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 Lewm: IMHO that could be a " simple " anwser but I think things are not so easy.

The tonearm/cartridge behavior/relationship is not an easy " system " but a complex one because so many factors involve or that have influence in the overall quality performance level.

The " system " is more than the sum of its parts because almost each part has its own sub-system, example: the cartridge stylus it is not only a " cartridge stylus " but part of a sub-system cartridge that is configure by: stylus and stylus shape, cantilever and cantilever build material and cartridge suspension ( compliance ) and this sub-system is part of other sub-system configure by coils, yoke, pole piece, etc and then the cartridge body.

On each single cartridge there are differences on the behavior on each cartridge sub-system that makes per se umpredictable/uncertainty quality performance when you mated with the other cartridge sub-systems and " worst " when you try to mate the cartridge with an external sub-system name it tonearm.
That's why is so important the cartridge voicing for through that voicing " tame /flavor " its quality performance level desired.

The tonearm is too a set of sub-systems: bearings/pivot/damping type, arm wand/headshell/build material/damping/effective mass, counterweight and tonearm mount where all these sus-system have its own behavior independent on the cartridge.

To all these we have to add all the " forces /parameters " that exist when the stylus hit the first groove on LP playback where everything happens in a " dynamic " whole system and where there are other factors that have a critical influence in the tonearm/cartridge overall performance: accurate tonearm/cartridge set up, impedance/capacitance loading, VTA/SRA/VTF/Azymuth, stylus shape, antiskating, room temperature, TT own distortions and TT tonearm arm board,etc, etc.

All these parameter/factors has its own influence in the whole cartridge/topnearm performance quality level.

As you can see not an easy task and no easy answers other than " test and error ".

High mass tonearms performs better?, could be with some cartridges but with other cartridges medium mass tonearms could be better or even low mass tonearms.

Today IMHO there are not precise answers that can give us certainty.

Now, your statement that a " good point to start is to have a good tonearm design " is IMHO a good point to start but whom define which is a good tonearm design? where are those tonearm standards that define a good design? it is better a tangential tonearm or a unipivot one against a gimbal one?

I have no precise answers to that. The best we can do for now is: " test and error " and then test again.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " "I need them all" to get the best out of all those cartridges. " ++++++

yes till appear one " universal " tonearm where each cartridge could/can performs at its best.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Last 2-3 weeks I was and I'm enjoying two of my latest cartridge " members " that I bought in the last 2 months. These are the Micro Seiki LF-7 and the Excel ES-70EX4 and for the moment suffice is to say that both already made that I don't " miss " or have to remember cartridges quality performance like the Acutex, Empire D3 and even the 100CMK4, yes both are that good. I think a in deep review is on order.

In other side last week arrived a second sample of the ADC25 an yesterday I mounted and tested all day long where the cartridge showed that the design was a good one but not " good enough ".

I was not fully satisfied with its performance till today that I decided to mount it on a different headshell ( same G-945 tonearm. ).

Yesterday was mounted on a first rate SAEC headshell and today I changed to what for me was ( that's what I thinked. ) a " poor and shame " of AT headshell: thin aluminum with several tiny holes in the top plate/side, nothing to remember other that " you don't want to use it ".

Well what a nice surprise, this cartridge/headshell combination really match and works " on heaven ". Suddenly cartridge life comes and I not only heard it but feel it.

This is an additional experience on the importance to match any cartridge with the right headshell/tonearm more than with the " right TT ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Downunder: On the capacitance loading MM/MI subject IMHO there is no " best compromise ".

Certainly exist a relationship between cartridge internal inductance and loading capacitance but almost always exist along system own performance and this make that in many ways capacitance loading could be system dependent.

In the last few months where I take care seriously on cartridge capacitance loading I set up capacitance values from 50pf tp 450pf ( added to the own capacitance value in the phono IC . ) with no precise single value prevalent. So we need wide flexibility on capacitance values. The difference when the capacitance value is " right " makes a difference for the better and not in tiny way: it makes a difference!.

At least that's what I experienced on the subject in my system. I will continue with " newest " tests with all those top cartridges where in the past were tested with no added capacitance. I will try too that when I already tested all those " importants " cartridges to report on the subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Certainly I did/do not tested all the cartridges out there ( MM/MI or MC. ), even not all the ones I own, but till today I can say that every cartridge I tested sounded from " decent " to excellent level.

Could be cartridges that can perform bad but I have to find it yet. I think that some way or the other all cartridge designs are good and if we find a bad one maybe could be due to a poor excution/build quality design.

In the opther side and talking on the Fr tonearms I appreciate that this time could be the last time to touch the subject in this thread and not for any other thing that because at least three other threads where that subject was discussed on " hot way " were deleted and I don't want that that could happen here and this thread disappear because of that.

Yes, I was one of the persons that puts " fire " on those deleted threads but I can't see or stay " dead silence " when some one try to take advantage on good faith's people in that subject or any other one.

I owned five times those tonearms, I still own a 64 one and enough is to say that I own it mainly to be certain that our tonearm design should not performs in that way.

Lewm, its resonances especially at hf extreme makes " alive " and nice sounding performance that IMHO is away from reality. This is what it likes people along other resonances on the other frequency extreme.
I don't like this level of quality that has nothing to do with music: it is to colored. Some audio systems are not good enough for you can aware of this or just you like those distortions: me no.

Lewm, please don't make I talk in deep on the subject. I respect Halcro and other FR owners but that is not my level of excellence.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Thuchan: From my part there is no problem about. A welcome thread.

