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 Acman3: Thank's to bring here the 412 Acutex subject, seems to me that is a promised cartridge and maybe the " all star " in the Acutex 400 series.

I will buy it and test it, seems it deserves that.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Ecir38: Not exactly. The real and deep subject on that closed thread started not because Thuchan and here was not because that copy-cat headshell. Please read what Thuchan posted here and was not because that headshell.

In the other side, no I don't have that link but the ones I owned were bought directly to Japan importer several several years ago and I'm sure were original.

Things with that headshell is that was very well sold it in Japan where hundred of japanese audiophiles " died for it " and because this fact many people in a wrong way ( as me in those times. ) decided to bought it with out think why those audiophile japaneses liked it.

Through the years I learned that several Japan audiophiles like different kind of distortions that we like, they like high distortions and the kind of " audio way of life/system " they own confirm that: Orsonic is only an example of a design that can't fulfil the cartridge needs, was designed with other targets.

Anyway, nothing for I can't sleep.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " I share your reservations about the rigidity of the Orsonic, based only on its physical appearance, although I question whether you could "hear" the Orsonic bending under stress. I would say, "maybe". My interpretation would be that you heard "something" you did not like and that it was absent with the 4 or 5 other headshells you tried. Then you infer that the unpleasant coloration was due to flexibility of the....... " ++++++

and then Thuchan added:

+++++ " The advantage of the real Orsonic should have been a good compromise of the inevitable need to reduce weight without sacrificing stiffness nor the best possible energy transfer. Stiffness is very important.... " +++++

it is clear that all these are only speculations because only the designers knows for sure that headshell design targets that IMHO those targets can't fulfil the cartridge needs but maybe as with many designs today the designers does not know for sure which are those cartridge needs and IMHO this is the real subject.

Anyway, rigidity and stifness are two desired characteristics in some analog audio items as tonearm or headshells but as with other audio design subjects we audiophiles are not exactly sure what all that means in reality and its real importance.

I know rigidity is an important design factor on those analog audio items and I don't diminish in anyway but problem is how can we detected a " weak " on rigidity in a tonearm for example and I tell this because the people that designed the DaVinci tonearm have as an " excuse " for their design does not had the azymuth facility with the argument/excuse that that goes against one main goal in its tonearm design: rigidity and that they don't want to " sacrifice " nothing against a lose of rigidity that could compromise the tonearm quality performance level.
After 2-3 years and when they took in count that a tonearm is a " slave " of the cartridge and due to this fact the tonearm has to help to fulfil the cartridge needs today his top of the line tonearm has an azymuth adjustement that certainly goes against their early target of rigidity and not only this but things are that the today design according with people/reviewer?? is better performer than his full " rigidity " brother design.

Now, if you or any one else read what I posted on our propietary blend build material headshell that I use to made and make several tests with cartridges mounted in normal/stock tonearms with removable headshell design you could see that that rigidity is in severe trouble because my headshells are fasten/hold in place with no nothing other than the pressure ( plug-in. ) of the headshell bayonet that goes inside the hole of the tonearm wand!!!!!
The headshell could move more or less easy to both sides ( azymuth ) and front/rear ( overhang ) even with out touch it!!!!!

Well, even that absolute no rigidity here performs marvelous and shows the importance of the blend materials in headshell designs to fulfil cartridge needs and as I posted there: metal is " the enemy ", no metal build headshell can IMHO fulfil cartridge needs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " I was agreeing with the premise that there may have been some attempt to create a false sense of exclusivity in order to justify what I imagine was a very high price for the preamp. This is done all the time in the "high end" business. Nothing new. " +++++

yes, that is the audio high end history and part important part of the audio products marketing oriented as primary goal..

When we designed our Essential 3160 Phonolinepreamp because we were no marketing oriented because we were no " oficial " audio manufacturers we don't proclaim it.

Today that the Essential 3160 is no more down there as manufacturers I can tell that today still has a radical design that no other designers even attempt or attepted to design and not because we are something especial but because our targets and very especial my audio targets are different.

A similar approach we took with our tonearm design which is a radical design and not only because its exclusive build material but because its operation, a radical one.

