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 Coltrane'friends: ++++++ " one of Coltrane's most distinguishing characteristics was the hard edge or "bite" of his tone. That characteristic was a huge departure from the softer textured tone that was more common for tenor players before him; even when they were loud and aggressive. This approach to tone was very controversial among players, and many considered this drier .... " ++++++

I never had the opportunity, as Lewm and some of you, to heard Coltrane but through several LPs I own the Frogman post was just on target.
I even fell like Coltrane was always approaching " perfection " on its performance selections and this " subject 2 put some of his performances a little " stress ".

I don't think his sound is exactly " drier " but " precise " and if I have to make a comparison with an audio sytem perfromance I could say that Coltrane is less " distorted " or for no hurt any one less "b textured " more " believed sound " of its instrument voice. I don't think either that Coltrane could be more agresive or with more bite but: different, that's all for me.
I love Coleman H. and others but certainly is different.

+++++ " the amazing beauty in his tightly controlled tone and little (relatively) use of vibrato. It changed forever the way the instrument would be approached. " +++++

absolutely YES.

As many of you I own almost all his Prestige ones and I can't remember one of those LPs where I can say: " hey that Coltrane did not likes me ".
Well we are talink on the subject on the greatest tenors ever. Each one had and has his own merits.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: IMHO I think that all we are fortunate enough to discovered the MM/MI alternative ( vintage cartridges. ) 30+ years after those vintage cartridges were designed because only with our each one today audio systems we really can enjoy and be awared for sure what all those " old " gems have to show us.

Why said I that?: well asking for Philips cartridge experiences ( thank you Siniy123. ) I read an old ( 1970 ) Philips cartridge review where the reviewer had a complaint:

++++ " The bass response is impressive. At a playing weight of 1.2 grams the opening pedal notes of Also Sprach Zarathustra (Decca SXL6379) together with the following crescendos were handled with ease. Piano tone is generally excellent but soprano voice is edgy-reducing treble response to take the bite from this resulted in a dull performance. " +++++

my 412-III SE sample performs just great and with out no " soprano voice edgy " or almost any other complaint I have on its quality level performance, as a fact I have none as Siniy123 poste this cartridge is highly recomend.

I think that was and is pity that even the cartridge designers of those vintage cartridges perhaps never had the opportunity to heard the real glorious of all those gems and we are receiving the " benefits " of those designs.

I think we are fortunate about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
I forgot, this is the link for that review:
http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/February%201970/116/771646/Philips+GP412+Cartridge.+Price%3A+,C39.

R.
Dear Stltrains: +++++ " stayed in my system is my modern speakers and analog source... " ++++

with some vintage cartridges that benefit on today audio advancements. In the years where were build/designed all those great cartridges a real limitation on playback were the it self/own audio devices limtations that today we almost does not have.

This time IMHO are " the vintage cartridge golden years ", better than ever.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends ( Lewm. ): Same body in cartridges is not IMHO a synonymous of same motor/voicing/tunning.

I posted this statement several times for different vintage cartridges including Signets and of course Acutex.
I said that cartridge manufacturers put more " effort " fine tunning their top of the line models that with the step down ones. It is wrong IMHO to think that because the body looks the same the difference is only on the cantilever/stylus manufacturer choice. This could be true between two middle of the cartridge line but not on the top ones-

I have several examples of what I'm saying but the Acutex is a good one:

I own the 320 and 315 ( long nose. ) and even that Acutex said it that in practic terms both cartridges performs the same this IMHO is not true, for my ears the 320 is a superior one even that the 315 is a great cartridge by its own merits.
I think I already posted but here again: do you think that changing the 320 stylus replacement to the 315 body makes this cartridhe a 320?, yes? well NO: the 315 with the 320 stylus performs almost the same ( and I said almost because is difficult to discern about. ) to the 315 and the 320 with its own 320 stylus is still the better cartridge.

I made the same comparisons between AT 20SS and 20SLa and IMHO the 20SS is a better performer and the same for the Signets and other cartridges like Grace 9 series and AKGs.

Cartridge manufacturers are not stupid as almost all of you could think:

I agree with Ecir38 ( thank you for the link and to Dyna10x too for his link. ) that posted " I doubt been the same ".

