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 Dgob: Good to know it but : what were your experiences with the three cartridges at quality performance level?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Tubetan: Talking for me. MM or MI does not really matters on the subject.

I already heard The Voice and the SMMC1/2 , these all SS cartridges.
The SMMC1/2 are B&O MI original designs modified by SS and marketed by SS.
Several times I posted ( and even you can read it on thhis thread somewhere or at the thread page: writed 4+ years ago. ) that IMHO the original B&O MMC1/2 designs were better quality performers than the similar SS ones that are a little on the hi-fi side with out the natural B&O original " signature ".

Even the B&O people has a test on SS rebuilds against other B&O authorized fixing source ( Germany ), this is what they found out:

http://www.beoworld.org/article_view.asp?id=203

+++++ " Moving onto the Soundsmith it was immediately obvious that the two pickups were very different in character. The SMMC20EN appears to have been retuned for the digital age, gone is the smoothness and niceness and in it’s place is a sharper, more aggressively detailed sound that is more akin to that of a CD player than a classic turntable. The SMMC20EN required slightly less down force (1.3 grams) to track correctly but because of its brighter sound the limits of the LP system were more audible, it was never sibilant but it certainly verged on it at times. Some recordings were also overlaid with a steely glare that could very occasionally blur the imaging. For highly produced, high energy music the SMMC20EN cut through the characteristic B&O sound and toughened up the 8000 system in general, if you want to rock and prefer LP to CD then it represents a very worthwhile audition. It was not a pickup that I found relaxing however. " +++++

these is part of that hi-fi side that SS shows and I talked about.

Seems to me that SS voicing is to that hi-fi side. They choosed to design the strain gauge cartridge with out RIAA standard and the cartridge share that hi-fi side.

I send to SS my Win ruby cantilever cartridge to fix it because they works with ruby material and my cartridge cantilever was bent. When I receive it I noted that the cantilever was shorter and after few hours broke and I re-send to SS aclaring that I want the original Win length in the cantilever because I don't like what I breiffly heard with the shorter one.

Seems to me that the SS " touch/magic " goes almost always to that hi-fi side because that's what like these guys.
Almost all the people that retip at SS are very satisfied because their cartridges now sounds better than ever: well all them are hearing a different cartridge voicing almost a different cartridge and nothing wrong with that.

When I send my Virtuoso to SS I was very clear to stay nearest to the original design, as a fact SS try to " push " me in different direction but does not convince me.

Some one told me that Ruby and sapphire has similar characteristics and if I was any of you ( Fleib. ) then I will take the Virtuoso and then send it to Alex in Germany ( whom use sapphire material. ) to fix it. I have to say that Alex not only shows to B&O people his high skills but this guy was the only cartridge fix source that take the Technics 100CMK4 from Dgob and fixed at great satisfactory level, not even VdH wants to take the cartridge to fix it, Dgob was really worried and sad about till we find out Axel.

Anyway, we always could buy SS cartridges if we like it ( not me, today. ) but if we want to find out where the Virtuoso could " arrive " then the Alex alternative IMHO could be the best option.

Btw, I don't have any relationship with Alex.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dlaloum: It appears that almost " float " around resonances/distortions that comes from different product inside/sources and in different kind of it.

The Virtuoso has some design characteristics that helps a lot, additional with what you posted there are:

+++++ " +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Cartridge Highlights External Design Characteristics:

The cartridge came with removable stylus guard which is a good point because we have not to be worried about cartridge stylus guard resonances/colorations/distortion that affect the cartridge signal quality performance level.

The cartridge fortunately came with non-removable stylus that is a good characteristic too due that here again the cartridge does not add didtortions/colorations because the normal plastic stylus removable assembly.

I'm not in love whith its " looking body design " but all in all it is not an important issue for me. What it is important is that the cartridge design body ( metal/wood. ) does not shows resonances/distortions I can detect.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

these characteristics are not shared at the same level for the Signets you name it but for the 9/10 and if you check the plastic stylus assembly of the 20 SS against the AT13 or TK5/7 you can " see " the difference and where came some resonances in the lesser products, we have to remember that all these cartridges are build in reference to a price point and as cartridge designs goes up on that price point as better control on those resonances not only by design but because better build materials.

In the last months your work that you are so gentle to share in this thread has a heavy weight on resonances/distortions because you know that's is in these resonances/distortions where performance differences belongs.

The cantilever is a critical subject about. The LPs were cut with a head with no-cantilever so things are that why not do the same with cartridges on playback.
Dynavector maybe has the shorter cantilever in a cantilevered cartridge and that was the 13D: 1.3cm and we have the non-cantilever designs as Ikeda/Decca or Victor.
If we know that cantilever maybe makes more " harm " than what it helps a solution is non-cantilever designs. But till today Ikeda/Decca had an average successful because it is not an easy task to design/build/execution the " perfect " non-cantilever cartridge that " works ". That's why the cantilever build material as the it self cantilever design is so critical and important.