I don't like to participate in an audio item design only to achieve " more of the same ", I don't like to copy other people designs. As with the Essential 3160 the tonearm is a radical design, you will see when see it.

My amplifier ( on desk ) motivation for a design is a radical one, something that till today no one attempt to do it or at least never appeared as a commercial product and today I don't know if we can have sucess.

Some of you could remember that I posted that I have on desk a cartridge design well it is on desk till I or we can find out a " radical " way to improve the today cartridge status and not before.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover/Lewm: The Dyna DV-505 was for me for several years a " keeper ", I was looking for a second hand in good condition till I found out and found out too the add-on arm lift.

From the very first moment I mounted cartridge around the Stevenson set up that according to Dyna is not only the way the tonearm was designed but they think is the best set up for it.

Well I really never was totaly satisfied with Stevenson set up till I tested with Baerwald.

As my audio system improved its resolution and my training on set up ( that improved too. ) along it the Baerwald set up in my system is the " best " set up especially against Stevenson and not for a tiny margin I can say.

When Lewm, that I have in high praise, posted that he does not like it its 505 performance he decided to change to Stevenson and the light goes onn!.
This Lewm first hand experience disturb me a little and still disturb me because I can't understand why Stevenson works fine there and not with some of us.

I agree with you ( Dover ) that extremely high sensitivity to tiny deviations on the whole tonearm set up.

Anyway, even today that Dyna is a novel tonearm design, good.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Btw, we can think that the Dyna XV-1s could be extremely " happy " with the 505 but for my " surprise " too and even that the cartridge here sounds good ( is very dificult that the XV-1s can sounds bad. ) it is IMHO not the best match for it.
Dear Lewm: Blended materials. Top today tonearms comes with blend materials where wood is an important one.

When I talked about wood I was not tested all kind of wood. Now, when I say that something does not fill my expectations that does not means is a bad item not it is not. I posted that the Acutex 420 is an inferior performer against the 320s but that I can live with.

What I know about headshell build materials is that row metal ( almost any ) is an " enemy " of the cartridge. In my experiences ( hundreds of test materials. ) the worst were the all metal ones and worst by a wide margin.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
It came along the 23 around 1981. Before these the 270C in 1975.

Returning to the LOMC models the 300MC appeared in 1977 and the performance level with the 305MC ( 1981 ) is really high in between and both were top of the line in its time, I owned the 300 and own the 305MK2.

One additional experiences that I had with Technics were with the top 205C ( next down step to the 100C. ). We can think reading its specs that this cartridge could performs very near to the 100C due that those specs are almost the same.
Well I owned that 205C in MK3 version and never been satisfied with till I was lucky enough to found out the MK4 stylus replacement but even here this was not the 100C but almost there. Btw, the 100C appeared on 1982 and the 205 on 1984.

Try to find out this 205MK4. Yes, I now that maybe you are thinking: hey this Technics 25 entry level could be the " losted Technics link " but it is not easy that this can happen as happened with other cartridges where the entry/middle of the line models performs top top top.

Any way, keep trying.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Yes Lewm, from that point of view every headshell or tonearm is a copy-cat but here we are talking of a unique VTA mechanism " invented " by Dual ( I think there is a difference, don't you think? ). I don't know if exist that mechanism in a headshell before Dual one.

R.
Dear Dean_man: Thank's to share with us that Thorens TP50/TP13A headshell with VTA capacity, certainly I was unaware of it. Thank's again.

I always posted: every single day is a learning day!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: Any one of you was the lucky one that winned the ebay auction for the top of the line Astatic MF-100 gem? whom was?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear pryso; There is no doubt, you and your buddie's wife are right: no audio system will perform " like that "..

Time ago in some other threads some people ( not one. ) posted that some times and ude to the very high quality performance of very expensive audio systems in a home system/retailer room they were " foolished " on what they heard before they knew was an audio system: they thinked was a live instruments/live music.

When I read that I posted that " I respect all your opinions but IMHO that could not happened and if you heard that was because two factors: or you are near deaf or you know nothing about live music performance level ".

