a cartridge review in Stereophile that seems to address this issue.

"Magnet-based cartridges, MM or MC, are devices that are sensitive to velocity, which is measured as distance over time"

No wonder accurate and constant speed of the stylus tracing the groove is so important to our listening perceptions.
Professor, what is the difference between conical and round? -

"18um contact surface for a 0.7 conical or 13um for a 0.5 round stylus"

I assume that was a typo and you intended to say elliptical but I don't want to put words in your mouth.
Wow, be called to report for a jury selection pool, miss this forum for 36 hours and just look at the number of posts I missed!

Lew, Acman, Dgob, et al, while a big fan, I only heard Coltrane live one time. That was at the Minor Key, a small club in Detroit in the early '60s. I had one of the original Prestige LPs with Coltrane and Miles from the late '50s but that somehow disappeared over the years. I never got into his "sheets of sound" period but love his other work.

Lew I'm sure you know the Miles soundtrack album was released on both 6-eye and 2-eye Columbias. That should be much easier to find than the German pressing although I have no idea about a sonic comparison.

Also, Grado has been offering both high and low output versions of all their wood bodied models for several years. I had a Reference Master several years ago (when only the standard output was available) and it was a very good, if not outstanding cartridge. I've wondered about a low output audition since then.
Hi Fleib, no disagreement with your comments. However speaking for myself, I do wonder sometimes if I become so "involved" with the analytical side of listening that I forget the real reason I'm doing all this anyway. More than once I've ask myself if every change I've made in my audio system over the past 40 years was really as worthwhile as I thought it was at the time, shouldn't I be closer to a live acoustic music experience now? ;-)

BTW, listening to Weather Report is a favored experience for me -- no comparison to trains or thunderstorms.
Professor, you identified the ultimate goal for my system - " just listening to the music instead of the gear". I became interested in audio equipment as a way to enjoy my music all the more. Unfortunately sometimes the tail wags the dog.

It is difficult to worry about which material my cantilever is made from if I'm not involved by the emotion and performance of what I'm listening to. It reminds me of the story from many years ago (although it must still apply to some) about the fellow who only owned ten records to play on his ultra-expensive system -- and they were of either steam-engined trains or thunderstorms!
Don, hope this does not make you feel bad. I bought a Shinon Red Boron from Jerry L many, many years ago. After a short period of use the cantilever collapsed. I sent it to the North American importer (Canada) for inspection and they replaced it with a new one. If you can believe it, it still performs beautifully after all this time, including the suspension maintaining position. Of course it has been in and out of my system during all this time, not in steady use as that would have worn out the stylus long before now. But it still has a nice combination of detail retrieval while presenting a great deal of warmth and body to the music, similar to live instruments!
Don, et al. It must be OK to discuss MCs here since they appear in the title post and Raul continues to mention them from time to time. At least I'll identify which one I'll talk about here. ;-)

Yes, Lew is correct on the spelling, "Shinon" Red Boron. Unfortunately I've not had mine in the system since owning the C&C BENs. But in my long experience using it with my previous Duntech Princesses I did not experience an "in my face" presentation. I would have remembered that since it is a characteristic I don't care for very much. Just a natural tonal presentation, broad frequency extension, nice soundstaging, and a good level of detail that was not over-exaggerated, a fault of many MCs that I suspect has driven many people here back to MM or MI.

One problem is my Kuzma Reference arm has a one-piece headshell/arm tube. Thus changing cartridges is a little time consuming and I'm not about to experiment with 2 or 3 in an evening. Also, after Raul's influence I've bought a few MM and MI carts and I've only heard a couple of those so far. So my list of candidates is a little long. Unfortunately it has been my intention for over two years to set up a different table with two arms, both of which will allow easier cartridge changes (once set up in dedicated headshells). But I won't bore you with the list of reasons why that has not happened yet.

Back to the Shinon, the output is 1.0 mV. The only c-j preamp I ever owned was a PV-5 (long ago) which had (non-adjustable) gain out the wazoo. But more typical gain levels near 40 dB work just fine. I believe I tracked at just a little over 1.5 g. Loading was usually 1K if I remember correctly. I recall the "poor man's Koetsu" reputation and agree that I preferred the SRB to at least a couple of Koetsus I heard in friend's systems, although I understand that was not completely fair. And no, sorry, I don't want to sell it!

