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 lespier: I read the same but I can't be sure about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Think on this: when yo have a " perfect " cartridge/tonearm alignment the only alternative when in playback is that that algnment almost always will be out/off??, where maybe a non " perfect " alignment could be ( at random ) with a lower distortions due to that LP imperfections that time to time could put the stylus tip ( at random, I repeat ) in the precise position during playback.

It is clear that waves/wraps in the LP take out that " perfect alignment " as did it different LP weights ( 140grs, 180 or 200 grs. ) but a non-perfect alignment could at random be converted in a " perfect " alignment due that those imperfections could " acommodate " the stylus tip in the right position: I say maybe.

Anyway, the perfect cartridge/tonearm alignment due that was made in static position/motion can asure me nothing about distortions on motion/dynamic position during playback. What can guarantee me is that has different kind of distortions that a non prefect static alignments.

In the other side I'm assuming that during the recording process the RIAA eq was applied with accuracy and I don't have any way to confirm it an that's why I assume was accurate. With an LP I have on hand what proves all its imperfect characteristics where I have to deal with. I can't deceit my self thinking that " an anal perfect alignment in the cartridge/tonearm " could help to lower distortions because in playback that is not true or at least we can't say for sure-
I'm not saying that alignment is not important or that we have to make it with out care.

Lewm, in at least two times in other threads I askb to any one that he try to test with the same track recording three different cartridge alignments: one a " perfect " one, second moving the cartridge position one to two milimeters forefront and third position moving the cartridge one or two milimeters rearward and then listen and compare what you heard on those threee different alignments and wich one likes you more and why. Till today no one posted any answer about other that they have no time to do it. My question was not a question at random but I made it for good reasons. I know the answers but this is not important but that you or any one else be aware of what you get about.

For the third time I ask the same in this post, it is a learning excersice.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Ct0517: IMHO a R2R is a totally and not related source if for no other characteristic because there is no RIAA eq. double process like in the LP source.

Only for your records: IMHO ( for very good reasons. ) the best up dated R2R ( analog ) today is outperformed by the best digital source, no contest here. As the LP the analog R2R has many imperfections too, different ones but imperfections at last that in the digital source/medium has not to deal with. I can think you already know this and this: digital has lower distortions than analog R2R. I'm not talking what you like or not I'm talking of high or lower distortions.

Some other time we can go on on this R2R ( analog ) against digital.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: I know you can hear the differences moving rearward/foreward the cartridge.

Ecir38, you can make the tests out of that " margin " with different geometry alignments, in the other side as Lewm pointed out I'm not talking to " touch " the ofsset angle but only moving in the same plane the cartridge.

As I said that could be an interesting learning's excersice.

Lewm, problem with the RIAA eq is that we can't know for sure the accuracy on that factor during the recording process so I assume was accurate. With the LP on hand and hearing and looking for those differences in a " perfect " alignment against non-perfect one things change because I'm aware of those impferfections that preclude that the overall advantages in the " perfect " alignment theory could be achieved on playback: just disappear/can't be accomplished.
Lewm, before you go on please try it and then come back and share with us your experiences about. If you can do it in other tonearm than the 505.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Stltrains: IMHO independent on AS is almost imposible to have a stylus tip wear even both sides because grooves at each side are different and friction level is different.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " then perhaps Raul will tell us what he has in mind concerning alignment, and hopefully do so more quickly than he has in revealing the identity of his mysterious reference MC cartridge. " +++++

please test it making those f/r cartridge movements and you will have the answer: a better answer that what I can give you. Any one can have answers when test it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: As good as is that P8Es or that Signet you need to find out an Astatic MF-200 that IMHO beats not only those ones but the Grace Ruby that Lewm is listening.

This Astatic is a must to have.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Last day I did it. Normaly when one of you talk about a cartridge performance I give a listen to that cartridge like with the Grace and the AKG or the MF-200 that Idid not bring here but from other of you.

+++++ " Does it not also count that our systems and probably our preferences are miles apart? " ++++

certainly not, I'm not checking which cartridge likes me but which one is better than the other through a comparison well defined and precise process.

Unfortunately and as you said: you don't have the MF-200 on hand, maybe in the future.

Btw, if I can I will test the MF-300 next.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Storyboy: Btw, I decided to modify the Astatic MF-300. I have good expectations about.

R.
Dear Woodchamber: MMC1 and MMC2 are and share same design and build materials, the main difference is that the MMC1 is a hand-selected cartridge.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: Always is important to know and learn why and how " things " works ( as AS and any other audio subjects. ) to make concience of the importance of the set up on that " subject " regards.