As you posted: we can't be confused about!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Frogman: +++++ " in a room with an open window, one block away, can be instantly recognized as live and not a recording? " +++++

that's absolutely true. Months ago in other thread we were discussing precisely what means live music and how we perceive it against recorded one.
In that time I posted one of several experiences that as you several of us already had.
The one I exposed was by coincidence the sound of a music in a horn played for a street-man that goes block after block playing looking for some coins for he can survive ( here in México we have many of this. ).

Yes, you can disguish live music not one block from you but even two or three blocks and it does not matters if what we heard is in an open " stage " like the plain street with all the street noise pollulation.

In that time too I posted that that " visceral " word that used Lewm is absolutely right and is a sinonimus of DYNAMIC, this dynamic is the main difference between live music ( it does not matters seat/micro position and it does not matters at which distance we are. hearing it. ) and any recorded music in any audio system.

Live music DYNAMIC is untouchable by audio system performances and for a wide wide margin.

Frogman, my main target is to have that live music DYNAMICS that's a critical an important factor to feel the MUSIC to feel and develop all kind of emotions that only music can gives us.
So please don't misunderstood when I talk about distortions because IMHO in an audio system we are " fighting 2 against those distortions and as lower those distortions as IMHO we are near to that " live event ".

MUSIC per se even through a Walkman has the capacity to move us in many ways and it does not matters how high are those Walkman distortions but this is not the subject.

The subject is ( at least for me )and my main target in my audio system: to hear first than all the recorded music in a way that " moves " me that wake-up my emotions that wake-up on me the hapiness that MUSIC can gives me ( distorted or not. ). My second target is that that MUSIC I heard/hear through my audio system be at the top quality performance level I can achieve and things are that I think that lowering any kind of distortions I can be nearest to this second main target.

So, in a different way but I agree absolutely with you about. This is not my first post supporting that dynamic main characteristic that music has, I did it many times and did it not only because a music characteristic but because the recorded music can't approach it and this is the biggest challenge for the audio high industry where we are an important part.
In the mean time I think that we have to think how improve what we have, I know because you posted several times that you are not looking for audio " perfection " , well I'm looking that precisely. Tha's why exist this thread that's why I always try to test to explore new " audio roads " and that's why I try to share my findings with all of you.

I respect your position to not look for " perfection ", I can't even imagine it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Jbthree: I own the PR-77, the AR Cambridge and the Jico SAS-1 stylus replacement but till today I did not give me a time to test all these and its stylus interchanges in between but reading what Griffithds posted seems to me that the Jico one is very good alternative and I think the only you have and for 100.00: could you ask more?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Halcro: For years and through several posts I writed that many times a home system experience could and can be more " atractive " than the live event and the main factor for this is because the microphones are " seated " at 2-3 m. from the source when we are seated at 10 m.. So the micro can take almost the penultimate nuances of music that we can't and we have to remember that the best micros can take frequency ranges from: 5hz to 50khz+.

In the other side it does not matters where we are seated the " visceral/dynamics " of a live event IMHO can't be matched even for the best micro/audio systems and as frogman pointed out: this is not a factor of loudness but DYNAMICS that only live music has, remember too that live music has a natural agresiveness and natural " flavor " and natural " distortions " that can't IMHO been mimic but any audio system including yours.

Again, there are some recordings that we can say: " sounds better in my home system that in live venue ", but this is a function of what I posted and not that any system can be " there " can approach the live music DYNAMICS.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Halcro: +++++ " If I were Raul....I could make some inflammatory statement to the effect that HIS system is simply deficient if it can't produce sounds able to approximate the sound of 'Live'?
Mine certainly can. " +++++ " And if you haven't got it Raul.......please don't assume that others are similarly deprived? " ++++

All that is IMHO a misunderstood. As in almost any of each one audio system we " think " we are approaching the live event/music but this fact is only a best " desire " that we can't fulfil.
I don't want to repeat what I posted in my last two posts that are self explaining that.

Yes, our audio systems sounds " glorious "/fantastic and I have no doubt about but this is not the main subject.