Audio experiences always are interesting and " learning " ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dlaloum: Yes, there are some important aspects with some cartridges that benefits from added capacitance. I did not ( yet ) any measures to know if what I'm hearing is " right " about linearity.

The best way I can explain it is to describe my simple process that I follow to discern about the capacitance cartridge value set up:

I made the whole cartridge set up and quality performance playback with 100K loading impedance and with no added capacitance other than the one in the IC phono cable it self ( 150-200 pfs. ).

Here I describe the LPs and tracks on those LPs that I use to cartridge set up:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1246451558&openflup&93&4#93

well, if after the innitial cartridge set up ( overhang, VTA/SRA/VTF/AZ/etc. ) with no added capacitance I can't heard that left percussion sound on the left speaker on that Eagles track then I change from cero pfs to 450pfs. and see what happen.

Till today all the cartridges I tryed and that does not reproduce that percussion left speaker sound now with the added capacitance the percussion sounds comes alive.

From here I listen the same track again but with 100pf lowered ( that's it: 350pf. ) looking for changes in quality or SPL on that percussion sound and if there is no changes then I go further and now I try again with 200pf lower and go on till I heard any single change.

When I heard that change then I evaluate if that change goes against overall quality performance and if goes against then I return to the latest capacitance set up and I left in that way to confirm in a second step and through other LPs the overall quality performance improvement because that added capacitance.

For this I use at least the P.Barber track on that link and the 45rpm version Side one track one on Rickie Lee Jones: " it's like this " recording. At this stage I confirm if everything is for the better and not " exaggerated ".

I'm not only trying to heard those Eagles track percussions ( something like: sshhsh... ) but a clear definition and overall transparency improvement that I can confirm through the other LPs.

It is to tempting to left the capacitance value at its highest number and here is where our each one knowledge audio/music level plays a definitive role to decide the " right " capacitance loading number.

In all cases when I achieve the " right " capacitance value I heard too a very positive and tiny/small bass improvement.

I did not tested many cartridges about and only when I finish with the more important ones I will report on the subject to be absolutely sure.

What I already experienced about could be change with other cartridges so I'm not saying there is a rule down there. Too many factors to " write " rules on the subject. Even I have to re-check all the cartridges tested in that way because I want to be absolutely sure that what I'm hearing is " right " to my system.

Btw, this is not the best time in México city to make/made these cartridge tests because the room temperature inside our homes is lower than the " ideal " one for the cartridges due that here in México city we don't have " heating " items like in USA because here the temperature does not goes so low like there but goes lower that what cartridges likes.
Yes, I think that with 23° celcius degrees things could change.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Hxt1: Good that now you are enjoying better than ever your system through that Denon cartridge, this is all about and what many of os are looking for every single day.

Anyway, I think you had " good times "/fun with the MM/MI alternative while last.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
That's why we are surrounded of mediocrity, that's why some of us are still trapped on the mediocrity.

The main subject on this regard is: why we that are not mediocre people accept that mediocrity with out claim nothing against it but even supported that mediocrity? WHY?

Raul.
Dear Timeltel/Lewm: On the cantilever subject I still consider the cantilever as a critical " factor " either because is the " one " that carry the stylus is the one IMHO with a higher resonance ( mechanical. ) " responsability " is the one maybe with the higher design options and always put its " sound signature " .

There are so many cantilever options: rod, tube, deposited gold, blended materials, boron, Al, beryllium, length, weight, etc, etc that in someways preclude a precise answer to the question: which the best cantilever? or best material or best lenght.
In the other side we have to take in count the whole cartridge design where the cantilever/stylus/suspension is a sub-set as I posted somewhere.

The Empire cartridges is a good example of that where used Al build material cantilevers but outperform several other cartridges that are using " exotic " cantilevers.

In the past Timeltel ask me about cantilever sound signature and today, even that it has, for me is really hard to tell a sound signature cantilever due to build material.
Maybe because I heard the cartridge performance as a whole and don't " dissect " ( I can't do it yet. ) if in two cartridges with different build material cantilevers what belongs ( on quality performance differences. ) in specific to that cantilever and not to a different stylus shape or cantilever lenght or different kind of cartridge suspension.
I can't understand yet how you ( Timeltel ) can do it on precise way.

Btw Lewm, I will email you an article about " equivalent mass ": fact or fiction?. It is interesting to read the concept and how treat the cantilever subject on its overall contribution.
Gentlemans I can't paste here because I have it in " adobe reader " format and I don't know how to do it other than email it.

Timeltel, all what you are hearing is still through your Pionner? or you add something different as phono/line stages: thank you.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: As a fact I'm still learning on the whole subject thank's to this thread and yours and all other great people contributions.

If we take stylus/cantilever as a stand alone " set " then I agree the cantilever has more " weight " on quality performance.
Unfortunately for me that is not so important as is the cartridge overall quality performance level and I said " for me " because I'm on the cartridge own design.

+++++ " "swap" styli has resulted in numerous styli for the same cartridge, wether it be AT, Signet, ADC, Shure, Empire, enough to have some awareness of the difference. " +++++

I agree that we could have some awareness of the difference but IMHO what we can't have is the awaranees that that differences comes precisely from the cantilever. The only way IMHO to be sure about is when we have the same cartridge stylus with two different build material cantilevers.

You have to take in count that even same build material cantilevers with different design " sound " different: it is not the same a 3mm Al hollow tapered cantilever than a 5mm solid Al non-tapered cantilever.