Till this moment almost no one posted not what happen or not but what we heard when applying the AS in correct way or incorrect way, I think Timeltel mentioned about but there were no " quorum " to speaks on listening experiences. At the end and after the " learning time " the most important subject ( IMHO ) is or are each one of us experiences under playback.

Same happened with my last post to Fleib where I left a " question " in the air: how to match VTF/VTA with overhang tonearm cartridge geometry set up? because when we make a tiny change on SRA/VTA or VTF exist a change in overhang too and we have to reset this parameter that could change those VTA/SRA/VTF tiny changes.
On this reset set up changes the stylus tip change its position and " reads " the grooves with tiny differences that maybe through playback could like us at random or not.

What are your take here or what do you think about? is there something wrong that I'm unaware? am I wrong? why?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Fleib: As you I had experiences with Adcom and SAE but was many years ago and what I remember due not only to the time already pass but the differences in my system my opinion about is almost useless.

In the other side I can't remember any first hand experience with the Coral one ( direct to Coral. ).

From some months now those Coral, Adcom and Saes cartridges were on ebay/agon sites but I was and I'm not tempted to test one of those cartridgesm maybe we have to do it and see what Coral has to " shows " us.

Maybe some one of the Agoner's could put some " light " on that subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: Or the Astatic MF-200 or the CA Virtuoso Wood re-tipped or, or , or, etc. etc.....to many great cartridges still waiting for you and other people.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Stltrains: IMHO the AKG is nothing les but an stellar performer.

If I remember you posted that was serviced recently by VdH and even that you just can't achieve a " decent " performance. My take is that that sample has a suspension trouble and if not fixed maybe over time you will be experience that " terrible " performance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Stltrains: Certainly not, that cartridge suspension is out of work. Need to fix it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
r.
Dear Stltrains: Yes, this kind of experiences are always frustrating but the good news is that has solution.

Northwest Analog in England could be a good alternative to fix your AKG P100LE Axel and even SS could help too.

That cartridge is hard to get and now that you have it you need to make any thing around for it can works on specs again.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Again, IMHO the Astatic MF-200 is a must to have.

Certainly other cartridges like your Grace Ruby are more easy to find out, even my MF-100 was more easy to get that the MF-200 or the MF-300 and things are that IMHO in the Astatic MF series crown belongs to the MF-200.

I bring " here " the MF-100 and I can't remember whom bring ( lately ) the MF-200 but I say: thank's for that because this lovely " window " was closed and unknow for many of us.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Timeltel: Yes, as I said to many gems waiting for us. So we still have and will have a lot of fun in the coming times.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Stltrains: Alex is the bluebird VdH distributor or is the man whom you bought it?

Yes, VdH should remember that cartridge but I don't think that due to the time already pass VdH could make a revision and fix it by free.

In the other side I agree with Nandric, Axel seems an expert on AKG so this is maybe the best alternative to fix that P100LE, cheking not only the suspension but overall.

The cartridge IMHO is worth almost any effort to " revive " it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: Btw, I tested my AKG ES and overall is a good cartridge but I prefer the P8E.
I know you own it too and maybe you coul give a try putting the time you already given to the ES. I prefer the 8E at both frequency extremes, I think there is where belongs the main differences.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Stltrains: Yes, that AGK P8Es is another " lost link ".

I don't know when but I will compare it against the newest P8Es AKG model ( similar to what is listening Jmowbray. ) or similar P25MD.

All in all the older and different cartridge body/construction P8E original AKG model is a winner.
Now try to imagine a more " refined " performance through the AKG P100LE.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: Thank you for your up date on the SAE. I'm sure that the SAE is a good cartridge even for a HOMC.

I'm not looking MC options to listen it and maybe if I will in the future then I go for the LOMC SAE version or directly to the Choral that appear time to time in ebay.

Yes, 199.00 seems not to much money but maybe you can get an Astatic MF-200 for that and you will get not a god cartridge but a fenomenal one.

Again, thank you for the up date.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " My point is that one can live happily with any one (or two?) of many of these cartridges, that while I believe they all sound subtly different from one another, more than one can be truly "great" or "exceptional". So it is not a tragedy not to own any one particular one of our collective favorites.... " +++++

all this statement is far away to be true, you as other people including me CAN'T LIVE WITH ONE OR TWO!. If your statement be true you and any one else own only one or two and the fact is that no one of us own only one or two cartridges and you know the reasons behind this fact.