Main subject IMHO is what Lewm posted at the begin, that unique music characteristic. VISCERAL7DYNAMICS that only live music has with poor performances or great performances.

There are other music characteristics that we can't mimic trhough any audio system but that one I repeat is UNTOUCHABLE by any audio system at any price range and if you think that is not true then maybe your live music knowledge and what you perceived with is different for what others ( including me. ) perceive about.

No, your " blasfemhy " is absolutely not only tolerated but we are discussing on.
Dear Lewm: I did it more that once. Remember that man with his horn that I meet at the street?, well that they he played for me at my place.

Yes, we have ( a must to ) these kind of first hand experiences to know the TRUE, to be aware of it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R:
Dear Halcro/Lewm/all: I think that today we are aware that in our home systems we can't mimic that visceral/dynamics of the live music. Now, the loudspeakers in its best " encarnation/perfect " what can do is to mimic the audio system signal with out degradation and taking in count that we have to a theoretical " perfect room ".

IMHO the efficiency, impedance or other factors you named as a design targets are a desire only but not necessary a designer targets. I think that a loudspeaker designer must be free on what surround the speakers but the room.
The " problem " of low efficiency or electrical impedance/phase curve and other is not his " trouble " that must be solved by the amplifier designers not the loudspeaker designer.

In the other side IMHO the most critical factors to achieve top top/first rate loudspeaker quality performance reside in the low mid-bass/low bass frequency range: how it handle how it performs there.
IMHO that range frequency is the real loudspeaker design challenge where unfortunately does not exist ( till today ) the " perfect speakers that fulfil it
Is in this frequency range where IMHO the " magic " comes or not.

If the speaker is a moving coil type or electrostatic or an hybrid design is in general not important or if it is multidriver design. I heard " thousands " of systems with different loudspeaker types and almost all ( decent speakers. ) performs very good from that frequency range an up but the wide diffrences on performances came from that low mid-bass/low bass, is through my experiences in this range where " home system music lives ". and if we take in count this then ( from my experiences too. ) the " best " bass design is the sealed/acoustic suspension one against ported and other bass type of designs.
As in any audio system link accuracy and low distortions is a must to have and in that bass frequency range sealed are more accurate with lower distortions. Could have we the same kind of performance through a ported one design? could be but I never had the opportunity to hear it yet.

Halcro as a trasducer and like a phono cartridge the loudspeaker " mission " is way critical but I don't think that today is weakest system link, I think that in the last years that market segment was and still is growing up with improvements over the past. What maybe I could agree is that the loudspeaker challenge is the higher one: especially to " golden ear " audiophiles.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: Maybe you could think I'm " masoquist " because I just bought a second Spectral sample from Dgob. Music deserve to have this kind of " spare " when it need it.

R.
Dear Fleib. You are right about the Virtuoso. One of my samples has Gyger2 stylus and is outstanding over the other Virtuoso(s) I own and owned.

Btw, Dover I think could be a good idea that you try an Axel's Virtuoso wood in your system with Gyger2 stylus, IMHO hands down the Rex 9 I own by a wide margin. You can get right now an Acutex LPM320 through ebay auction, other good very good alternative to top MM/MI performers is the Astatic MF-200 or even a MF-300 or you can get for " penauts " a Goldring G800 ( very easy to buy on ebay. ) and send to Axel to re-tip.

I think that these cartridges could make that you re-set your grading on MC vs MM/MI ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover/Timeltel/Lewm/all: Years ago on this thread ( I think was here??? ) when I posted that the MM/MI had lower distortions ( for different reasons. ) than their MC " brothers " the first person that disagree was J: Carr it self whom posted that the MC were the ones with lower distoritons. Like Dover this time.

Through all these years and through almost endless experiences with both sides I can't understand yet where JC/Dover can prove that MC superiority/superior " characteristic.

I think that with cartridges happen almost the same that with electronics: that the measurements do not fulfil or explain what we are hearing because we are not taking the " right " ones.
Could be that in fact the MC are or has lower distortions elsewhere against the MM/MI but that is not exactly what some os us are hearing or at least we don't be aware yet of that.