++ " A reflection of engineering reality? or a reflection of the state of play in the late 70's / early 80's? " +++++

Both but I could think more oriented on what was happening in those days: MM/MI cartridges with high compliance was the " norm/rule ", tonearms designers made their designs for that kind of cartridges.
Take note something weird: the majority of the low mass tonearms were designs coming from USA/Europe and from Japan only Grace that did it in big " volume " sales with Stax and Technics with a lot lower sales.

Now, a matched mass tonearm with cartridge is not enough, you mentioned tonearm damping and I agree with you this subject is critical too to handle resonances/distortions and to avoid self resonances/distortions that's why for several years many of us are " supporting " tonearm removable headshell designs where we can choose different headshells with different build materials that modify resonances/distortions.

Now, it is not only that we know it all that but thet in each one audio system we can be aware of those resonances/distortions and on its changes when we try to damp it or simple we want to avoid those resonances/distortions in favor of accurate and neutral quality performance level.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Griffithds: I just losted the opportunity to hear the CA ( red and untouched. ) because my friend " detsroy " the cantilever of the cartridge he accepted to borrow me.

++++ " It really is a more of you are there type of difference " +++++

this a main characteristic on the SS that certainly ( as you posted ) been an upgrade and that certainly too very difficult to explain/put on words but a subject that involve cartridge overall quality performance level.

Yesterday I had again the Maestro in my system and I'm still hearing a great performance but ( as you said. ) with different tone, softer if you like.

Yes, as you seems to me that with a better stylus the Virdtuoso can be even greater performer. Note that I'm said " better stylus " meaning same cantilever or at least same build material cantilever. Well this is what I would do it but obviously that it's your call.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Delamostrel: I hope you are enjoying the analog experience where cartridge/tonearm set-up being a critical factor that could makes a paramount difference for the better when it's " right ".

I don´t have experience with the Shure 91 but with the 97 and V15III both with SAS/Jico stylus and both are really good and mate with your 1200.

If you want to invest for a " finale one " then my choice today is this one:

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1319872263&/Clearaudio-Virtuoso-wood-

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dlaloum: Nice Shure history. I heard the Ultra 500 when I owned the V15-V and in those times ( what I remember. ) I like the 500 especially its different cartridge body. I was unaware of the Ultra 400/300 till you " touch " it here in the past.

Now, I own the 140 and in comparison with the V15-V the 140 outperform it. The 140 looks a little weird but it is top performer. Siniy123 was the person that let me know about.

The 140 is hard to find and its price is nothing near the bargains we are accustom to. My sample was a NOS that I bought in an ebay auction and I paid over 450.00 for it. There is original NOS stylus replacement for the 140 at around 185.00 through ebay, the 149.00 stylus rep´lacement that you mentioned say it is an Ultra300 that fits on the 140.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Griffithds: I'm with you.

In the other side the Fleib ruby cantilever option is other alternative with way different targets. As J.Carr posted more than once: if you like your cartridge " signature " then re-tip with the same/similar cantilever. A change in the build material cantilever along stylus makes almost a different cartridge that could lose its main " signature ".
Through my years experiences about I'm with JC too.

Now, I'm not against the ruby cantilever option only that's more " different ". I have no doubt that this alternative is a good one.

On this subject IMHO almost all reside on what we want : on what are our targets about. Any option is good one nothing wrong here, we will go for the one that fulfil our targets in better way.
I can say that I would like to try the ruby option or the similar sapphire one ( through the german source. ) but then I need two Virtuoso samples and this tell me that I need to invest at least 650.00 for other cartridge sample that I prefer invest in an Ortofon 2M Black. In the other side I don't want or need to change the Virtuoso " signature ".

Why don't I change the boron cantiler on my Technics cartridges for a ruby one? or with each one of all other top cartridges I own or any one own: either LOMC or MM/MIs?, the alternative is there but then seems to me that in that way we are changing the reference to other cartridge owners.

Anyway, a very specific targets dependable option.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " pre-digital influence carts, " +++++

I don't know what you mean with that but IMHO there are great cartridge designs before and after digital era.

Digital starts with many quality performance problems but if there is one area where I learn from digital and how a frequency range most performs that area was BASS-Low Bass. Till today IMHO there is no single analog system that can even the digital quality performance level in that frequency range area, so I learned from digital and as a fact I'm still learning on this medium as a MUSIC reproducer/tool.

Astrion, now that your " reference information " touched maybe it is time to hear it, I think I have not months but years that I don't " touch " my Astrion as the Shure 140.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: I'm sorry but IMHO you are wrong on the Signet subject: it is to easy to compare the 20SS plastic assembly and the Signet ones and " see " why the Signets have more resonances and no I don't think my Signets are " defective " but that my system has more resolution that's different.