I insist in this because if there is some " formula " out there that can help me to put wide light on this subject I really appreciate that but till today I can't find any precise process that can help on that specific subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: For all your posts and especially the starting ones by Timeltel seems to me that I'm just loosening the " big party " with the Signets/ATs freaks.

I own the AT 155LC but no the TK5e or other Signet but the TK10ML II/III.

Fortunately there are several out there for sale so I will buy one and have my ticket to be inside that " party ".

On the AT line and in my book the AT20SS continue a top the 155LC as the ML180-OCC even the AT-ML160-LC/OCC is a champ on the AT line.

No, I'm not diminished the AT 155-LC that by its own " rights " is a very good performer.

I have to say that what you can read in my 20SS review was experienced with the cartridge mounted in our self design tonearm where the 155LC never had that opportunity so maybe I'm a little unfair with the different cartridges test " environment ".

I don't have on hand that tonearm but I will test the 20SS in the same tonearm or similar to the one where I tested the 155LC and report on it.

The main differences between the 155LC and the 20SS are IMHO exactly what Frogman posted elsewhere ( I think in page 65-66 ) in the thread about: color, rhythmun and alive performance concepts, the 20SS is IMHO superior overall to the 155LC especially on color/rhythmun.

Btw Travbrow, I can't say yet if those middle of line " freaks " are better than the Signet top of the line TK10ML or only " different " and if that " different " performance is nearest to a person's preferences/priorities and not a real better performance .

This is one of the main factors that push me to look for a TK5 sample along to know : what is happening there? how is that one of those freaks even the Acutex quality performance?, I have to hear it because that could means that beats almost any other MM/MI cartridge but the very very top ones like the 100CMK4 or AKG P100 or the Empire DIII, etc, etc.

I have some examples of those freaks with the ADC cartridges and others that I will share after that Sigfreak experience.

Regards and enjoy the music,

Raul.
Dear friends/Halcro: I already have on hand the FRs cartridges 6 and 5 ones ( courtesy of Mario. He worked for five years in Japan. ) along the Signet 5ea.

I was " playing " with all them and permit me to report my findings first on the FRs:

first thing I noted is that these FR cartridges are not low compliance ( Halcro, maybe I'm wrong but I think you states that the FR is a low compliance. ) but more in the medium range and over 12-14cu, I can't be sure but certainly not low compliance. I don't buy either the " idea " that these MM cartridges were designed thinking on FR heavy mass tonearms: makes no sense with a low weight/medium compliance cartridges like these ones.

IMHO these cartridges were designed/voiced with low mid bass ( around 45hz to 70hz. ) " strength " in mind, at least for what I heard in my system.

As J.Carr posted the 5 is a little more refined cartridge than the 6 and shows better tonal balance.

Both cartridges are good at the HF extreme nothing that you can compare against the EPC100CMK4 or the Acutex LPM315STRIII or the AT ML180-OCC or the Azden that's very good on this regard.

Halcro, ( and sorry if I'm wrong with. ) you posted that the cartridge has the deepst low bass you heard and IMHO these cartridges are totaly " normal " on deep bass where the Empires, the 100CMK4, the 205MK4 or the Acutex along the 20ss are a lot better in this regard with true/real low bass, maybe IMHO that low mid-bass coloration " help " to think it had/has better low bass that in reality does not.

I used the same tracks that were in the EPC100CMK4 and 20SS reviews as in the Acutex one along my normal test recordings.

Nothing I heard in the FRs approach the quality performance of all those named cartridges.
Yes, the 5 is a little better but even not on that " big league ".

I tested both cartridges in the G-940, AT 103, FR64 and Lustre GST-801. The best performance comes from the Lustre tonearm.

Anyway a good overall experience.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Waynefia: IMHO the 140LC is worth for a new stylus ( after you tested what you have right now, maybe works fine. ) or the 155LC up date.

Five dollars for it?, that's a real bargain. I think the best you can do is test that cartridge for you can decide which " road " you have to take.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: The one I tested was the 6SE. About compliance you can check against the XV-1 (with VTF in between: 1.8grs to 2.0 grs. ) and see how the FR cantilever with the same VTF than the XV-1 ( I just do it. ) goes down a little further that the Dyna one. Anyway 10cu that you and me can't be sure is the real value at 10hz ( instead 100hz that normaly is the Japanese reference. ) IMHO belongs in the low side of medium compliance.
Maybe in those very old 63 times even the high FR mass tonearms did not exist: I don't know but this is not the real subject.

+++++ " whilst the EPC100MK3 is just a little more 'neutral'.....possibly a tad more 'flat' or 'accurate' if you like " +++++

IMHO the Technics is all what you said where the 6SE is on the " colored " side in a frequency range ( around 45hz-70hz, I can't be sure exactly. ) where my ears are really sensitive and where harmonics ( and up ) puts its " grain of colored salt ".
I think that that " rich deep bass " you mentioned could means everything about that cartridge colorations.
Btw, I don't want to go in deep what I heard through the FR64 against the Lustre and the other tonearms I used.

In the other side I agree that the G-940 is not the best for the 20SS ( my review was on a different tonearm. ) where you have to find the right headshell match. I don't know why but a not easy cartridge for the Grace tonearm.

+++++ " It's a litle disturbing since we agree on most other things and my experiences with the Signets appear to match quite well with Timeltel's " +++++

the latest up-dates to my system ( including the electrical power supply " direct connection ". ) IMHO lowering so down/much system overall distortions that the self/own system limitations factor ( about quality performance level/resolution. ) goes two-three steps down given it a resolution where we can detect " sounds/colorations/errors ) that I was unaware before the audio system up-dates.