In the last weeks/months I was and am testing in deep not only the top MM/MIs but several vintage and today LOMC cartridges and as all in audio does not exist the perfect " answer ", both cartridge designs have its own trade-offs.

Can I hear always lower distortions with the LOMC ones?, no but with some set-ups a LOMC has lower distortions against a specific MM/MI cartridge set-up but not against a different MM/MI model. So seems to me that we have no specific rule here about that " MC lower distortions ".

I'm not finish yet my revision of LOMC cartridges, I bought more than 30 MC vintage cartridges, to give here a more precise " light " on that distortion subject that is really critical because distortions are important part/factor of quality level performance. When I finished I will report here.

Btw, Lewm I agree with you about HOMC cartridges that I listened sevral times not only in my system ( I own HOMCs. ) but other audio systems but that not only could change but already changed with an unexpected gift ( I pay nothing for the cartridge. ) that came with my Sony tonearm that I just bought and that I'm testing. This tonearm arrived with a HOMC cartridge where IMHO not only me but you or any one can detect in ANYWAY is HOMC!!!!. My report on a few days latter.

This experience confirm what I always support: every single day is a learning one!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
That HOMC was unknow for me in everyway. When I make the report will let you know the manufacturer and cartridge model.

R.
Dear Dover: This is what you posted: +++++ " or you prefer the ginormous distortions of higher output MM's, ideal for listening to Mr Whippy tunes, than the tiny distortions in LOMC's, which is quite reasonable " +++++

" sorry to my misunderstood " .

Anyway enjoy your Ikeda distortions that are way different to the MM/MI alternative.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Fleib: Boron, I don't use aluminum any more but when is " strictly " necessary.

In the past I was willing to preservate a cartridge nearest to its original design and that's why I asked SS to re-tip my review sample with aluminum and similar stylus than the original ( Peter was a little renuent to make that but finally agreed. ). Through several experiences on SS/VDH/Axel I decided to forget a little about and to make the whole cartridge re-tip at the top of what we can get.

Today I know was a mistake to re-tip some cartridges with aluminum pressure fitted stylus, no more. Right now: boron, berillyum, saphire and the like with the best stylus I can find.

I'm re-tipping cartridges that just came from Axel because of that and I'm sending some cartridges to Dominic, Expert Stylus and VDH ( again. ). I want to have the best and know it and the only way to do it is comparing in between.

Yes, to do that I have to have samples of the same model and fortunately on some cartridges I have 2 and even 3 samp´les and I'm still buying.

Btw, I wonder if Audio Technica knows for sure has that " incredible " cartridge generator/motor that comes in the 95 and the Clearaudio as you stated.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Thuchan: As Fleib pointed out there are cartridges that was designed and voiced with aluminum cantilever to fulfil the designer targets, same when were designed with boron or other kind of cantilever build material.

My LOMC overall today refrence cartridges comes with aluminum cantilever but this not means that material is superior to other ones.

For years I was using VDH services and he use boron material and all those cartridges performs top very top.

The subject in my Clearaudios is that the aluminum choice was a bad choice if we can achieve the best that cartridge can shows.
Unfortunately we are not the cartridge designers so any one of us decide what to do and if like me the choice was wrong then always is time to retify that is what I'm doing.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: Years ago when started to appear " magic fuses " that transformed an audio system quality performance level I was really sceptic till I started to try it. I try 3-4 diferent manufacturer fuses like Furutech or HI-Fi Tunning and I corroborate that really works and improve the performance level in an audio system.

Why is that?, till today I have not a precise answer so I can't understand yet why works so fine but the important subject is that it works.

For the last 2 years my preference are the Hi-Fi tunning that are the ones I use in all my electronics.

Two-three months ago I read about the " new kid on the block " by Synergetics Research and what I read move me to bought and test it. I mounted first in the external amplifiers , four of them ( my system have around 16 fuses. ), and I was not with very high expectations about because my today audio system level is really high and not easy that a " new fuse " could help it especially when already has top " fancy " fuses.