Now, with Acutex I send my 315 second sample to VDH and certainly there was and is an improvement beyond even the 320 ( long nose ) and very near the 320 quality performance level ( flat nose one. )

It is obviously that a re-tipped ( cantilever/stylus. ) vintage cartridge can or could performs not only different but better if for no other thing because on the re-tip the cartridge suspension was or will be " refreshed " and this single fact is vital/cfrucial for what we are hearing: this function as a re-tunning/voicing.

I'm not the only one that think that same body cartridge are not the same ( especially top models. ), Timeltel reported that he heard differences between the 315 and 320 ( both are nude stylus and cantilever looks the same material under 50x magnification. ) and if I remember he prefers the 315 performance: the point here is that these Acutex cartridges " looks the same " but performs with differences that almost any one could hear.

Do you think that the Desmond 420 re-tipped one was already converted in the " best of the best " as he are expecting?. My take here is that the 315 or 320 motor is way better than the 420 but unfortunately Desmond has not those 315/320 for comparisons, anyway I will wait for his experiences about.

Lewm, I have no single doubt that if you take your 320 for re-tip you can wait for a different performance on the better side. I posted that my 315 VDH outperform the stock 320 ( not a wide margin but important one. ).

Anyway, independent the " same body " subject a vintage re-tip almost always can give us quality performance rewards.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Acman3: I don't own the 312 so I can't speak on it but I can hear the differences between the 315, 320, 315 VDH, 315 w/320 stylus, 320 w/315 stylus and 320 w/315 VDH stylus and of course differences between all and the flat-nose 320.

No, IMHO it is not my imagination and as I posted at least Timeltel heard differences between 315-320.

I don't doubt in your experienced " ears " but I think that in those comparisons you are not looking for the right " things " to look.
Comparisons needs to have targets in what to look with very specific recording tracks.

Anyway, you are the best judge at your home.

I'm not aware of that Acutex history about cause and effect of that patent.

Yes, normally any cartridge rebuild could be better that in stock or at least different.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dgob: Well for what you posted that 420 will no more an Acutex one other than the name.

Good this is always an alternative with any other cartridges: leave the cartridge fix source that make anything he thinks could improve the overall quality performance level other than only cantilever/stylus changes.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: Inductance, resistance and the like means nothing against voicing/fine tunning a cartridge. Same cartridge inductance/resistance/stylus/cantilever can performs way different only fine tunning different, designer's choice.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: Is hard to go on with you if you can't understand what I posted about because if I'm ignorant on that subject seems to me that you are more ignorant.

I don't want to go to explain that fine tunning through suspension/compliance and other factors including cartridge internal body differences to control resonances and the like.

But the classic example of two amps that measure the same and sound different could be enough for you can understand about.

cartridges are extremely sensitive ( as a mechanical/electrical device. ) to tiny tiny changes every where in the design where you can't know nothing but the designer.

Take a look of what cartridge designers, like J. Carr, offer to their customers on re-tipping: you will receive your re-tipped cartridge with all " new " improvements that were not on the stock unit when you bought it and if you measure your re-tipped cartridge even that measures exactly the same you can hear its designer cartridge improvements and you don't know why.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm, Frogman, Dgob, Fleib and friends: It is weird and pity that when people speaks on jazz/blues/soul music and speaks on the best " instrument voices " many great players are almost forgoten in similar way that the MM/MI against the LOMC. Examples ( btw, I'm not an expert on music or music composition or the like y only have my " body " that tell me about quality perfromances. ): if we take tenors like in this late posts names are Coleman, Coltrane and perhaps Rollins but what about other " tenor's gems " like Dexter, Ammons, Griffin or Zoot- If we speaks about trumpeters first name in the list is Miles ( like here 9 but what about H. Edison or Chet Baker or Eldridge or Dorham. For piano Evans almost always comes first but W.Kelly or Gardland or ...or are at the same level.

IMHO all these different players have their each one merits and IMHO no one of them have to envy nothing to the " names " top players.

Why people dimish or don't take in count almost all them but the " famous " ?

What do you think?

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Yes and my " worry " is why almost all people speak about the " same ".

My take with Miles ( other that his name: Miles. ) for example is that he was surrounded ( on playback. ) for other great names: Coltrane, rollins, Adderley, etc when H. Edison for example was almost a " side man ".

I like Bill Evans a lot but what amde him so famous when W.kelly is at least at the same level and no one almost remember him.

What makes D.Guillespy ( other that his slope trumpet. ) so famous?, nothing wrong with that or with other of the big names I like it all ones but at the same time I like you like other not to famous players that in some ways or some kind of " tempos " are even better than the " greats ".