Any audio system has limitations ( many kind. ) and is this limitation system factor the one that permit or preclude to " hear things " or hear things at different quality level.

Your system as my system and other people system has lower or higher limitation factor level and this factor makes differences.

I don't know you or other persons here but if it is true that I take every single opinion very seriously and that I give the right importance to all opinions it is true too that I always analyze the " environment/stage " that surrounded/surround that single person opinion, including my opinions!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: I forgot, please test the FR at continuous 95db SPL at seat position with around peaks on the 102db for at least 20-30 minutes and see what " happen ", what is what you experienced?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: Usualy I listen at 83db-84db but when I'm testing my system or a " new " item/cartridge I always make two tests: I heard at around 76db on SPL ( continuous at seat position. ) and at around 95db.

The latest one give you very clear the distortion levels of that item/cartridge and at the same time shows you different " errors/unaccuracies " of that same item that at normal SPL you almost can't be aware of it. Btw, almost all could sound " decent " at 84db: but how good is an item or even your system at a SPL continuous/seat position 76db and 95db with recordings that more or less has a good average SPL over the recording ( I mean with out " piannisimos ". ) ?

IMHO the 5 has lower distortions than the 6se and maybe that's what you are hearing.

This morning I returned both cartridges is not useful for me following on listen tests wwith cartridges that IMHO and in my system does not shows something " interesting " or something that can motivate more listening time, enough for me and as Downunder posted I have to keep walking with the cartridges of the month.

Next post: Signet freaks.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel/Halcro: IMHO a main difference between the Signet freak, the 155LC and the TK10ML3 is on the " I'm here "/cartridge presence factor level:

IMHO the freak has the higher level where the 155LC is in between and the ML3 is the one where there is almost nothing between you and the music.

Yes differences in audio systems makes always a difference: a difference that I think is not like night and day ( I mean all of us are experienced music lovers with full understanding of what that means. ) but more related on that limitation performance factor level that at the " end of the day " means: different resolution level, different distortions ( any kind ) level and different accuracy level, even different system set up level.

About the 20SS you posted that the Grace and MS tonearms are a bad couple for the AT cartridge but this means only that: that those tonearms are not well suited for the 20SS and that's all.
Right from the first moment ( years ago ) I posted in the main thread explanation the 20SS troubles I had with and on the official review you can read under which environment and tonearm I reviewed and yes I like it.

About the ML3 seems to me that you did not found out what to made/make for that great cartridge can shows you its real very high quality performance. I have to say that this one too is not an easy cartridge either but when you finally are " there " you just enjoy music with out nothing in between.

Good that you will put on sale both cartridges because maybe some other persons could enjoy them in a better way that you did not.

Maybe other factor that we have to take in count is that we are talking about quality performance level on vintage cartridges that were builded 30-40 years ago and that the majority of them we bought it second/third hand so differences on cartridge performance could be/happen only because of that.
I have 4-5 samples of the Ortofon 20 FL/E Super and even that all have the Ortofon signature no one performs exactly the same in the same set up. This is only one example where I have other ones.

Dlaloum, I will give you my answer about your questions on the system SPL listening as soon is possible.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: Btw, other than in this thread and because is more easy to find out you can read in the 20SS review what Dgarretson posted.

In VE there are more 20SS owners that really enjoy the cartridge high quality performance.
I'm not promoting nothing with this AT cartridge only an opinion.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " Any audio system has limitations ( many kind. ) and is this limitation system factor the one that permit or preclude to " hear things " or hear things at different quality level.

Your system as my system and other people system has lower or higher limitation factor level and this factor makes differences.

I don't know you or other persons here but if it is true that I take every single opinion very seriously and that I give the right importance to all opinions it is true too that I always analyze the " environment/stage " that surrounded/surround that single person opinion, including my opinions! " ++++++

that's what I posted and when I'm refering to " system dependent " is right to this SYSTEM LIMITATION FACTOR LEVEL ( SLFL ).

What you, other or me like it is not under discussion. IMHO almost all the persons that posted/post in this thread and several that read it but not post/posted are experienced music lovers with differences not on what they like it on the intrinsic meaning of MUSIC but more on score performances kind of level, I mean ( an example on classic music. ) you could like more a same score performance made under Solti direction than under Barenboim or you can like it more the woodwinds section performance level on the Berliner Philharmonihc than in the Viena one but these differences are not really a intrinsic MUSIC perception differences that can/could change our each one overall MUSIC meaning, I try to say that that does not change our perception of how a violin or double bass sounds ( intrinsic sound. ) and its instrument color performance ( as Frogman point out. ).

So for me and due that almost all of us are experienced music lovers what we heard in our system set up and the differences against what other person heard/hear through his system is mainly because that SLFL.

+++++ " Yes differences in audio systems makes always a difference: a difference that I think is not like night and day ( I mean all of us are experienced music lovers with full understanding of what that means. ) but more related on that limitation performance factor level that at the " end of the day " means: different resolution level, different distortions ( any kind ) level and different accuracy level, even different system set up level. " +++++

that too is what I posted somewhere and that maybe we need to re-read.

I can hear/heard in my system what the SLFL permit to hear/heard.
If for example my system frequency range performance goes between 50hz and 10khz it is obvious that I can't hear almost nothing out of that frequency range or at least I can't hear it in a precise way, so my opinions will be under my very specific SLFL environment.