Well, I had and have a notorious improvement. Why I say a " notorious " improvement: well when you have a " 98.5% " of something good in audio try to achieve 99.5% of that good thing is very very dificult and a hard task. It is more easy to pass from 80% to 90%.
Distortions goes lower. First LP I use it under the system test was my sample of the 33rpm single Laura Branigan " Self Control " ( I use this recording in my overall testing process for several reasons, between them to test: rhythm. ), at the very begening this track has the natural agresiveness that has the live music but here the high frequency is a little to agressive and only on top system with very low distortions you can hear it with out or very low shrill.
I really was satisfied on that regar with my system till I heard those fuses in there: the last tiny shrill veil disappear. This HF lower distortions follow appearing through all my recordings even I check if really those distortions gone lower and I did it with that recordings and others incrementing by 1-2-3dbs to see what happen in my ears/system limit ( that I'm aware in very precise way. ) and if I can go higher with out " pain " and yes I go higher with no single problem other that at that so high SPL is risky to my ears after several minutes to hear it.

What happened at the other frequency extreme?, well in that test recording and others ones happened the same: lower distortions that not only gives me a better bass management but that help for not only the midrange shine it with new " light " but the overall audio system performance level.

I decide to follow testing those SR fuses in all my electronics, next step in my Phonolinepreamp and from there to the amplifiers internally and obviously my subwoofers.

Highly recomended.

I bought it here: http://www.highend-electronics.com/38.html#qf

and I have no relationship there, Alfred Kainz was the person I contact it.

Btw, you can buy with no risk about your investment because you are free to test it at your place for 30 days and if you don't like it they return your money.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: As I said I can't understand/know why the fuse improvements differences in between.

Silver, cryo and ceramic is not all the " name of game " because the Acme and Hi-Fi tunning share those characteristics and the HFT are superior ones in the way that the SR are superiors to the HFT, so???????????

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: I already tested the ones you use it.

You are right about the fuse holder and trhough my electronics I soldered directly the fuse when that was/is posible.

Btw, agree with you: by-pass fuses is almost always riscky we can lose the protection for any unexpected electrical " failure ".

In electronics configuration as your OTL in theory the best fuse is no fuse due that is in the signal path.

Why in electronics as mine where the fuse is not on the signal path makes those differences?

I know that the SR is an expensive one but if in my system made a " significant " improvement ( not a mere difference. ) IMHO in your electronics could be like " night and day ". Worth to try it and you lose nothing because that 30 days test warranty!

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Aududiopulse: He is right, aluminum is wrong with that cartridge as is with the Virtuoso.

I know that almost any cantilever build material could function very well depending on the overall cartridge design, we have to remember that cantilever is an important part of that design but is only a part.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Yes, there are " crazy " tthings surrounded these fancy fuses as that " directionality " you name it and that some persons support it.
Reading that kind of fuse " things " I tested that directionality looking for a change and I could not be aware of it.

Things goes so " crazy " that even the manyfacturers recomed that " directionality ". In the case of my new SR ones the manufacturer said : no directionality factor with their fuses.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: It was unfortunated that Axel re-tipping/fix prices already gone real high.

Well, that helps to be more selective and precise on what we want it.

Time to come back VDH for me.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: That's exactly what I was thinking last night. If the " fancy charactersitics " are more or les the same in between then the HF-tunning or SR could " have " something inside to later and makes the differences???????

A characteristic from the SR fuses that is not shared with the other fuse manufacturers is this:

++++ " Synergistic Research Quantum Fuses employ a custom alloy for burn wire and end caps, treated with 2,000,000 volts of electricity, altering the conductor at molecular level! " +++++

that means almost nothing for me to be realy aware that's the difference. In the other side the fuses in my electronics and almost everywhere goes out of the signal path.

Too many questions and no answers.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Ecir38: Thank's, Why not?:

http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/public/en/bussmann/electronics/products/cooper_bussmann_overcurrentovervoltagecircuitprotection/fuses_and_accessories.html

we can try even military specs ones.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: I think Timeltel and Dgarretson own or owned the EPA 500 and can put additional light on that. I can say that with my samples the VTA is really smooth, yes the tonearm base in that toonearm and in the EPA-100MK2 is " no sense " but the mechanism works great and yes the B-60 adds mass down there than in some way can help, this is what SAEC and MS tonearm designs did it.