My cartridge comparisons are not the type ( as yours. ) that tweaked " one cartrridge to see if is more competitive, normally I do nothing other than a near " right " set up and that's all. Try to tweak " every single cartridge is a " endless history " even with 3-4 cartridges but with 100+ is out of question.

The Sinet/AT subject is " old " hystory that I decide to forget because there is nothing more to learn when there are a lot of other cartridge alternatives looking for us. I touched in my last posts because some one else " touch " it and I'm only refereing to but not because I have more interest on those average/mediocre cartridges against other top top performers. I don't know why you don't want to advance and stay sticky over there IMHO you are better than that and deserve something better to speak for.

+++++ " I expect you already know this? " +++++

if you are refering of what AT stated: that's what I always supported and support and give advise about with out knowing what AT thought about. If you are refering to the CD influence sure it has an influence in the same way that tube sound had an influence in some SS electronic designs.

Timeltel, do you know that at recording studio level exist plug-inns to mimic the analog distortions/colorations that enginners on digital recordings use it to fulfil customer expectations?, " stupid audio world " we have.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: I bought not one Signet sample but three ( I already sold one. ) and there is no difference.

Btw, I think you missed my post on AT line. What I remember of it is that it is near a Siny123 post with his opinion about.

Yes, the Astrion and 140 deserve a " serious " listening.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Ecir38: With out take my notes I think that I added 400pf-450pf to an Exel cartridge and one of my ADC ones.

I have to say that that was time ago but anyway valid in my system. The capacitance subject always is system dependent and of course what you hear through that system.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Fleib: Overall I agree with you. No, there is no " one size fit all ". The cantilever been a critical an important factor on cartridge design is just one of the carrtridge design factors, that's that is only part of the cartridge. Of course that a cartridge designer has to analize full characteristics on diferent build materials on cantilevers and its " shape ". The cantilever must fulfil the designer cartridge performance targets: thi is that the cantilever must help to achieve those designer targets.

A cartridge designer ( as almost any audio item designer. ) is like a chef that can cook with the same ingredients different " plate " flavors.

For a good chef having on hand: aluminum, boron, ruby or the like perhaps is not the most important part but how he can cook around any of thgose " ingredients " to an specific " flavor/taste ".

I think that are at least two critical characteristics in cantilever materials: transmitting speed and self resonance/distortion control.
Transmitting speed is essential and critical for the music reproduction: dynamics and transients are two characteristics that makes the difference with different cartrridges, as higher transmitting speed as we perceive better cartridge dynamics due to faster transients. At the other side as more self-free of resonances/distortions the cantilever transmit the signal in purer and precise way " incrementing: dynamics and the " feel " of faster transients that we can percieve as: power, power that only the live music has.

Yes, the cantilever design is important and maybe more that we can think but I'm with the statement that say that " the best cantilever is no cantilever ". In real terms the best cantilever represent in the signal reproduction a " delay " in the signal transmition that means a downgrade on dynamics and transient speed.

In the 80's I owned the Dyna Nova 13D that was a very expensive cartridge, I bought from a Dyna distributor in Laredo, TX who put on sale his demo sample for me at a " bargain " price that I can't refuse. Unfortunately in those times my audio system performance was well away from today but even that maybe this was the best cartridge I owned in those all times. I remember that almost always the cartridge put me nervous when I used because that to short cantilever. Not only me but even the Dyna dealer can't explain the importance of that tiny/short cantilever.

Looking to the Virtuoso one its cantilever looks as a " gigantic ". I wish and would to have that Nova 13D on hands to give a listen on today audio system standards, I think that this Dyna could be a revelation but why Dynavector grow-up with out " return " on design to its Nova 13D? I don't know.

Btw, we don't see the 13D very often on sale over the net and this means its owners knows what they have.

regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Nandric: Characteristics ( stand alone ) of any material are at our hand all over the net.

For me speaks on aluminum ( or other material ) alone has no sense in the cartridge overall design.

No, I'm not " angry " for your post, things are that our targets here are different, I like to speak on any subject inside a " live " environment that could make not only sense but that tell me something to learn inside that environment and no I don't like to answer a question with other questions but some times my way of think makes me to arrive this way.

Your question about aluminum material is similar as if I ask about Shibata stylus shape ( stand alone. ). It is different if I ask about that stylus shape inside a specific cartridge design/targets.

Anyway, go on: you know that even that some times I did not show this way: I'm open mind almost always. I can't learn in other way.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Nandric: IMHO the " euphonics " is in the designer hands and not in a specific " in self " part of that design.

A designer can choose to achieve an accurate and neutral sound/performance in the same way that he can choose different level of item colorations on different frequency ranges to " motivate " the customers. I hate these ones.