With all the discussion here about styli shapes and cantilever materials, it could be a problem when I do need to have mine retiped. I would want the same profile stylus and to keep the boron cantilever if at all possible. In other words, I'd want to keep the sonic character as close to original as possible.
Lew, you make a good point, but so far as I know Shinon has been out of business for many years. If they are in business under another name, or their cartridges were made by someone else who is still in business and anyone knows about that, Don and I would really appreciate learning the details.
Lew, I've heard that singular repair person lives under a bridge somewhere in Scandinavia, rather than on a mountain top in the Alps. Thus, the only way he can be reached it through "trolls". ;-)
Nandric, a few weeks ago you posted "There is however an summary in English : Denon 103 and conical stylus; Lenco Heaven.net/forum (by Thomas). "

I went to the Lenco Heaven site and found I needed to register to read posts, so I've attempted twice to register. Both trys failed. I saw a link to the original article more than a year ago and looked for a translation or summary of the entire article since then, to no avail.

So if you could post a direct link or forward the summary in a PM I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks.
Timetell and Nandric, thank you both for responding. 2-3 years ago I found a reference to Reto's article but it included only the first page and was not in English, thus it only raised my curiosity. Professor your link opened so I'll study that.
Lew, others, re: spherical/conical stylus.

Back in the days when Stereophile was a small format magazine and J Gordon Holt was chief cook, bottle-washer, and drudge, he evaluate the Shure V-15 Type whatever with both conical and elliptical styli and concluded the conical better replicated the sound of his personal master tapes. Thus he named that his reference cartridge at the time.

And as Timetell suggests, Denon would not have sold so many if the 103 didn't offer something beyond durability for broadcast use.

This is not to say everyone should like a conical styli but they might be a good choice for early stereo pressings.
Ecir38, "only +- a mm or two"?!?

Consider that distance compared to the cross section of any modern stylus tip. I would not call it small or insignificant. Accurate overhang/offset is more like one of those dancing angels on the head of a pin. ;-)
Hey guys, I can't add anything to the why? or how? of AS, only a further question.

I recall reading some years ago about Thorens' research on skating force and their finding that correct AS would actually change as the arm/cartridge moves across the record. If that is correct, how can we best compensate for skating force? Should AS be set for a mid-point on the LP (thus an average) or should it be adjusted within the last third (if that is subject to greatest distortion due to the shorter radius)?

Sorry if this muddies the waters even more.
Hi Mike, can you explain how AS is built into an arm to vary as the cartridge moves across the record? The most common mechanism I'm familiar with is the string and weight, attached to pull the arm counter to the skating force. I don't remember much from physics so does that change as the arm moves across the record and the distance of the weight from its support (fulcrum) shortens? I believe other arm designs (your MS?) utilize a spring for the counter force.

Banquo363, setting AS equal (on a scale marker at least) to VTF is a long standing recommendation, including by many manufacturers. More recent thinking suggests that AS should be 2/3 of VTF. Thus a simple example with 1.5 g VTF, set the AS scale to 1. I don't believe any of the AS scales are intended to represent specific weight so it is not 1-1.4 grams.
Hi Lew, et. al.

Like you, my interest in MM/MI cartridges predated Raul's initiation of this thread. Perhaps 20-25 years ago, before most LP production succumbed to the onslaught of the CD, I read about an interesting situation. Sax, Grundman, and several other prominent mastering engineers reported using MM/MI cartridges in their work. Not long after that Robert E. Greene wrote a review for TAS on Stanton and Audio Technica -

http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html

Not being comfortable with the prices of some MCs at that time (as much as $2K, imagine that!) I tried a few Shures and Stantons, but mainly listened to Grados among my mix of less expensive MCs.

I mention this not to take any credit away from Raul and the momentum of interest he created over the past four years, but the MM/MI cartridges had not been totally abandoned by serious music listeners prior to his efforts.
Montepilot, here is a consideration about detail:

You described Max Roach, "when he walked through the front door wearing his black fedora and trench coat carrying his bass". That is interesting since Roach was a drummer.

Now I suppose he could have been carrying his bass drum, but why would that be?

But considering detail in playback, my opinion is this is a result of modern close-mic recording technics. In a live performance we don't typically hear the musician breathing (perhaps other than Glenn Gould), the page turning, or the chair squeaking. They may have been "real" events but they are too low in level to be heard from much distance in a live audience situation. Therefore I am far more interested in the tonal representation of the instruments and how well the emotion of the performance is conveyed. Mouse farts into a cotton ball can easily be ignored.
Lew, re: harmonics.

My understanding is that harmonic tones are multiples ABOVE the fundamental tone, not below it. Thus your example of a pure tone 1K Hz would not have a harmonic at 500 Hz.