Even the persons that are LOMC advocates owns several cartridges because today many persons owns several tonearms.

In the other side " I believe they all sound subtly different from one another, " this is one of the reasons to own several cartridges.

I remember your posts in the past where you " swear " you won't buy any single cartridge again and after those posts you follow buying more cartridges and I'm sure that if you see one cartridge you like then you will buy it.

Btw, I don't know which Astatic MF model Dgob is refereing to but IMHO is very hard to believe that any one with a MF-200 could put it as an " inferior " performer against other top MM/MI cartridges other that a wrong set up or a cartridge sample out of specs that could happen due to its vintage state.

Anyway, I love the MF-200's distortions.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear banquo363: Iown both the MF-300 and MF-200 and according to its manual both cartridge motors are the same so IMHO what you bought was a real MF-200, good.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Acman3: ++++ " He originally said the Astatic MF 200 and 300 were just below the best, but that was 3 years ago. " ++++

I will try the MF-300 next week because now my system is " out of work ".

The MF-200 is perhaps the better tracking cartridge I sawed, it is the only cartridge I tested that pass cleanly my tests procedure and this gave it along the whole design its very high quality performance level.

Easy: the MF-200 always is in touch/contact with the grooves in better way than other top cartridges, this fact IMHO is an advantage.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Jbthree: Good that you own both Astatic cartridges for as you say compare performance in between.

Acman3 comments on this subject were almost with no superiority from MF-200 over MF-300 but that for some kind of music he prefers one model or the other.
This means both are very good.

Acman3: could you tell us if during your Astatic comparisons used both stylus in the same cartridge or each stylus with its own cartridge body?, thank you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Acman3: Yes, I remember what happen in that time.

I bought the three Astatic cartridges NOS but the MF-300 that was second hand. I never give the time to the MF-100 and if I remember the test on the MF-200 was only to know was in good operation condition.
When I mounted the MF-300 I was " shocked " for what for me in that time was an inferior cartridge/performer against both top of Astatic line, I mean " inferior because was the third step model from the top but not because of comparisons in between Astatic cartridge line.

Unfortunaly right now my system is out of work and I can give a listen to the MF-300 but certainly I will do pretty soon.

These MF-200 and MF-300 are just overwhelming cartridges against almost any cartridge in our each one top of the list ones.

The Astatic experience IMHO is a must to have to experience to any music lover.

Oh!, that tremendous applomb that the MF-200 shows with its tracking " power " second to none ( Mf-300???' ).

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: Yes, that's what my post means.

After Acman3 brought to the thread his experiences with the Astatic MF-200 and MF-300 I was curios ( as always. ) to confirm his findings and what a great " surprise " because my MF-200 is a fabolous performer and even better than its bif brother and top of the line MF-100.

I was so sticky with the MF-200 that I refused to test the MF-300 even that Acman3 had very good praise on it and when I decided to my system goes down.

Certainly I need to test in deep the MF.300 that following the Acman 3 opinion I think it is a very good challenger.

I hope you can find out one of these Astatic ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Stltrains: That's is a very good notice, thank's.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " After all, Raul's system and mine are pretty much as far apart in concept as two "high end" systems can get. " +++++

you always support that kind of statement to validate that " caution ".
Till today and even that I posted several times here and in other threads IMHO the only differences between you, me and any other person are the kind of distortions that you have to accept against mines or other person and that's all: system?, who cares.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: I agree with you in that is not always an easy task.

Years ago ( maybe 30 years. ) I remember I glued the stylus assembly of my ADC Astrion and for whatever reason the glue migrated inside the stylus assembly and ruined. Yes, I was not using the righ kind of glue and today instant ones are " safe ", I think.

Now, I glued only those cartridges that are loose, there are several that came tight-fit.

Along this subject the stylus guard is another distortion's focus and IMHO could be a good " habit " to take-off during serious listening sessions.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Griffithds: If that was shipped on the envelope why did not made it any claim to the freight company. The envelope are handle not only with more caution but I understand separate of the normal freight.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Yes, was terrible. 7.8° on Ritcher scale

For a lot lower earthquake Ritcher level many cities collapsed in other countries. When the bridge in Oakland collapsed that earthquake was lower than 7°. The kind of Ritcher level movement we just pass on if happened in LA or the like maybe the whole city dissapears.
We are really lucky we still can talk about!!!