Now, in electronics design it is much easy to achieve that accurrate/neutral item because if you are a good designer you even don't need to voicing it but when we are talking on transducers like cartridges or speakers you need to voicing it and you did/do this through an audio system and trhough your ears ( designer ears. ) that not always are accurate and neutral.

Yes, I know that you don't like the answers that tell you: this is acomplex " task " but the reality is that this is a complex task/subject. At the end we are in the designer/market/profit hands. I already told you that manufacturers/designers are like a chefs and they will cook what the market are waiting for: euphonic sound, unfortunatelly the majority of those euphonic sound audio items are non-accurate and far away from neutrality against a few audio items that have euphonic sound and are accurate and neutral. There are different level of euphonics performance.

I owned the Myaby Ivory ( a very expensive cartridge. ) that when I owned my system was a poor one and I think never permited that the cartridge shows its best performance. I sold it to a friend with a top audio system and when I heard at his place I really can't believe how good the Ivory was and I was really sad ( for my self. ) because I " losted ".

Last time I heard a Myabi was two years ago in San Diego: I heard it in an unknow system for me and what I heard at first does not like me to much because the owner was loading the cartridge over 500-700 ohms then I suggest him to go down to 100 ohms and things change for the better and I can tell you that the euphonics I heard were inside an almost accurate/neutral performance in that system context.

Live Music has its own euphonics " weight " and that's why Music wake-up each one emotions/feelings, so I'm not against euphonics in this regard/meaning.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgob: Do you read what J.Carr posted on phono stages?, IMHO that's how your Phonolinepreamp was designed but on " steroids ".

No I'm not presume on that design but facts are that it " falls " under that description and was so " tempt " to leave pass.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: I was and am a little busy working-playing with that Neumann correction and with the AT-95SA ( I will post on this latter. ).

I have both at hand so time to go in deep about.

Dlaloum posted that the NC could or can gives more " airy " or transparency to the whole performance ( or something like that. ) and makes sense for any one to think in this way due that that NC gives some gain in the high frequencies.

I found out as a main charateristic in my audio system: more coherence- better " unity ". The " difference " between both frequency extremes now seems to me with better equilibrium and this makes that overall tonal balance improve in favor of better quality performance level.
Now, unfortunately I don't know which recordings were cut with that correction but for what I read almost in all recordings exist some way or the other this type of correction if at/with different frequency.

IMHO while subtle the improvement is notable and really welcomed. I have to follow in this RIAA correction tests but if you ask me today about my answer is: that I think I can't go back, I can't hear with out that NC again.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgob: Maybe is time that you give a in deep listeninbg test to the Neumann option.

My take here ( other that my tests about really likes me. ) is that if the majority of recordings came with this " correction " then apply the inverse one is what IMHO we have to do. This is exactly the same " stage "/meaning than the RIAA where we need to apply the inverse on the phono stage to be " there " but now to be really " there " IMHO I think we need that inverse NC that as me you already have in your Phonolinepreamp.

I would like to know your future experiences on this subject, thank you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Fleib: My sample runs great at 100 ohms.

Dgob, I respect JC on the DL-100A that's very good but IMHO the DS1 is way better and yes the Highphonic D-15 is very fine too: you have to remember that the Highphonic people came from Denon.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Jcarr: No, we did not. Now that you are touching the NC on LPs permit me to ask: what do you think about? makes sense ( it makes sense to me. ) to work with?, yes? good, no? why not?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Ecir38: I can assure you that that post will be welcome!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Plinko: I can add some info to what Fleib posted.

Along CA I think that the Shelter 201 and Sumiko Pearl are medium compliance but for what I remember there is no low compliance MMs other than the Ortofon Arkiv/Night Club or the like that are for specific works ( DJs. ), these cartridges runs at 3gr- to 5grs: you can try it!. Seriously the other " normal " cartridge that I think has a lower compliance is the Decca london :12 cu. but again nothing in the low compliance range.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Banquo363: I understand your oint and agree/disagree. I agree with the T_bone " take " about science and its importance.

In theory I think all what each one of us in our each one home audio system perceive / ears sense. ) has a scientism explanation ( by physics/mathemathics and other formal disciplines. ) and I have no doubt about but ( unfortunately always are " buts ". ) things are that till this " moment " there is no single scientist " model " that involve all the parameters, alternatives and relationships that are inside in the audio reproduction whole subject but not only that but there is no scientist model that explain: what to measure, where to measure, why to measure, how to measure and its scientist interpretation.

IMHO that's why science " fail " on audio. Even that fact we have several objective " tools "/measures that along the subjective opinion helps to have a better idea of what we are hearing.

Now, our each one subjectivity is in some ways a " science " kind discipline not formal one but empirical that all we acquire through several experinces years.

The problem with this empirical knowledge is that we learn/ned not only the " right things " but the " wrong " ones that we took it and let stay as " weigthy " part of our subjectivity with out aware that information is plain wrong. This fact explain in part why we ( fortunately ) agree or disagree in between on different audio topics/subjects.