Which your take here? because this happens not only with jazz but on classic music too, an example of this is Mahler that IMHO at symphonic composition level is even greater that Beethoven but almost no one " knows ". Maybe I'm saying a stupid " thing " with Mahler but inside my no-formal music formation is what I think.
Yes I like Beethoven and tchaikosky too but Mahler is something very especial for me.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: This Dominic is a serious cartridge fix source and not only that but: TTs and tonearms too:

http://northwestanalogue.weebly.com./cartridge-repairs.html

Thank's again Audiopulse.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Certainly I don't dislike them and I understand what you mean for what Frogman posted about Coltrane and now you about Evans and Dizzy.

Yes, W.Kelly or H.Edison or Baker maybe don't contribute in that way for been take in count at that level but even that true their skills and soul are IMHO up with the great ones so as a players it self they IMHO has the same merits than the ones that " count ".

Thank you for your explanation that puts " things " in a better overall " stage ". My ignorance level here is realy deep I have to say , however I prefer listen to H.Edison and even Baker that Dizzy or even Miles. Of course this is absolutely subjective and of course that depends of the recording selections where things can goes the other way around.

The arts like music is fully subjective not like audio. Is in arts where I fully agree there are no absolutes.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Frogman: Thank you, I'm sure that every one here will appreciated your next post:

++++ " Much to say about the previous posts when I have a little more time. " ++++

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Fleib: Thank's too for your information, I need to learn and read and research on the whole topic.

I know why The beatles are so famous and not The Animals or Kinks but other that appreciated their " instrument voices " through their recordings and read the LP cover information I almost know nothing on jazz/blues history.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dgob: I will take my time reading that link: thank you for that.

As seems to that all people agree if MUSIC is all about IMHO, in each musical's genre, is way important to know its " roots ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: +++++ " somtimes the item I payd 20 Euro for in some other shop for 18 Euro and
even this small amount causes me sleeping problems... " ++++

because the Krenzler's post in this Lencoheaven tread?:

http://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?topic=6675.105

nothing wrong with me because any one of us is free to sell anything we want.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: Good to hear from you again.

++++ " the 5ea with any of the styli you mention will offer more detail and faster leading edge transients than the 7SU, " +++++

I know are like apples and oranges and that's why I'm curious about. I tested both ( as usual in stock condition. ) and what I remember is not precisely that way ( it does not matters what I remember, this is not the subject. ), question: do you heard both cartridges with even SPL?, thank you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Perhaps cartridge suspension is the main subject on cartridge re-tip and yes always " suspension refresh " with my cartridges and yes too Axel has: boron, aluminum, berylium and ruby.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: Ok, Ithink understand: we are talking on different subjects, no problem.

No, I think many of us that like jazz like blues too, I just left in my system Prestige pressing: Lightnin Hopkins " Soul Blues " recording.

Blues is very special and even that many times I don't understand very well the lyrics blues really moves me in a different way than jazz.

Regards and enjoy the music,
r
Dear Halcro/Timeltel: That Folk Singer recording is perhaps my more " clicks/pops " recording I have due that I heard it hundred hundred times and still do it.

Btw, Elmore James?: could you give info on recordings?

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: I'm not surprised you disagree on the cartridge suspension subject. In several all around subjects ( in audio and out of audio. ) I disagree too due to my ignorance level and that's all.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Rangefinder: All LPs are warped with different warp " levels " and normally can't do harm to the stylus even in the ones that warped severely.

Now, IMHO when the warp is not wide by to short then the cartridge can jump/skip on it and this depend on the cartridge tracking habilities along how good is matched with the tonearm even in this case the stylus not " suffer " but the LP for the mistracking.

I think there are not to much research on that specific subject , at least I did not read about.

Stay calm about and listen to your warped records.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: That Magic Diamond was a refurbished 103 and that's why...

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Thuchan: Congratulations for you got the 6K+.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dgarretson: I agree that for a LOMC advocate with the right phono stage that Denon is something to own at least for comparisons against other top performers.

I never runned higher than 125 ohms but as you know loading with is phono cartridge-cartridge dependent and ovbiously teh whole system " flavor ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: That's what I remember from the DL1000 where the S1 is way different. I never owned that Dyna ( to expensive for me. ) but heard it in stock status ( not ebony body. ) and was really good and better than the DL 1000 but again the DL 1000 is a very low output so depend mainly on the quality of the phono stage.