Thank you for your concern.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear L/N/T: All over this thread shows us that we all did not take to much time speaking on the Stanton/Pickering cartridges and this is a little weird because both are top designs and a lot of people own these cartridges including some of us.

I never made a comparison between similar models in the Stanton and Pickering lines, I assume both performs the same because I understand has the same design.
Whom of you can go more in deep with this Stanton/Pickering performance comparisons?

I ubderstand that other than Timeltel Fleib and Dlaloum really knows about and could be interesting for all to put some light on the issue.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Banquo363: Yes, with some cartridges like the Acutexs and Empires it is a little riscky to take off the stylus guar but the rewards are worth to do it with extremely care.

With care any one can do it and like you say " even Nandric can ".

If we saw at the LOMC alternative we take in count that almost no one use " fixed " stylus guard, almost all comes with a ( need to ) removable stylus guard and IMHO are very good reasons for.

Things are that we can't imagine at " microscopic " level how tiny tiny distotions that came from cartridge overall body affect the cartridge level performance. When we , step by step, eliminate those distortion's focus ( like glued the stylus assembly or/and take off stylus guard. ) no doubt we can hear the benefits, of course depending on each one system resolution.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: Last week I was tempted by an ebay auction showed for my surprise ( first time I saw this cartridge on the net. ) a Dynavector Karat Nova 13D ( LOMC. ), as a fact the seller even does not knew the cartridge model but my " eyes " go out when I saw it.

This cartridge for some persons ( I think J.Carr and Dover mentioned here. ) is one of the best out there and a reference cartridge on its own merits.

I was lucky to win that auction for a good price. I don't receive it yet but I'm really exited for and confirm what other persons said it on this item.

Nandric: why even that I own some top and best out there cartridges am I willing to follow buying cartridges?: the expectation to new experiences hopping for a better performer.

Along that Dynavector I bought a Goldring G800 ( vintage ) that I'm waiting too. I read that this G800 with a change in cantilever/stylus is something to own and for at least one person I respect this Goldring ( modified. ) is his today Reference. Better than the MF-200?, we will see.

Btw, I bought the Goldring for a ridiculous price through the ebay UK.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: Maybe a excuse, I have to say a good excuse. The Karat Nova 13D is not a legendary cartridge but the most " chased " cartridge out there.

I have no idea/can't imagine its quality level performance but I trust is people like Dover/J.C whom I respect and whom have only high praise for it.

How can any one refuse to own/listen it when you have the unique opportunity to do it?

Not many persons were aware of this " best chased " Karat Nova 13D, I'm almost sure that if you were aware of its " importance " and you saw it you were bought it: with no excuse for that. Am I wrong?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: As I told you one of the " best chased " cartridge, hard to find out.

I own that AT, recomemded even that that one has no stylus. If you win the auction then you will need a source for diamond cantilever/stylus because that kind of cantilever is the one in its design. I don't know any diamond cantilever source but maybe a sapphire one could works with that AT.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Albert: That's very good performer and is very low output at the same level of LOMC cartridges with low output.

It benefit from an active high gain phono stage.

IMHO better performer than the V15VMR. In the Shure lines I prefer the M140HE but as you say the V15 for its price is very good too.

Try to find an Astatic MF-200 ( vintage. ) or buy a Clearaudio Virtuoso Wood ( current Clearaudio model. ) that in original shape is very good but with a new/retipped cantilever/stylus is a great one, here too IMHO better than your Shure/SAS.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: I forgot. I just bought from the same seller an Ortofon MC-3000MK2 that's a great LOMC contender.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Fleib: Certainly I know what I'm saying. The subject is that you designed an ICs electronics so you have to support it but that does not means is the best way to go only an alternative: as Albertporter said " different ways to skin the cat ".

As with the cartridges on electronics does not exist the " perfect " and the ICs designs are not perfect. As I posted: advantages and disadvantages.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel Thank's to put some light in the Stanton/Pickering.

Btw, many people are " crazy " looking for Stanton/Pickering vintage original stylus replacement when IMHO could be better to retip it to today standards. What do you think in this subject?

Years/moths ago I was reluctant to change " nothing " in a vintage cartridge but through experiences about maybe I was wrong due that the cartridge motors on those vintage cartridges are so good that the improvement through retip to today standards put almost all those gems steps further a top its original " shape ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: Well, that opportunity was not for you this time.

Teh cartridge is very good performer and very low output (0.1mv ) and not easy to handle. I hope you can keep your hands on it in the near future.