What happen when I read other person opinion that is way different from mine? my first question is not if I'm right or he is wrong but: why he is hearing what he posted? which is the SLFL against mine? ( it is a little more complex than this but it is only an example .)

I'm not worried because you like it so much those Signets freaks against what I like/perceive in my system about the other cartridges I compared against the freaks.

The answer is way simple: your system and my system have way different SLFLand that's all.

I don't think that you think your system is perfect. I know mine it is not and I know too its limitations.

How conscious we are of those systems limitations help to understand in better way other people opinions. I always like to put " things " in the " right "(?) context before give an opinion.

I don't like to speak on other person SLFL but I will do as an example of what I'm saying ( please take it in good shape, I know that anyone that " touch " in any way our beloved audio system could " hurt " us: this is not the purpose in this post. ):

maybe you could think that I'm unaware on your SLFL but lucky I'm: I'm not, things are that in that old times I was in love with Pionner.

I owned a full Pionner system with these items: integrated SA-9800, PL-630 TT and HPM-900 loudspeakers. A good entry level system for those no-high end times.

I was really proud on that system with my friends. Those speakers were good ones and when I seen in the Dady's Disco in Copenhagen ( four of them at the cealing on the dance floor/place. ) my proud goes to " heaven ": I can't belived!!"! ( you know what I mean?. ).

The PL-630 is still working in my brother's system and the speakers/SA-900 in a friend's home system.

I heard your SX that has the same phono stage than the SA. My dream in those years was to own the SPECS separate but I never had that kind of money ( but I heard it several times at dealer room. ) even I can't afford the very good Sansui items.

For today standards IMHO the SLFL in the SX/SA Pionner items is really high.

In those times existed a strong " war " between Japanese audio electronics manufacturers: Pionner, Sansui, Kenwood and the like where IMHO the main targets were on specs and item facilities ( how many " things " the item can do and how many " things/items " you can connect to that item. ) even led colors and how many " lights " the item has.

IMHO the take care on design was left as a second side, all of these audio items were full of ICs ( including your SX and my SA. ), poor layouts, passive and active parts that shows low level quality performance and where the most important target was on the item final price target to compete.

These kind of items were not the Japanese high end designs but only the commercial ones to make the more money they can.

I know your Paradigm too, so in some way I know more or less why you posted and post what you did and do.
In the other side unfortunately ( you are welcome any time to do it. ) you don't know what I'm hearing.

As a whole I think that any of our systems ( any one. ) can/could give us at least a 70% to 80% of the 100% quality performance that could be achieved in a " perfect " system: a system with CERO SLFL.

The remaining/remained 20% is all about high end quality performance level.
This 20% is what really makes the systems differences and the main factor on our each one opinions.

This IMHO is not what I like it but what I hear/heard it because we like what we have ( yes all of us want to improve what we have. ) even if it is not what we really want it as a final achievement.

Timeltel, I'm not trying to dimish your system and what you hear through it I only want to put things in context. As always this is only an opinion and of course exist always ( too ) the possibility that I can be wrong.

Btw, nice history on your friend tube 100K audio system.

By separate I will give the other answers/thoughts about input/output cartridge level and how the phonolinepreamp handle it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Yes our MUSIC preferences is how we are biased and yes a Jazz full orchestra IMHO put similar system demands than big classical scores.

I never be a " fan " of ESLs till I heard Soundlabs ones and you know why: because IMHO it does not sounds as an ESL but as MUSIC.

The ones that own Guillermo ( close friend and tonearm co-designer ) like me a lot. I think it is the latest version first step down the top of today Soundlabs line. Curious, the Soundlab designer recommended him to mate it with the JC-1s.
Guillermo owned Halcro amps that works good with that ESLs but the " magic " belongs to the JC-1s match: no contest by Halcro ones.
OTLs?, I reserve my opinion about.

A short history:

one day I received a phone call from Guillermo who ask me to meet him at his home with out any precise additional information.
I go there and for my surprise ( other that its " monumental " size. )I saw his Soundlabs already " mounted " in his audio room. A surprise to me because 10 days before he had not these speakers.
Things are that he take a flight to Utha for listen these and other speakers ( Wilson. ) and been there by the Soundlabs designer's hand he bought it and take it under his " arms " and return with.

I asked why he decided for Soundlabs instead Wilson and other great speakers out there, he told me: " these speakers has the nearest sound to what I heard/hear in your system " and yes he is right and that's why I like it so much.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " The first group of cartridges, you find pleasing, the other you relegate to cartridge perdition.

Is there is a pattern emerging and has it to do with cartridge output?

Just wondering if you had given this thought. Is there something awry with your phono pre? " +++++

well I don't think that I " relegate to perdition " any cartridge yet.

IMHO the cartridge output level is almost irrelevant when you auditioned it to be aware of its quality performance level if you always work at the same system SPL that in my case is 84db at seat position.
I know that some phonolinepreamps shows different inaccuracies in frequency linearity response at different control volume position but this is not true in my electronics.

In theory as Dlaloum point out a lower output level in a cartridge means lower inductance and less wire from where the audio signal must pass through.
If in theory is important " on the road " things are not exactly the same.
Many LOMC advocates said that lower MC output cartridges sounds better than higher output ones and this is not totally true because if it is true that the XV-1s ( low output ) has an excellent quality performance level it is true too that cartridges with higher output like Clearaudio are great performers too.