In those old times my ignorance level was way higher than today and certainly my system was very poor on quality performance level that even that I owned the X88D ( expensive too. Mine came direct from Japan at lower price. ) I never be aware of its greatest and I sold it after six months with.

I own the 103D and yes is better performer than the entry level 103.

Multicaps: once my system had MIT muklticaps all around till I find something better more neutral ones, today I don't use any single MIT but I have to say that in some applications are good but not an excellent ones. Well, inside my electronics ( SS ) I mainly have teflon caps and in my speaker passive crossover I don't like MIT ones but each audio item design is different and its needs are different.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Storyboy: Phase reversed?, well I never thinked about. I assume you have first hand great exoeriences with that Technics and I'm guessing that if works with the 205 II maybe it could works with any other cartridges but till we test it we can't know about.

Could you share those experiences with your Technics one?, thank you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: Thank's but the thread was and is builded by each one of you, the thread is yours all.

So, congratulations and thank's to all of you that posted, post and seen and read it.

The MM/MI alternative is still alive!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Grbluen2: Welcome a board!.

Well, the AHEE not only convinced almost all of us that the right and only road was the LOMC but today all of us know that LOMC and MM/MI are two very good alternatives " to do justice to our favorite music ". No more " one way ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear T_bone: Nice to hear from you again.

No, my today reference LOMC cartridge is not that 88D, it is something in its own class that shares with no other cartridge.

Btw, if the DACs on your CD player is one of the latest generations then listening to digital recordings is IMHO not " bad " at all but a great experience and a learning one for a skilled listener as I assume you are.

In several sound/music reproduction areas digital is IMHO unbeatable for any analog source. Only an opinion where through experiences you could and are the best judge on this subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear T_bone: I like Ikeda cartridges and through time I owned and own these cantileverless design. As Dover pointed out the Ikeda cartridges are not really friendly and when are in good " companion " and set up it can shows very good performance, what Ikeda cartridges makes it makes as no other cartridge but it is far from be the perfect design or near it.
IMHO there are some MM/MI and other LOMC that performs at better quality performance level.
The Ikeda are perhaps in the lowest ladder step about tracking abilities so distortion and music information are not the best one.

Now, the cantileverless approach on cartridge design is a desired one because " less is more " and the cantilever in normal cartridge designs has a deep influence in the cartridge quality performance level.
I think that the cartridge cantileverless design has a lot of " land " to discover with IMHO great expectations and great rewards when that design " disappear " its today trade-offs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm All are welcomed. Chiles rellenos, cerveza, mezcal and chapulines are ready for all!!!!

Regrads and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nickiguy: I have experiences with the cartridge fixing sources but Expert stylus and as you experienced I have no doubt this one is very good too.

If waiting-time is important for the people then VDH and Axel are the best option: both are really fast and with first rate quality ( as the other two. ), 2-3 weeks could be the average fix time.

In the other side seems to me that Axel has more alternatives ( cantilever build materials and stylus shapes. ) that can fulfil better what we want or what the cartridge asks for.

I have no experience but I think that the guys of today Garrot cartridges in Australia is another source to fix cartridges. Maybe Halcro could put some " light " here.

Btw, that ADC TRX ( all models. ) design was and is a winner and IMHO does not matters whom fixed. Good that you are so satisfied with.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Don: I can't say if VdH deal with ES . Till today all the cartridges that was fixed by VdH the working time to fixing was no more than a week + shipping both ways.

I wonder how that could be if VdH deals with ES.

Anyway, the important subject is that we have different alternatives about, I wish we can have more in the future.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Audiopulse: Agree with Griffithds. Do you have a link for Northwest Analogue? , thank's in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: IMHO Stiltrains is right on that subject.

I know you are looking the " business " and at least some people of this analog forum already know what those humble MM/MI cartridges can shows.

IMHO the today prices for those top vintage ones are a " bargain " a " bargain of the century " for any one. All those top vintage MM/MI IMHO could easily be in the 3K+ cartridge price range due its quality performance level and this is the reality.

For me if you want to own a EPC100CMK4 you need to pay at least 3K for it: its performance IMHO justify that price against other alternatives and if that cartridge was re-.tipped for today status then even more money for it.