In the mean time try to get the G800 by Goldring.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: Great, that's the one I bougth it. Loooks really nice.

How do you compare it against other top LOMC cartridges?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Albertporter: With all respect till today I can't understand why any one invest big big dollars on LOMC cartridges only to degrade its quality performance through a SUT, any SUT at any price. I have to say that years ago I belongs to this LOMC owner's group.

Any top LOMC cartridge demands specific playback/set up " conditions " to performs at its best something that you can't achieve through a SUT. Same demands are asked by the Stanton.

Why invest in high price analog rig that surrounded a top LOMC cartridge only to add a full degradation to the cartridge signal through a SUT. ????? I think that we don't buy a Ferrari and instead to use/mount the Ferrari's tires is asking we mount it on cicle ones: makes sense to you?

I understand that you are happy with ( this is what it matters and not what I think. My post is only an opinion. ) and that that kind of distortions are not only the ones that you like but the ones that you have to accept amd I respect that.

Of course that if that was the only alternative to handle LOMC cartridge well we have to accept it but exist not only other alternatives but alternatives that fulfil exactly what any of those cartridges are asking for: craying for!

Maybe I'm wrong and I'm always willing to learn: am I missing something in this subject that I'm unaware other that: " this is what I like " answer?

I know that you as me and us are part of the AHEE and that's the " road " that the AHEE push to take it in favor of comercial targets$$$. They know are wrong but the subject is not what is wrong or what is right but: business$$$.

Fortunately some of us learned about and in this as other AHEE audio susbjects decided think " twice " before follow the AHEE advices.

Btw, the AHEE was the one that proscribe the MM/MI alternative diminished to our " eyes ".
I like many other persons today know the AHEE was and is wrong.

Anyway, enjoy the Stanton.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Not exactly. What I posted about is that the similar H output is IMHO a little better but I never said the LZS is not a good cartridge because it is.

Certainly IMHO there are better performers out there: vintage and today designs but these Stantons are good contenders.

How do you compare it against your Grace Ruby?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Delamostre1: My experiences with re-tipping vintage cartridges tell me that " always " we can have an improvement, not only because a newer cantilever and maybe a better stylus shape but because when the re-tipping fix works the retipper fine tunning the cartridge suspension that in vintage cartridges due to its time is already degraded.

I'm not saying that you have to send the 9600 to re-tip because I " know " that in its original shape the cartridge will performs very good, what I'm saying is that the re-tip could be a good alternative to improve an already good quality performance level.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Albertporter: +++++ " Many ways to skin a cat, LOMC cartridges have fewer windings and lower internal impedance. Some engineers and designers think this is more important than the high output alternative, " +++++

problem is not with the cartridge designers

+++++ " No way to argue which is best as each ear must decide for themself. " +++++

subject is not what your ears decide or what you like but what is right or wrong.

Years ago I made my self these simple questions: what if what I'm listening that I like it is wrong? what if what I learned through the AHEE is wrong?

the answers to those questions along added other questions/answers were the big step on all my audio life.

For the first time I was aware and was " concious " of the reality and understanded this reality this true. From here I started to destroy to left behind almost all what I learned that were wrong and started to build a new " road " that till today I'm on the way.

I know is not easy for you speak against SUTs due that you promoted through the electronics you have on sale.

I want to put you two examples of two regarded/praised audio item designers whom I respect along one audiophile that I respect too.
One is R.Kartsen from Atmasphere whom know very well the damage that make SUTs, certainly he knows a lot about and that's why his phonolinepreamp is a non-SUT design and certainly not because " many ways to skin the cat ".
The other is J.Carr cartridge and electronics designer whom choosed ( for very good reasons. ) no SUT it his great phono stage design.
The audiophile/music lover is Dougdeacon that for some time was the best advocate to SUTs you could find out till he listened/tested a high gain active stage that he loves till today.

All these persons IMHO choosed what is right because they knew what was and is wrong.

M.Lavigne is another very good example. He owned or at least had on hand tubes electronics with inside SUTs and at the end when he decide to " download " his system choosed for no SUT in favor of active low noise high gain phono stage.

Do you want a reviewer?, well J.Atkinson.

As you I'm not alone and the " crew " are growing up in the same manner than the MM/MI " crew ". Btw, my today cartridge reference is a LOMC not a MM/MI type.

I hope that over time you can get one of the very top MM/MI performers where IMHO you could find MM/MI performers nearest to your beloved LOMC ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.