Learning physics or mathematics in formal way has no place for what is wrong stay in our mind as " right ": we know that 2+2=4 and not 9. Many times in our empirical subjectivity behavior 2+2=15 and we are entitled with that result and disagree when some one afirm that 15 is the wrong answer and 7 is the right one and we follow in disagreement when a person said: hey guys it is not 15 and not 7 but 4.

It is not easy for a person that learn and that been/was " trained " ( by the AHEE. ) that 2+2=15 that suddenly agree with other person that the real result is: 4. This is what we found out often in forums like this one.

Over the last years I try ( learning and training. ) that in almost every single audio subject 2+2 always be 4: a big 4 or small 4 or cloudly 4 but always 4.

Several of my differences with some of you is only because of that. When for me those seven's cartridges including the Nandric beloved 7V are only average performers for some of you are a lot better than that.

Yes, I'm telling that all of us must follow learning to improve our each one ignorance level ( me included. ). I did and try to do every single day.

Btw, normally almost no one likes " objectivity " because in some ways think that then audio discussions could lose some " fun ". I think is the other way around because now with that " objective " weight we have more " guns " to talk about.

Syntax poste a thread about the greates MC cartridges with out any frame/context ( objective. ) to compare and decide according it.
Almost everyone goes and posted and they styll doing and its right no problem here.
I posted on that thread twice about the convenience to have standards/references/frame/context to compare and decide which are those great MC cartridges and you know what: no one posted any single word on what I posted. This confirm in some way what I said here: people think that with that " frame "/context ( objective one. ) fun is loosed so they prefer ignore about.
Btw, Lewm and Jloveys ( there ) were the only persons ( maybe A. Porter. ) that posted something not specific as me but something that was related with.

This is the way we are! but the exiting point is that WE ALL CAN IMPROVE.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: Thank's. I don't know when but I will do as sooner I can.

Seems to me that you are enjoying LPs as never before, good.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear banquo363: Again I agree/disagree with you. I think that the main " trouble " in our hobby are us: us as human being and what this human being involve.

I'm not a devotee of " church of physics " but as you recognize its importance in our hobby. IMHO there is no single audio link in the audio chain where science it is not " there ": electronics design, cartrridges, tonearms, speakers, etc, etc. and yes if it is true that with out specific science ( physics, mathematics, mechanical, etc, etc. ) disciplines all those audio links can't " exist " ( at least in the way we know. ) it is true that with out each one designer " subjectivity " ( that involves not only: listen but scientist skills. ) those audio links can't exist either.

I don't think that our hobby is not dictated by objective science I think it is ( like it or not. ) in the same way is dictated by subjectivity: both " doctrines " live together and have not only a very close relationship but a hard mix in between.

Fleib open that window that many of us even don't know exist ( and this is my main point about the 2+2=15 instead 4. ) with his elephant example and this is what I'm trying to say...Several of us in the whole audio subject grow-up with that chain and for different reasons we stay that way with out break it, we did it only with few audio subjects and many times we never did it.

I always think that science ( different disciplines. ) is not only a great tool but the only one that ( some time in the future when exist those " models " I'm talking about. ) can help us to understand not only what goes on around what we are hearing but why we heard what we heard even that each one of us are " unique/singular ". Of course here we have to leave out subjects like: why I like rock and not jazz or classic music or why I prefer digital over analog and several other deep subjective subjects.

My take is that we have to use more often the " objective " approach not over the subjectiv one but along it.

The great cartridge work that Dlaloum is entilted shows to any one the importance to take in count objective factors/measures along subjectivity to make judgements more precise on cartridge quakity performance.

Objective tests are help me in many ways to understand the importance of different kind of distortions in cartridges during playback. I learned the importance of the cartridge tracking self abilities in favor or against quality performance and how I found out this?: when I begin to run tracking cartridge tests ( years ago. ).
Before I been convince of the main and critical importance of this cartridge tracking subject I don't care if this or that cartridge were able to track ( example ) the Telarc 1812, who cares?, I was thinking in the same way that the majority of the audio people think: who cares about that Telarc when there is no other single recording that was/is recorded that way ( it does not matter in what frequency ranges. )?

Well this kind of way of think was fine till I understand was wrong till I understand the vital importance overall job that the cartridge stylus tip must perform. If we want to hear what is in the recording the first " demand " is that the cartridge can extract " intact "/complete/no-distortions added and a main subject/factor to did/do it is the cartridge tracking ability to stay always in the groove and I mean it: stay always in the grooves and not jumping ( microscopic level. ) every single 1/100 sg.
IMHO with out specific tracking tests ( objective. ) we can be aware not only the cartridge tracking abilities but the generated distortions either. IMHO exist a heavy weight ( more than what we could think ) tracking distortions in what we heard/hear and we are not aware on it or only a few are, well I'm one of those " few " and this fact is part of the why's in my cartridge quality performance opinions.