Damping, you put the nail where it hurts because this is IMHO the first and main " problem " with the FR ones: are an undamped design, the arm wand has no single damping characteristics and the steel is way resonant by it self and certainly does not damps the cartridge resonances and its relationship with the tonearm. The other " problem " is when is used as dynamic balance way because in this regards share a problem with other dynamic balanced tonearm designs because the ringing mechanism in that kind of design, the only dynamic balanced designs I know has not that problem are: MS MAX and the Lustre that were designed in different way. I tested the FR in both ways several times with several cartridges and at least in my set up always performs better in static balanced way.

Many years ago Sumiko ( maybe some one remember it: Dover?? ) put in the market a kit to tweack analog rig, inside that kit came a transparent and flexible ribbon/band of 30cms to goes around any tonearm wands and the purpose was to damp it. It works really fine, I use it with my SAECs and with the FR and it helps more that what we can think. I still have these ribbons.

Obviously that this kind of damping change the performance characteristics about quality even on very well damped tonearms. Yes, IMHO we have to try not only with the FRs but with any single other tonearm and see what happen. The ribbon was extremely light in weight so no big deal about. Unfortunately Sumiko left to sale it.

Of course we can use other kind of ribbon or rings through the tonearm wand testing with different ring materials.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lharasim: Thank's to to invite all of us to your Premier Tonearm that for the Musical Arts description seems to me could be a Premier tonearm and an interesting design for any music lover.

Is it ready on stock?

Btw, that cartridge looks like a LOMC Fulton one: is it?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: Yes, "Sumiko Analogue Survival Kit". Thank's. As I posted other alternative to damp and test different tonearms is to use O-rings, not only one but 2-3-4 in different arm wand positions till we can achieve what we are looking at or to leave the tonearm with out that after-market damping.

re4gards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Harold-not-the-barrel: Yes, that's the idea. I could think a-priori that even that both cartridges were made by AT maybe ( even that has very similar specs and cantilever/stylus. ) performs more different that we can think because the 4MD-20X was made on the JVC " needs ", we will see.

What is clear to me is that this cartridge ( with those two ceros. ) could be as the G-800 the today bargain.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: An important part of our hobby is to achieve some FUN and regarding cartridges this thread gives all of us additional fun and additiopnal learning level. Yes, we have the risk that this fun makes some of us addict to it but the life is so short that we have to take it as it comes.

I remember one months/years ago Lewm post in the thread, something like this: " I don't will buy another vintage MM/MI cartridge because I have some than even I don't touched yet ", now we now that he did not stop as was his desire. It's not easy.

Many times I sware that was my last one and at the end what I have is: "" that's one was de last of that day ""!!!!!

We are not only learning and having fun but I think we are helping many people about alternatives to enjoy our music hobby.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Gentlemans: How any one can't be tempted by a 160.00 cartridge that performs so good: where can we invest 160.00 in our systems that can gives us something near or that surpass the enjoying that that cartridge will gives to Jbthree?

and what about those 8.00 big dollars that was paid for that marvelous Astatic MF-200 that now we know outperforms cartridges ( today ones. ) with a price in the 4K ( now ) Big Dollars!!!

I think almost no one can say: NO.

R.
Dear Temptation sometimes is bigger that what we can resist. Yesterday my latest acquisition the JVC 4MD-20X.

What move me to bought it?, well: browsing ebay I found out in the same page the same model at two different prices, one at 247.00 and the other ( the one I bought. ) at 120.00. As I said: I can't resist!

This cartridge is made by Audio Technica for and according needs/specs of JVC.

In its time the JVC top of the line, so: why not? and now I own it. This is the endless history of an addict analog audiophile!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: For digital exist " thousands " of alternatives at any range price, one of them could be: http://www.oppodigital.com/

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Jbthree: I have no single doubt and will buy this BDP-105. Thank's to bring here this new model.

I don't own or owned Oppo products but I heard it and I think is a great option. One of my audio friends change its heavy and very high price Esoteric combo for the Oppo.