IMHO the cartridge design, quality design execution and cartridge set up are the key for determine quality performance level in any cartridge.

In the other side, I raved on all these " high output " ( 4mv and up ):
Shure ML140HE, Sonus Dimension 5, AT ML180-OCC, Empire 600LAC, ADC 25, Astatic MF-200, Azden YM-P50VL.

Btw, no I'm sure there is nothing awry in my phonolinepreamp as you could think.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: I forgot, the phono stage MM overload level in my electronics is 500mv that like in the Dgarretson gear it is not only an overkill value but a healthy/cool peace of mind in the subject.

I forgot too that I rave on my Elac cartridge as in the Empire 750 LTD both very good performers and both " high output " ones.

Btw, do you already heard or own a Micro Acoustics cartridge?, well after a long time I'm just listening to one of my Micro Acoustics cartridges, this time the 630MP and " a priori " it is a revelation for say the least, I will give it more playback time and will report about.

Next in line the Shure M140HE, I want to listen again.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dean_man: Yes you are right. That along the Garrot P77 were raved here for several persons including me.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: +++++ " Can I imagine any cartridge doing more than the TK-7e? " +++++

this is exactly what was my thoughs every time that I tested and put under " serious " review some of the top MM/MI cartridges.

That's why IMHO every month emerge/appear the " month's cartridge ".

I was totally sure that I never find out something near the 100CMK4 or the P100LE before the Acutex or the D4000III or the 20SS or the 630MP or...or...or...

This is part of the MM/MI cartridge " magic ": almost all ( with the right set up ) sounds/performs great!! and through testing it ( as you did and do ) we are discovering that is almost an endless " scenario " of continuous quality performance level of one cartridge over the latest one!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear pryso: If I remember you own those JC-1 monoblocks, right?. So you are a very good " live " reference about.

Could you go further on these amplifiers quality performance level?

Thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Nandric: You are just right. I remember when I did not have enough money to buy DD TT separate ( Dp-80/75s. ). I owned that time the PL-630 by Pionner that was a decent integrated tonearm design but I must " be there " and so I made an effort and bought my Denons.

Same thing happened with my SA-9800 integrated electronics. Friend's status puash me to go for separate ( Luxman/Crown. ).

In the other side were audio retailers whom push me ( along reviewers ) to go for LOMC cartridges that they said it was the " holly grail " on analog source.
MM/MI cartridges? does not make sense for them if we want to belong to that " high end " stage.

We people are so " crazy " time to time!, almost just like the fashion world.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Nandric: +++++ " According to some reviewers the amps with less power sound better then the 'big guns'. Sam Tellig and Art Dudley for example. You will be not impressed I quess but the saving involved by avoiding the JC-1..... " ++++++

IMHO ST and AD are not very good reference on that subject and that subject only means that if in the same amplifier manufacturer line the lower power model sounds better than the higher one ( everything the same. ) then there exist a drawback on the design or execution design on the high power amplifier.
IMHO a good designed amplifier performs good regarding which power gives you.

I agree with Lewm about:

+++++ " I think of amplifiers as a means to an end, and that an amplifier has no importance except to drive the speaker properly. Hence to me the amplifier/speaker form a closed system, much like the tonearm/cartridge. " +++++

the " key " on that statement is: " to drive the speaker properly ", that could means many things but one critical one is to achieve: matched electrically, just like room/speakers match.

Btw, " avoiding the JC-1s?: well IMHO maybe you need to learn/ask ( him ) why the Soundlabs owner/designer recommend those great amplifiers with his ESL speakers or hear those amplifier on a good founded with audio system.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm/Downunder: Agree looks as it cost.

I think one of the main " questions " could be: which advantages give us against ( example ) Mint-LP protractor?, I mean if I already own a MINT protractor that was made in specific for my tonearm/TT geometry specs and that put the cartridge stylus where in theory belongs in my set up: what advantage on that set up could give me that good looking and very good build protractor? ( everything the same, this is ( example ) Baerwald IEC that's ( I think ) how the MINT comes. ).

I know that the Dertonarm's design has additional " tools/options " or even Azymuth or other cartridge set up needs but all these is not what I want to know but a bis-a-bis comparison looking for differences and accuracy set up with the MINT against the DT.

Obviously that Dertonarm could comes here and make an explanation where we all know he is very good doing it.

As you Downunder I would like that a non-biased owner of that device make the comparison against the MINT-LP protractor and could share his experiences with all of us.

In a mechanical device like this IMHO the only way to be sure on improvements or mere differences against other protractors, like the MINT-LP, is under system tests with both protractors on hand, this experiences/facts will be the ones that speaks for it self.

Anyway my congratulations to Dertonarm and wishes for success!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Downunder/all: This is information that I have on the protractor:

" The UNI-Pro's lines and spots are all laser hairline - the sharpest possible.
It's template is true mirror - 3 mm deep parallax. Each template is concave laser-cut to 1/100 mm. The actual "sweet-spot" is 1 single laser shot only. I thought it made little sense to make a spot larger than the stylus itself.
The cross-hair lines are all laser cut - the lines around the needle spot are in a half arc to accommodate the parallax aid lines when actually checking the cantilevers position as well as the cartridge body's azimuth. Furthermore there is a 8 mm vertical azimuth template to check at every possible point across the tangential curve.
The UNI-Pro comes with 3 precision machined POM-adapters for the TT spindle itself. Each adapter has a different center hole to accommodate different spindle diameters ( 7.05, 7.10 and 7.15 mm - others on request ...) so to precisely center each template without even the faintest play.
The template fixed over the spindle adapter then is surrounded by the UNI-Pro's main frame with the positioning linear drive and the magnifier slide.
The UNI-Pro's main frame fits over the template without the faintest play - due to the precisely cut frame and the special concave cut of the mirror templates.