Anyway, IMHO as more objective tools we use as more understanding we have of what audio is around us and these objective toold not only not precluide or leave in the dark our subjectivity but only enhance it and of course leave safe and live each one " singular " virtues/bias.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Near the end of the post we have to read: we can't be aware not only... " instead we can....

R.
Dear Ecir: Thank you. Looks fine and seems that works!. Good that we can handle those set up dip-switches from out-side.

I see you are using Holco resistors, these are good ones but I prefer Caddock. Btw, through M. Percy you can get very good polyestirene/polypropilene pf caps ( page 14 in his catalog. ). These two alternatives can make a difference on quality performance. Of course that this does not lower merits to your design, it is up to any one of us tochoose those parts as we judge convenient. The main subject is what you already did it with the design.

Thank you again.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Ecir38: I was unaware of these Irc resistors, looks and seems to me as very good option. Is this your first time you use it? which are your experiences with?, they have to be very good for you mix it with the nude ( first rate. ) Vishays.

Regards and enjoy the music,

Raul.
Thaks to both of you. Now seems to me that's time for IRC tests.

Vishay and Caddock are neutral resistors ( if both have its own signature as almost any electric/noc part. ) but if IRC outperform both then this say a lot and in the other side has lower price than the Caddock and Vishay 102 not say the nude version.

Thank you again.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Did you try a MM/MI cartridge along your Denon DP-80? with which tonearm?.. Thank you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: I don't know why that " noise " about tantalum. I know that Audio Note use it in their electronics but I have to say that Audio Note has a colored signature performance.

I prefer the MK over the TF and of course the nude ones. I'm looking for dead neutral resistors/non-signature ones. Reading throught the TTI site ( the IRC manufacturer. ) seems to me that at least their resistors are very well made.

Now, Ecir38 report an improvement using in a step attenuator and fleib likes over S-102 and Caddock.

Other " advantage " is that from all these is the one with the lower price what's a good additional factor.

I'm using MK to load cartridges but I'm seriously thinking to use the IRC in my step attenuators, right now I'm using holco and resista and I don't want to invest on the Cadocks if the IRC are at almost the same level or even better.

Maybe if I try on cartridge loading then I can decide but many times the same resistor performs a little different through a different application.

What do you think?, any of you: I need advise on the whole subject and appreciated.

Passive parts has almost no rules, let me explain: I try it almost any single premium capacitor in my speaker crossover: from Hovland to Duelund passing for V-caps/Mundorf/Jensen/Jupiter and even Audio Note and no one of them ( the more expensive like the Duelund's. ) give me the neutral level I'm looking for till I found out Sonicaps: dead neutral so dead-neutral that there are people that hate it and say are liveless: well I don't want a " live " cap but a dead one that let pass the signal with out add nothing.

In the same application I try it too almost any resistor out there from mills to Caddock or Kiwame and I was reluctant to try the Duelund ones not only because its high price but because my bad experience with the Duelund caps but I have to test it and I bought it and in the last two days these resistors are the new guest in my speakers, what can I say?: dead-neutral no signature I can detect, very good surprise I have to say and worth its price if any one are looking for neutrality. Unfortunately there is no Duelund's for other aplications but speaker crossover: they were designed on purpose for.

I will wait for any of you advise.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm/Dgarretson: I use the Vishay nude all over my Phonolinepreamp most critical stages. Fore some unknow reasons the TF's does not works for me as good as the MK series.

Now, I want to test other resistors on my balanced two attenuators ( 80+ resistors. ) and the nude ones are out of question$$$ ( for now. ) and that's why I think on the IRC that Ecir38 are using in his design. I can't make a mistake because I have to un-solder and solder again all those resistors and this is a " heavy " task. I was almost decided for the MK's but when I read on those IRC I'm in serious doubt about.

What do you think?, I'm asking for some help here. Yes, I could try the IRC on cartridge loading and see what happen and decide after this.

Btw, the Duelund resistors at least have the size and shape of a pencil and I don't care about but its neutrality.

Today my speaker crossover are in reality three separate crossovers each one wired directly from the amps and hard-wired.
The tweeter and woofer ones have the silver inductors and a cap ( second order shape. ) and is with the midrange crossover where additonal to the silver inductors/caps are two resistors ( one for each filter. ) and here is where the Duelunds are.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgob: The Neumann correction to the RIAA standard was implemented due to cutter head limitations: it could burn it if goes beyond 50khz during RIAA preemphasis.
So in the phono stage apply the inverse RIAA standard with out that correction and this means that all high frequencies ( ultrasonic level ) goes to infinite with a fall/down shape on the RIAA curve but because during the recording was applied the Neumann correction at 50khz then the inverse could be applied on playback ( phono stage ) and this means that instead that the inverse RIAA curve goes to infinite on those high frequencies stop its falls slope at 50khz.