Am I wrong? Can someone clarify this point?
Thank you Frogman, clarification is always appreciated.

Lew, I once wondered about more extreme examples considering a given note (middle C in your examples) than you offered with diverse singers. Why for example would a violin, trumpet, and piano all sound so different when playing the same single note? We agree it is the harmonics. The following from Wikipedia states it in terms my un-musically trained mind can understand addressing timbre -

The musical pitch of a note is usually perceived as the lowest partial present (the fundamental frequency), which may be the one created by vibration over the full length of the string or air column, or a higher harmonic chosen by the player. The musical timbre of a steady tone from such an instrument is determined by the relative strengths of each harmonic.
As I related to Raul some time ago, my curiosity about MM/MI was raised long before his initial post here. I had noted different references to well-known mastering engineers using them, rather than MCs, in their work. Now there might be several reasons for this, such as user-replaceable styli (time is money), but I could not imagine them taking any chance on compromising their work will less than accurate cartridges.

Unfortunately I didn't act then by buying up several candidate MM/MI cartridges while they were still available and inexpensive, such as a Technics 100 Mk 4!!! :^(

As for current discussions on Stanton cartridges, I know Doug Sax used them and that seems a pretty strong endorsement to me.
Com'on Lew, this thread has taken enough side tracks without bringing cooking into the mix! ;^)
Dlaloum, I have an early JLTi phono unit (black box) which is stock, other than replacing the wall wart with a regulated power supply.

I've admitted my lack of electronics knowledge elsewhere on this site so I hope you won't mind a basic question. I'm thinking of replacing the input loading from 47K to 100K to allow more flexibility with custom loading using the parallel inputs. Why would 500K, 1M, or any other fixed loading higher than 100K be beneficial?

Thanks.
Grado experts? I recently picked up an assortment of gear from a friend who is moving. Included in that are two Grado cartridges I know nothing or little about.

First, an 8MX. I have some memory of the 8M being a good performer among less expensive cartridges for its time. But I've not heard of an 8MX.

The other is an XTZ which I know nothing about. The package indicates $700 which would have been fairly expensive for a MI back in the '80s or whenever it was new.

I realize auditions for both will be in order but due to my project list that may be awhile. The cantilevers appear straight on both but the fellow could not estimate hours of play for either one.

In the mean time, comments from anyone with experience with either of these will be appreciated.
Hi Don,

No, I haven't seen Jerry for a few years so no idea how he may be doing.

The Grados came from someone else. That guy was very particular about his gear so I'm hoping both of these are in good condition and still have some play time left. What time frame was the XTC offered?
Thanks to all who commented on the Grado XTZ. Now I'll need to move it up in the lineup for auditioning. ;^)

But what about the 8MX, given it was a lesser cartridge? I did hear an 8M years ago when they were current but can't say I remember any specifics. Was there any sonic difference with the MX version?
Dlaloum, what can you tell me about the Grado 8-MX? No one replied to my question a few days ago and since you seem to know about the MZ I wonder what you know about the MX? Thanks.
Raul,

"All these will go to Axel after I make a " fast " test on it"

Perhaps the most important thing I learned since reading your posts over the past few years is the potential for fine tuning any cartridge by not only VTA and VTF but also matching with tonearm, headshell, and loading. Given this range of parameters, how can you make a "fast test" with any meaning?

Even for cartridges where you conduct your more "normal" test/review, do you keep notes for preferred set up with each one? You have auditioned an almost unbelievable number of cartridges over the past few years and I don't know how you would keep track of so many otherwise.
Nikola, that must have made it difficult for your mother to get close to him, unless she was his barber!
Raul, et al -

It seems this street musician experience is one that many of us have shared. For me it was during my lunch hour in our downtown area. I wasn't even on the same street but had to turn the corner and walk another block before I met up with him. Now some might say that hearing a solo sax was clue enough not to confuse it with something from a boom box or open car window. As a jazz fan I've heard lots of sax music, live and recorded. There was no confusion in my mind the moment I first heard him that it was a live performance. Yes I agree some of that was dynamics, but I believe it is more than an unrestricted range from soft to loud. There is also the complete lack of any distortion. These are not precise words but it is an ease and flow with the music. For me, any recorded music seems to have some varying number of thin veils between myself and the performer.

As the wife of one of my audio buddies expressed to him on their way home after a symphony concert, "I don't care how much money you spend or what equipment you try, it is never going to sound like that!"
Part of the problem here may be in how any of us defines a "live music" performance.