Yes, I know that people that does not have yet the MM/MI experience could be reluctant to pay that price.
In the other side there are low very low opportunities to buy any of those top MM/MI cartridges and this is a factor inside the price.

Don't worry you could make your business about.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: That 102 is not even near the 100C ( even the 205MK4 IMHO outperform it. ) and IMHO that 102 has the disadvantage to come with integrated headshell. Its " brother ": the 202 was a Technics entry level.

Specs on that 102 are far away from the 100C or 205MK4. But maybe some one here could ve interested, at the end is a Technics one.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: This link confirm what the other links that Timeltel shares with us about HF human been perception:

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

We have to remember that our whole body works as " ears " on music perception, that's that not only the ears/brain makes that function but our bones and skin and hair ( beteween other biody parts. ) " hear " too.
in the other side our brain synttetize part of what we hear that we can't hear but that we have experienced on that/it.

There are several studies on the whole subject that's " severe " complex and exciting.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: Iheard twice the Magic Diamond: one with a Walker and one in other system.

Is it something special?, IMHO it is not. It is agood cartridge but nothing to remember that helps to say: " hey this is great and better that other top performers I heard ".

I don't know the other two models you posted.

Now, the 103 success IMHO is not because the speric/ conical stylus shape but mainly because its motor. That stylus came with conical stylus because the cartridge belongs to a very restricted consumer price range and not because Denon choosed as the better alternative. To confirm this fact all the other Denons including the top ones were designed with no conical stylus shape.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dlaloum: What you posted you already posted several months ago: intermodulation and UHFC: how to differentiate in between?

Maybe a black art but no precise answers yet. We or some one else has to make deep research about. But what you posted not only not diminish what Timeltel or I already posted through conclusions or links only say that there are some subjects that needs explanation or better tan that: need to test in a sure way to know what in a hell is happening down there.

In the other side intermodulation or UHFC the subject is if in any way we can or we can't hear it. Several research/studies said we can. Point is: why can we have doubts about? or how can we prove we can't hear?: can you? or you agree to disagree. I don't have a test laboratory in home that could permit me to separate IMD from UHFC but certainly this can do it.

Btw, when I add the supertweeters in my audio system not only improved the high/UHFC and soundstage information but improved in an unexpected way the low bass. I think this last happened because the wider contrast between frequency system extremes response.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: IMHO in theory the guy behind the Magic Diamond cartridge design probably is right.

I own a Fulton cartridge ( LOMC ) that comes with conical tip (0.65m ) and has very good specs, example on frequency response: 10hz to 60khz running at 1.5grs.
This cartridge performs really good and if I don't tell you that has a conical stylus you can't even imagine but you could swears comes with a line contact: in this design I don't feel or think I'm missing music recorded information.

The stylus shape is always important but the whole cartridge design including its cantilever is way more important.

I posted sveral times through the years that cantilever build material is more importabt than the stylus shape and other persons confirm that including experts as J.Carr and by coincidence Dominic ( the new fix cartridge source in the " block ". ) quoted me by email this:

" A vast majority of cartridges can be improved by upgrading the cantilevers and tips. Hollow aluminium cantilevers in my experience have a poor performance and are actually quite flexible.
Upgrading the cantilever only, would in all cases offer a major upgrade over an aluminium one.
A mentioned my nickel cantilever. These are hand made individually for each upgrade. They are much stiffer than alloy cantilevers, though not as much as boron. This gives a lovely rich and detailed presentation.
Boron will sound more refined and accurate, and ruby even more so.
Tip upgrades will also help, but not to the degree you may think. There is no getting away from the fact that a micro ridge/line contact tip will give a better performance compared to a conical or simple elliptical tip, offering better frequency extension and groove noise, but even a conical tip will sound very convincing if mated to a better cantilever. Food for thought.
I see many many cartridges, and I find there are so many I could improve quite simply with new cantilevers etc. " ++++

What am I trying to say?: that even a conical tip can works great when mated with the right cartridge motor and the right cantilever.
The 103 motor is a good one but not good enough for a conical stylus as what happened with the Fulton one. Of course the Fulton has a higher price: 600.00 in its time.

Now, conical or line contact no one can through a pivot tonearm to follow in precise way the groove record modulations because of traking errors by the tonearm geometry, tracking errors by the cartridge it self and that is almost imposible to design and set up correctly a cartridge stylus shape that match exactly the groove modulations cutted in the recordings. We belongs to an imperfect world so all what we can tallk about are theory but on playback almost nothing of that theory can be duplicated.