This Neumann correction imply a deviation of +0.17db at 10khz and around +0.64db at 20khz and goes higher as higher goes the frequency and that transparency and better coherence/integrity you can hear is because of that.

Now, applying the Neumann correction in theory gives a flat frequency response where the inverse RIAA standard with out that correction can't do it. Got it?, I'm not very good for this kind of explanation because my short english vocabulary.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Stonedeaf: Not doubt you are a Shure's fan, I love my ML140HE.

Yes, this cartridge load impedance subject was one of the main " factors " to analysed through the thread , I pointed out just from the begin.

This cartridge load impedance along capacitance load are main and critical issues with MM cartridges and could made ( with the wrong combination values. ) a cartridge that you can see it as night and day depends on those loads.

Good that the thread at least help you in that regard and never is to late to join us: welcome!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Fleib: I re-read several times your post about IRC resistors and I think that because its high ratio between price-quality could be the best road to take for my attenuators: don't you think?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Fleib: Thank you for the link. Things are that I'm using custom stereo Elma attenuators and are the same as Goldpoint that with its SM model seems even better that a custom one even if I choose MK, Vishay or IRC.

Dgarretson, yes by Texas components. Seems to me that are licensed by Vishay but I'm not sure.

Anyway, thank you for the info I think I could go for two Goldpoint stereo V-standard that at 149.00 e/o looks like a good choice with hard to beat quality performance level.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Ecir38: Looks great and seems to me as very high quality and very good option with the " plus " of more attenuator steps against the Elma type but maybe because has a shunt configuration the impedance could be not only constant but a trouble with. Thank you to share the link.

In the past I was using the DACT attenuators tha's similar to the Goldpoint with SMD resistors. I used in our phonolinepreamp battery powered single ended and I have to say that works really wood with high accuracy and very very low colorations.
In fact when we pass to the Essential we want to use it but DACT does not build with 5k resistance and I was unaware on the Goldpoint. So we take the Elma mechanism and we made our attenuators to the Essential needs.

Now, seems that I'm " drowning in a glass of water " because maybe the best way to go ( even using TX/Vishay nude. ) is that I can change in my attenuators the resistors ( few ones. ) between 10-11 o'clock to 3 o'clok that are the ones where ( depending on my cartridges: MC/MM. ) I stay 99.95% of the time and that's it.

Anyway I would like to try the one you link it and this one too: http://www.khozmo.com/products_dale_ladder.html

I have good experiences with the Vishay-Dale but what could happen if instead those VD goes the ICRs? ( series or ladder configuration. ), another option: we will see.

Thank you again to all of you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Fleib: I understand your point on the tantalum resistors but fact is that I don't one that the resistors " improve nothing " but that only let pass the audio signal almost untouched.

In the other side I agree about resistors in speaker crossover but mines are part of the speaker original design that I never touched and that I don't want to go " inside ". That's why I tested several power resistor down there and today the Duelund makes my day contrary to my experiences with Duelund caps that along the Mundorf's IMHO are too " colored " for those prices, on caps I look too for neutrality but you and me know that all caps are not exactly neutrals but the Duelund/Mundorfs are IMHO more far away of that target/characteristic that other ones out there.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: I don't want to comment today about those " differences " in each one quality performance level perceived in each one system with different cartridges other than IMHO all those cartridges performs at average quality performance level. Of course there is a wide explanation about but this for other better time.

I don't want either to touch the subject of " the best " other that IMHO always exist " the best ", some other time we can go in deep in this controversial subject.

Now, good that you like the Virtuoso, it can be in other way, IMHO only with a poor system or a deaf one ears person we could not hear and appreciate the vitues of this Clearaudio MM cartridge.

I already listened with other headshells and with some little differences always performs great, including with wood headshell you could try it with your Yamamoto and obviously with other tonearms, I think you can't be dissapointed.

I think too that you could " play " a little with VTA/SRA only to confirm if the cartridge is " there " or only near " there ", worth this " excercise ".

In the other side remember that my sample has a modified stylus that your stock one not but this speaks by it self of the Virtuoso Wood quality design/execution level.

As more you listen to it as more aware you will be on the recordings content that you was unaware or at least with the Virtuoso those " emotions " are a great experiences to live and to share.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: How do you loaded ( impedance/capacitance ) your Virtuoso Black Wood?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: Thank's. I'm still with the same 2.2 VTf but now that you touched this factor maybe is time to test additional VTF values.

Regards and enjoy the msuic,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Thank you, I'm aware of it. Anyway and as I posted: I don't " feel " well with shunt/non-constant impedance attenuator configuration.