Unfortunately, there has been a trend for "electronic" reinforcement to the extent where it is difficult to find a truly acoustic live performance. And once electronics enter the picture can that still be considered live music?

I attend a variety of live performances, everything from folk, world music, or jazz trio/quartet in a small venue (say seating 100 or less) to my local symphony in their own hall (seating 2,250). Many performers show up with their own amps and speakers and insist on using them, even at our best local venue for acoustics, a purpose-built room seating less than 300. Even the symphony resorts to electronic reproduction to correct for sonic deficiencies at seats under a fairly large balcony (I choose seats near the front of the balcony, a location that experience has shown to offer the best overall sonics).

So my earlier comments on differentiating between live musical performances and the experience of home systems must include a footnote. To that point I recently discovered an opportunity to sit in (as a listener) for an evenings two-hour practice session by a local 17-piece jazz band. Other than the electric keyboard, that was completely acoustic. I attended with two other members of our local audio club and we emphatically agreed none of us EVER heard a home music that came close to that experience!
So Lew, just to be clear for anyone not solid in electronics (like myself), testing of the electrical performance of a cartridge (separate from tip wear, suspension, etc.) should be done as follows:

MM and MI - use multi-meter to measure the resistance by connecting to the hot and ground pins of each channel. Is there a recommendation for acceptable differences (%) between channels?

MC - while playing a 1K signal (or similar) on a test record, measure the ACV for each channel at the output of the phono stage. Again, what is an acceptable (%) difference between channels? Also, how do I establish that the gain in the phono stage is the same in both channels?

Thanks for this elementary guidance.
Lew my friend, that is the fallacy of the modern "live" performance. I've complained several times on audio forums against the "apparent need" for sound reinforcement for every performance, even in smaller settings for jazz, vocalist, and folk music.

At the risk of sounding like an old fart (which in truth I am) too many younger people believe mics, mixers, and amps are standard equipment for every performance. One example, attending a local university jazz band performance in an outdoor concourse setting, the sound was dominated by heavy bass from the electric bass and drums. So I walked over to the mixing board run by a student to see he had boosted the 50-200 Hz controls way above the others. Even outdoors, with an 18-piece jazz band playing, why was any electronic reinforcement needed (the bass player was already plugged in to his own amp/speaker BTW). Another example, attending a four-member Celtic group playing in a small church activity room (no more than 100 seats) they had every instrument and vocal mic'ed.

So, two problems, either of which could have impacted your experience. First is the application of sound reinforcement when it is not needed. And second, people running the mixing boards when reinforcement it utilized that have no idea what the concept of "balanced sound" means.

End of rant!
Nandric, in my experience with American-English usage when a home or automobile is rebuilt to bring it back to original condition it is considered to be "restored". This process may be done by either a replacement or refurbishment of component parts. So in my perspective when a cartridge has its cantilever realigned, stylus re-polished, or stylus replaced I would consider it restored.

I think Raul does quite well in expressing himself considering that English is not his native language. Thus I can understand him (I hope) when he sometimes uses words or phrases which I would not, such as refreshed.

However it seems the point of all this is what Axel considers to be refreshed or restored, and to be clear with him what that entails before he begins any work.
"There are no absolutes in audio." Between this statement and the comments on the road to Rome there has been lots of fundamental wisdom reiterated here in the last day.

We all come from such diverse backgrounds in exposure to music and our current listening environments and budgets for this audio hobby are so different that naturally we will have individual tastes and objectives in how we are satisfied.

To me the silliest question I see on the various audio websites is "what X-type component is best?" What is best for Raul will be different from Nandric who will be different from Lew who will be different from Don who will be different from me, etc., etc.

It is perfectly valid to discuss what any of us may have been delighted by, or disappointed with. And making suggestions to others regarding a component they might want to audition is the whole basis for this and most other links. So in my mind there is no place for any "I love this component and you are a fool if you don't too" attitude.

OK, I'm off my soap box now.
This discussion of conical styli reminded me that back in the days when J Gordon Holt was still publisher, editor, and chief writer for Stereophile, he drew a fair bit of criticism for rating his favorite Shure V-15 (whatever) conical version above the comparable elliptical stylus version. But then he was only making comparisons with LPs against master tapes he had of the same performances. ;^)
So Raul, when your musical listening pleasure lasts more than 4 hours do you seek medical attention? ;^)

But seriously, given that you initiated this post to discuss MM and MI cartridges, I would have thought you might begin a new thread to cover your findings with LOMC and SUTs?
OK folks, here is the REAL question. Will Raul's thread reach 10K posts by April Fool's Day? Just think of the implications! ;^)