One advantage with this Oppo is that came with the latest digital technology and the " heart " of digital products is its DACs. Yes, as in analog there are other product design characteristic that are important and if we read what is the Oppo link all the product design seems to me ( I'm not an expert on digital but almost a rookie. ) first rate.

Anyway, a nice option for every one.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: I don't know Lewm but I own several CDs that normaly I don't hear it, I prefer digital DVD-A that's exceptional. My digital " machine " is an " old " Denon that I modified the analog stages and is very good but I'm sure that this Oppo will brigns my in home digital experiences several steps forward enhancing/improving my today digital enjoyment level.

I think that even that we are " married " with analog time to time is interesting to know how the today digital advancements. For me and as the LOMC alternative I always see the digital option as an alternative and IMHO today a great one especialy with DVD-A and the BDP-105 handle it by design as almost any other format including the home thether experience, good for them!!!

regards and enjoy the music,

R.
Dear In_shore: The value of ADC cartridges was and is: Peter Pritchard its designer ( now pass-on at 83 age. ). IMHO he is one of the Mans that writed the today audio history.

He founded ADC after he worked for GE. He was the ADC owner for a time before he sold it to start a new cartridge designs under Sonus brand.

Well, the XLM was his design and the XLM 2 but the XLM-2 improved and the III and the next ones including the ADC top of the line Astrion were not Pritchard designs and for what were the XLMs the Pritchard ones are worth to try it but not the model you are talking about.

So maybe you can use that money in something more useful.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Yes, Trotsky was very close to Frida/Diego and was unfortunate that the Stalin hand was so " long " that " touched " Trotsky in my country.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends/Lewm: WOW!!!!!!, I just received my SR 20 european type fuses ( 5 ) for my Phonolinepreamp and if those SR fuses makes a difference with my ML monoblocks the differences were and are not only higher ones through my PLP but " unbeatable ", why?: I can't say it but the bass management as a whole frequency range is just unexpected because what I already had I was thinking can't be improved and that was not in that way. The main difference is " power precense " and this means not precisely lower bass or deepest bass but " power presence " as we can hear ( near of it ) only through live music. This " power precense " is not a bass coloration but a true power precense. At the other frequency extreme the main difference is " definition " a littlke different but this " definition " is a kind of " power presence " where this " power " seems to me a " delicate " power.
Obviously that these frequency extreme improvements improves too the overall remaining frequency ranges and improves too the whole soundstage " precense ".

One additional " characteristic " is that my already low low and black bñack background/floor noise from where surge the music notes gone blaker and lower noise. How can a dead silence audio system background noise level goes " more dead silence " ?, well is something that you can " hear " better yet you can " feel " because you can't realy hear it. This is something dificult to explain because I never had this kind of experiences about: it is an addict characteristic and a welcome one. I think that all of you sooner or latter need to have this experience, it is astonishing!!!!

Lewm: IMHO you don't have any idea of what is your system performance level till you change all the system fuses for these SR 20: maybe the best investment at this moment in audio links. Expensive?, not really: you can invest 10K in whatever you want at your system and you can't be near the SR 20 fuse improvements. Remember that money exist to bring pleasure to the human beings and nothing more.

Of course, I already order the fuses for my subwoofers and the ones that goes inside my ML monoblocks, six additional for the 16 system gran total.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: A great cartridge, in ngreat condition at " great " price:

http://app.audiogon.com/listings/cartridges-bang-olufsen-mmc2-cartridge-stylus-and-other-2012-11-09-analog-97209

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Timeltel, I forgot: that Empire " 4 dimensional " stylus shape design means nothing for you, me or any one and I think that you have the same Empire brochure I have and all waht it say about is: """" miniature nude diamond with .1 mil tracing radius. The cartridges are designed for 100kohm terminated impedance. """ and that's it.

R.
Dear Frogman: ++++ " then, is it surprising that current that is suddenly forced to travel through a hair-thin steel wire in a generic fuse would degrade compared to one of higher quality construction? " +++++

exactly, why not?

Regrads and enjoy the music,
R.