In the Essential design by design the signal pass thorugh only one resistor. I only want to test other resistors trying to find out if I can get a better neutrality level in this application.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgarretson. Thank to you too.

Back to cartridges?: where are " seated " right now? any news from your cartridge tests?

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Dgarretson: Well you are in very good " companion ".

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: I think that now ( because of you. Thank's? ) I have to make my Denon ( similar to Victor. )set up again after 10+ years.

This is not an easy task for me because I have not enough space/area for the Denon and its huge size/weight arm board/plinth'made it from marble or Onyx ( I have both. ). Or maybe could be more simple to me on my SP-10. We will see because now that you mentioned could be a good idea to bring the Denon and play with.

Btw, the Virtuoso VTA/SRA in my set up is only a single " hair " on the positive side: I found out in this way the " I'M there ", neutral VTA/SRA sounds great too as sligthly ( not hair one. ) too.

Now, IMHO canging from one TT other one does not means a necessity to change VTA/SRA because the LP recorded grooves are the same it does not matters about TT or even tonearm: the VTA/SRA IMHO has a direct relationship between the stylus angle and the groove, if we mantain the same relationship ( and we are sure that the " original " VTA/SRA is the best one. ) I think there is no need to re-set when we change TT or even tonearm, at least this is in theory. Could be that the new " resonances/distortions/colorations " ask for that change but seems to me not because a wrong VTA/SRA. What is important too is that with those changes in VTF and VTA/SRA is to check too the azymuth because this parameter change too with those other parameters changes.

Never easy on analog. My reference tracks on my set up proccess help me to be nearest to " there " almost always but nothing is perfect.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Something that I did not mentioned about the Duelund resistors on my crossover midrange speakers is that the ones I talked on my first post ( on this subject. ) were the ones that define the midrange lower frequency works range.

As I posted my midrange needs two filters ( high and low pass. ). Well when I decided to test/try the Duelunds I search to where I can have the best price ( due that are pricey items. ) and I found out that M. Percy was that source but things were that in that moment the ones for the high pass filter value was out of stock and then I have to ordered through Parts Connection.

I received two days ago and certainly these ones are more " important " than the other ones because through these single resistors pass all the midrange frequency range signal on my speakers.

Well, do you think I like it?: NO this could be a misunderstood ( yes I know the best resistor is no resistor but I have to live with in the speaker design. ). Fleib, and I gree with him, said resistor on crossover are lousy but the Duelund shows no sign of it.

It is not only that the whole sound is more transparent/ with less veils and the like ( some items perform with in theory " transparency " till you found out that that transperency is only " bright " distortions. ) but that these resistors contribute to lower the system distortions and the " more " important issue: the kind of DEFINITION that every single note/harmonics now I hear and it is not because before the speakers performance was not first rate because IMHO it was and it is this fact what overwhelming because the Duelund swap improve in a not expected quality performance what already was a " top " quality performance.

What can add other that if " unfortunately " your speakers came with resistor then IMHO it is worth to test that the Duelund ones: just remarkable and un/non-imagined.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: Sorry to insist in a personal subject.

Yesterday my daugther ( with my granddaugther and Juan her husband. ) came to my place for a family dinner as every Saturday.

Normally the system is onn and we listen to CDs over the whole dinner's time and normally too at some time after the dinner and after over-table talking I switch to Lps and I seat to listen.
No one of my family join me on specific to hear LPs ( they stay talking in between or whatever. ), suddenly my daugther told me : dad how clear is the sound!

She is accustomed to hear my system and I can't remember when was the last time he made a similar comment ( I think never did it. ), so that was a " surprise " to me so I talk with her an explain why the sound now is so clear and she take seat and stay listening for a few minutes till she ask Juan to seat and listen ( Juan play piano and sings very good too. ).

A short long history: they been listening LPs for the next three hours: LP after LP.

Today ( Sunday ) I'm listening music ( LPs. ) right from the 8 o'clock in the morning and right now are 3 o'clok in the afternoon and I can't stop.

What a new experience!, for say the least. I heard dozens of systems and I can't remember any that portray the music not only vivid and full of emotional content but so right and true.

Yes, I'm really happy with.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Pryso: Mainly with the AS and Virtuoso Wood in AT tonearm and in my own tonearm design.

I listening too the Technics 205MK4 and the Sonus D5 in Grace and Satin tonearms and even CDs.

In every single set up the main experience is the same and not dependable of a specific one.

Are the speakers quality performance level what were improved.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Fleib: If can help you last time I heard to mine I loaded 100 ohms, as a fact I always load that cartridge at 100 ohms. Works for me.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Audpulse: A tonearm design is not very complex task ( no rocket to the moon. ) but this could covert in something complex depending on the design targets.

Our main target is that in that tonearm any cartridge can shows its better uqality performance level against any other tonearm set up. We are not fulfil this target yet, we are almost there but needs additional tests that are the ones we are doing.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.