The micrometer driven linear drive allows precise positioning of the locator arm relative to the desired "null point" (each mirror parallax template comes with an individual figure to dial in at the micrometer).
This is to precisely tri-angular any desired geometry.
All this is done in less than 2 minutes.
The magnifier-slide puts the magnifier in exactly the correct position to focus in on the stylus.
You can directly take a bearing on the cantilever and determine whether it is really in right angle to the arc.
I will certainly not mention any other alignment tool here in comparison.
What I am sure about however is, that the UNI-Pro is the first truly universal alignment instrument as it gives the very same precision to ANY pivot (and tangential ...) tonearm of ANY mounting distance and ANY effective length (14" and less that is ...) and ANY geometry.

For important individual tonearms like Technics EPA-series, SAEC, Fidelity Research 64 and 66, DaVinci, Exclusive, Ortofon RMG 309, SME V, SME 3012, Audiocraft 300/3000, 4000, Dynavector, Triplanar, Reed, Talea and several others are individual templates available all made based on the geometry specified by their designers.
All made to the same 1/100 mm tolerance.
A matching P2S-template with 1/100 mm precise readings will be introduced on Audiogon on February 25th.
It will come together with a goniometric tool to determine off-set angle of unknown tonearms.

The UNI-Pro is all precision milled, made and assembled in Germany.
All mirror parallax templates are laser cut here in Munich/Bavaria.
The micrometer linear drive is custom made here in Germany too. "

Btw, Downunder I understand all what the protractor has around it but for me the first main important subject is which advantage on precision/accuracy brings me against MINT/freickert/Denessen and other protractors.

This new protractor puts ( everything the same. ) the cartridge stylus position with more accuracy that any of the other protractors out there?, if yes then I want to " see " the comparison and if there are improvements on quality sound reproduction or could be that the difference in accuracy is so tiny that the audio system can't " resolve " or we could not hear it.
IMHO these questions are critical and I think we need precise answers about from protractor's owners.

I hope they can share those information/experiences with all of us in this forum.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Well Halcro is that person and I'm sure he will come back here to share his experiences and I think that like me you or any other persons trust on Henry.

I like the protractor and its build quality level but for me ( for one or 20 tonearms ) the main subject is quality performance improvement ( over MINT/Freickert or other protractors out there. ) level that I can hear it.

If the DT protractor fulfill that main target this sole fact justify its price and with all what " surrounded " the protractor then I could say : it's a bargain, but not before know that's a real improvement on quality performance.

I have to say that I'm almost " sure " that the protractor can/could fulfill that main target because Dertonarm has the skills to fulfill it through his protractor design/execution .

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm/friends: In theory I'm a good/natural " candidate " for the DT protractor due that I have several tonearms/cartridges.

In normal conditions I should already order it but things are that with our tonearm design IMHO we don't need and after market protractor.

Our tonearm's protractor not only is 100% accurate and user friendly but has all what we need for any cartridge set up.

When my tonearm be ready I don't use any more any other tonearm I own or is out there and I will put on sale all those tonearms.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear pryso: No there are no pictures ( yet ) and we are sheduled by some day in next July/August.

We want that this tonearm be my last tonearm for years to come and we must be sure it will be in that way, this is why we are delayed with.

Price?, no we have no precise idea yet.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear banquo363: Universal, yes that's the whole main target that put Guillermo and I in this excited and learning project.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Thuchan: Yes, this 2011 the tonearm will " see the light " and yes we take very serious the tonearm designer responsability for that tonearm comes with a 100% accurate/user friendly universal protractor for any owner does not needs any after market protractor on cartridge/tonearm set up.

When you and other people will have our design on hand will understand our statements about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgob: The way to go is taking as a foundation the tonearm effective length and that's all. Yes, you can use that protractor.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Till today I'm still " married " with 100K and I don't tryed ( yet ) a higher one, Dgarretson can help you here because he has a impedance load selector for as higher as 250K and I assume he already tryed higher than 100K loads.

In my set up these are the added load capacitance values that I use with some cartridges:

AT ML-180 OCC: 50pf. , Micro Acoustics MA-630: 400pf, Technics 205CMK4: 350pf, Sonus Dimension 5: 350pf, Signet TK10MLII: 150pf, Nagatron 9600: 100pf, Excel ES70XE4: 450pf, Micro Seiki LF-7: 150pf, ADC 25: 450pf and Empire 750LTD: 300pf.

My advise is that if you can leave capacitance alone and independent on the impedance selector.

Those cartridge capacitance loads were " found out " after several tests with several capacitance values, I don't found out a " rule " for this subject ( other that the process I follow to do it. ) where everything were made through my ears " measure tool ".

I'm using the cartridge capacitive load as a critical and very important way for a cartridge " final fine tunning ", said " final " means that we have to take care in deep on these capacitance load changes: not so easy as it " sounds " but when you made the " right " capacitance load cartridge set up you know immediately that that load is " right " against other values. IMHO we need a " process " that can works for each one of us. Till today mine always works and tell me what's happening and what's not happening.

IMHO the cartridge capacitance load subject not only is critical ( maybe more than load impedance ) but makes a paramount difference if the audio system has the resolution for you be aware of those differences.