Btw, Nandric all that near perfect protractors only shows a theory behind it but when the stylus is in playback that near perfect set up " disappear 2 due to record imperfections, LP wraps and waves that change the VTA/SRA and VTF. We have to live with this reality and this reality tell us that we have must to live with these full of distortion analog medium. So a discussion about stylus shape is more something academic that useful on the whole audio analogquality performance subject.
We all know that in analog 2+2 not always is 4: some time is 6 and some times could be 9.

Regards and enjoy the music,
r.
Nandric: I forgot, on playback the cartridge overhang that we set up through a protractor is loosed during playback due to records imperfections we already know exist.

R.
Dear Fleib: Those 123 pages were writed through 4 years and through those years we learned many things and thank's to that " learning " some of us change a little on set up with some cartridges.

About tonearm effective mass and cartridge compliance there are IMHO several " roads " each one with its own trade-offs. Yes one of that road to analize is the one you posted because we have to take in count not only what VTF seen the cartridge but that tonearm moving mass along the tonearm effective length.

I made and have a lot of experiences trying to look for real differences on quality performance ( what we hear. ) that we can related not to the tonearm overall design but to that effective mass in the tonearm and the compliance in the cartridge and honesty till today I have not a precise answer about. Is not easy to have precise answers in that subject because to many factors invloved and related in between.

Through this thread and in other threads I posted that I already experienced resonance frequencies between tonearm and cartridge as low as 4hz with out single problem, at least that I was aware, that same cartridge in the same tonearm with a 8hz resonance frequencies where I can't detect an improvement because of this friendly resonant frequency. Of course all these kind of tests were by ear.

The interesting subject could be to bring that kind of " stage " to laboratory level and see what is really happening there and with that information test under playback if those laboratory results could have some sense on what we are hearing.

Other subject that in some way bother me is what you posted:

+++++ " removeable headshells disqualify you from making "ultimate comparisons" " +++++

in my system I have removeable headshell tonearm designs and non-removeable ones. In both cases the phono wires goes directly from cartridge pin connectors to my phonolinepreamp.
I would like to know and appreciate that you can tell us what are the main factors that you took as foundation for that posted statement. Maybe I'm missing something important that I/we are not aware of it: thank you in advance.

Btw, your comment on the M20FL/E gives me the opportunity to test both cartridges again.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: That thread came from 2007 and that's was the first time I was in touch with the MD. I heard it at Slipknot's place on the Walker, the Essential 3150 phonolinepreamp ( I think that with Shindo phono too: I can't remember for sure. ) and Kharma speakers.

From that 2007 thread people were arguing that the MD was/had a 103 motor and I posted there that if that was true does not means performed as a 103 but way different: way better quality.

Nothing is wrong with that 103 cartridge motor, today exist several cartridges that outperform easily the 103 that shares the same motor. This is something as with the AT and CA cartridges and I already posted my take with that was the same as with the 103 and MD.
At the end the quality performance level of the MD is not thak's to Denon but to the MD " designer " as with the Clearaudio Virtuoso Wood.

In the other side I agree with Lewm about that MD designer as a good marketing/business guy.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: ++++ " The crux of the matter is the ability to distinguish between "better" and "worse". " +++

or just different.?????

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Stltrains: I agree with you if and only if those full range speakers are designed with a high frequency driver that can goes to 50khz and at the other frequency extreme the crossover from woofer to midrange is no higher than between 80hz to 100hz and the prefrence is that that bass driver could be self powered.

Regards and enjoy the music,
r.
Dear Dlaloum: +++++ " High compliance, matched with a lower mass arm, as a result passes far less energy on. And as a corollary, requires less damping in the arm - which is a good thing, as damping usually adds mass, and the arm needs less mass not more! " +++++

not always damping add mass to tonearm: what about tonearm build material " self damping "? I mean that that material has its own damping by it self to " kill " those cartridge/tonearm resonances. Sounds like this kind of material ( if exist ) could be " ideal " one for tonearm or arm wands.

Even low compliance cartridges and its transfered energy to the tonearm could be " killed " too.

As with the platter build material in the TT the tonearm build material is the " key " on that regards and other quality performance " subjects " with these audio devices that could include cartridge body construction.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
and don't forget Tannoy ones that Iown that goes to 50khz and others that comes from Japan.

Rgerads and enjoy the music,
R.