Good that you are taking care on the whole cartridge load capacitance/impedance subject, good luck.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Obviously that the " right " impedance/capacitance cartridge set up depend mainly on how good is the overall cartridge/tonearm set up, this tonearm/cartridge set up is the main step ( critical one. ) for you can achieve the best of " that " cartridge performance. The other important subject is with which tonearm/headshell the cartridge is mated.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: I forgot that I loaded the great Azden P50VL with added 250pf.

Btw, I writed " great " because today the " emotions " surrounded me ( again ) in the last two days that I decided to try it again, all I can say is: WHAT A PHENOMENAL PERFORMER, yes with capital letters.

I did not heard the Azden for at least 12 months ( when was the month's cartridge. ) now and its great quality performance along that my SLFL goes really lower through that time now this cartridge is showing me things that I was unaware the Azden could do it. This IMHO is a cartridge that honored MUSIC and honored any " best " audio system out there.

Now, I'm not sure which cartridge I will make a " formal " review because I have other cadidates ( including the Shure M140HE ) but I'm taken by this Azden.
Halcro, pity that your sample is out of work/specs because IMHO this could be the " top dog " in your cartridge arsenal.

Lewm, I think that if you can't have two independent selectors for impedance and capacitance then ( after a test between 47k and 100k in that tube phono stage. ) your choice could be a fixed impedance ( either: 47k or 100k. ) with all the capacitance value options you decide.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: I can see your point. I have 10+ cartridges that " float my boat " and counting.

Lewm, as your system quality performance improve and your ASLFL goes down as more cartridges you will find " float your boat ".
Maybe your first " move " could be to achieve that quality performance level before you put on sale any of the cartridges you own.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: That headshell O-ring can give you some kind of " damping " when you need it.
It works?, this is something that only you can tell when you try it in your system because sometimes can works and sometimes don't/did not.

Other than " damping " you could use it to make minute/tiny changes on overhang even you can use more than one O-ring in the same headshell.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: IMHO it is worth that you try some way to bring your Azden to work. It is a facinating performer and I'm sure you will include it in the cartridges you MOVE.

I'm testing it in the G-940 with Grace headshell and I'm doing not in direct-connection fashion but using the adaptor pin connectors.

I would like that other Azden P50LV owners could test again this cartridge and share " new " experiences about ( if any. ) because with my cartridge sample everything improved over the first time I tested, that if I remember was with the same tonearm.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgarretson/Lewm: Do you already have the time to test again the AT 20SS and the Azden one?, thank you in advance for share your experiences.

Btw, I'm testing the 20SS ( again ) loaded with 350pf, very promising.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: What a hell!. From the very first time you mentioned the headshell O-ring I start to testing some cartridges with and with out that rubber O-ring and at least with the ones I did it the veredict is: leave the O-ring in place where belongs, with the headshell as an important and critical link with the tonearm.

I think Iwill follow making tests on the subject a see what experiences could achieve.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: Not only glassy but less natural overall presentation but you only be aware when compare it because if not then with out O-ring things " can be fine ".

Now, that's what I experienced through: AT 20SS, Micro Acoutics MA-630, Azden P50VL, Empire 750LTD and ADC 25. I can't be sure if that is true with other cartridges. Things are that time ago I decided to go " naked " and only a few weeks ago I return to the O-ring.

Headshell dependent?, I can't be sure either but all those cartridges I named are mounted in different headshells so ?!?!???

We need to test each time and decide about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: Mines are only " first " impressions and things could change over time to listening.

Yes, you have to tight the locking collar with " fierce ".

Btw, with the 20SS ( the others too but at differnt level. ) the O-ring makes the sound with more definition, everything is more clear ( not transparent ). It seems to me that with out O-ring " minute " distoretions there are higher and we can detect at frequency extremes where in the higher ones we could think that with out O-ring the sound is brigther and with more openess.

As I said we have " to play " more time around to be sure.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Jcarr: SAEC headshells comes with a non-rubber O-ring, instead the SAECs have a thin metal made O-ring that are fited to the headshell through a tiny screw.

It works?, well I never readed through the SAEC tonearms manuals I own nothing on the whys ( advantages or whatever. ) of that metal O-ring instead rubber one: yes it works but I can't say if better than with out it or than a rubber one, I will try to give me time to make some tests about.

Jonathan, your " thin sheet of lead " advise is the first time I " heard " about other than the SAEC metal one.
I would like that you could share with us your first hand experiences on the subject, it is really interesting.

In the other side you are just right, we have to take care ( deep care ) on those headshell and tonearms little " points " of contact where the cartridge signal must pass: as you point out these connections must be always in pristine condition.
I want to add that the cartridge own pin connectors must be always in pristine condition too so time to time it is good to make a clean " self " service alond the headshell own pin connectors and the headshell lead wires connectors at both extremes.

In many ways and IMHO this kind of clean task always pay high rewards.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: I forgot: the other headshell I owned with a non-rubber O-ring was the Victor LH-1000 that's a beautiful dark grey ( shiny top plate. ) 18grs ceramic one that comes with a metal O-ring this time rounded O-ring and not flat one like the SAECs one.

Btw, the " crazy " Japanese people are willing to pay over 1K for this vintage headshell, crazy!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel/all: As more listening time I take with this rubber O-ring inn as more makes sense that this " coupling " O-ring main target is to damp connection between two metal surfaces ( headshell and tonearm wand ) avoiding " boundary resonances " that at the end IMHO means : lower distortions.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.