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.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas

Showing 50 responses by chakster

@jtnicolosi
There’s a certain internal conflict that doesn’t allow me to accept that a $200 MM cartridge will replace $3000+ MC cartridges

then you have to spend more on some rare expensive vintage MM :)


do you have any experience with the Garrott FGS ruby?

never, those styli are expensive

But i owned two original Victor X1 & X1II and they are pretty good, but the X1II was NOS and it was impossible to deny an offer to sell it for $1300.




Talking about Jico SAS, which is close (or identical) to Micro Ridge aka Micro Line (patented by Audio-Technica), and taking in count the magic of the vintage cartridges, i don’t see any reason to avoid the original design utilizing Micro Line tip and the most advanced hollow pipe gold plated Boron cantilevers by Audio-Technica. This vintage conbination is superior to new Jico SAS Boron rod or neo SAS sapphire/ruby. So for the best possible quality i would look for the fully original MM design from the 70’s or 80’s if $200-300 price difference is not the big deal. Linked pics above are my own AT-AM170 (1988) and i love it.
Glanz MFG-61 with it’s tiny cantilever and very special stylus tip is completely differen beast and way ahead of the "normal" Glanz models with huge aluminum cantilevers like on 71L (and more conventional like on 31L). I have never seen this model for sale anywhere, since i bough mine long time ago. However, it makes me think that any conventional Glanz could be re-cantilevered/re-tipped with something like Boron/Microridge to compete with that rare MF61 model.
@jessica_severin
I wonder if part of this is the current "taste" that modern people want (HiDef, High-contrast, hyper-real) and thus the market is forcing the manufacturers to tune their cartridges to this.

They want an MC and this is the reality of the audiophile market today. Even your favorite cartridge is Denon MC, that you’re listening with a SUT while the MM philosophy is way different. Nagaoka MP-500 is the "updated" modern version of the vintage MP-50 discussed here long time ago. The diamond of Nagaoka is glued to the cantilever, same with most of the modern MM cartridges, this method is not the best! Also cantilevers made of beryllium are not available anymore, the material is restricted to use long time ago. Most of the top vintage MM cartridges comes with hollow pipe Boron or Beryllium cantilevers and the diamond is fastened throught the pipe - that was a very expensive technology. Vintage Audio-Technica cartridges are superior to the new models, not sure why you’re ignoring the AT-ML170 and AT-ML180 from the 80's and looking for an old AT15Sa instead? MicroLine stylus (similar to Micro Ridge) of the AT-ML170 and AT-ML180 cartridges are superior to the classic 70's Shibata of the AT15Sa. In my opinion the Ortofon OM2 black is a waste of money, the problem is that you will not find a reviews for vintage MM cartridges, but you will find many reviews supporting modern cartridges. The reviewers are not testing them with the vintage stuff, they are only testing them with modern stuff. People read the reviews and buying those ortofons, denons etc, then we see thousands of comments on the forums regarding mediocre modern cartridges (claimed to be the best of the best). The vintage market open the doors to a true high-end for much better price and much better quality, but it is not interesting for the magazines and reviewers today.

@jessica_severin If you’re in Japan it should not be a problem to find what you want, especially if you can check them all in the showroom (great option) before you will buy them. I wish i could do so, but i can only buy them to try them. The Shibata is good, if the tiny Boron cantilever is scary then bigger aluminum or beryllium is the way to go for everyday use. As for the theory that simple conical styli are better than advanced styli, i do not agree. The Shibata is not a simple profile and while the conical/spherical are more forgiving to tonearm set-up, the Shibata must be set-up properly, same with Micro Line, Micro Ridge etc.
Look for boron JICO SAS or new generation (ruby or sapphire) JICO NEO SAS styli, not for the cheap Jico Shibata or Elliptical, because they are not the best and not superior to the original AT styli! 
@jls001 I assume you know the story behind Azzurra Esoter MF cartridges. Japanese Mitachi Corporation was OEM of Azzurra, Glanz, Astatic and even Jamo MF cartridges. The lowest models like the Azzurra have a Conical Styli, but they can be upgraded (re-tipped or re-cantilevered) by Axel in Germany with the most advanced styli of your choice, then it can be fantastic cartridge with its Moving Flux generator. Axel once fixed suspension on my Glanz 71L, some of those NOS cartridges have "dead" suspension/damper. In stock condition Azzurra is a very good cartridge at reasonable price (with conical tip), but not as good as the Glanz with Line Contact tip. The price for Azzurra is so low that anyone can buy it to upgrade later and i hope someone will do that to report back on audiogon. My pair of Azzurra went to a local vinyl collector, dude playin records at the local bar with Azzurra cartridges and he’s happy about it. I have only tested Azzurra in my headphones, because i already had Glanz 31L, 71L in the past, and currently have Glanz 61 (which is my favorite). None of the line Contact models impressed me as much as the rarest Glanz 61 model, so i decided to keep only 61 for myself, so at the moment i do not have any other cartridges made by Mitachi. Here is a picture of my Glanz 71 and 61 cartridges: https://scontent-ams3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20264897_1804729219545237_9108764864272708551_n.jpg?oh...

@jls001 The X1 or XII without styli are useless as you will never find an original stylus for this model and there is no equal replacement, because beryllium is restricted to use nowadays (no more beryllium cantilevers).

The Jico make sence only for cheap Z-1 models, but not for the superior and expensive X-1 or X-II.

Even rare JVC X-2 cartridge body is on ebay for ages and still unsold. This cartridge is a top performer ONLY with original shibata stylus and original beryllium pipe cantilever.    
@rauliruegas as far as i know the product made for Japanese market always branded Victor, while the products for international market (outside of japan) always branded JVC.

here is a bit of history:
Victor Company of Japan, Ltd, usually referred to as JVC or The Japan Victor Company. JVC is generally known within Japan by the Victor brand, preceded by the His Master's Voice (HMV) logo featuring the dog Nipper.  Because of a conflict in trademarks between HMV and Victor, HMV is not allowed to use Nipper in Japan. At one time, the company used the Nivico name (for " Nippon Victor Company") overseas, before rebranding to JVC, which stands for Japan’s Victor Company. Therefore, the Victor and JVC-Victor web sites look quite different. 
The Victor X1II is amazing cartridge in stock condition with original Shibata Tip on Beryllium Cantilever. This original cantilever has its own unique shape, just look at the picture of my X1II (stylus/cantilever assembly). Don’t waste your time if the cartridge has no stylus, it will be impossible to find the original stylus replacement for this model even in Japan and X1II with Jico will never sound as good as the original Shibata/Beryllium stylus replacement. That was top-of-the-line Victor / JVC mm cartridge and one of the best in my won list, but as i said earlier i sold my NOS X1II for more than $1300 in Europe. The X1II is an upgrade over the arlier X1 model which normally goes for up to $750 is the damper is good (i owned 2 samples). The integrated stylus protector of the X1 cause the resonance, so on the next and more expensive model (X1II) it was removed.

The Victor X1IIE (Elliptical) is just one step behind the X1II (Shibata) and the current price is about $400-600 depends on condition (i owned one sample), the original nude Elliptical stylus of Victor X1IIE mounted on hollow pipe Beryllium Cantilever to reduce the mass! So the JICO is not on the same level of performance at all. Just look at at the picture of my original X1IIE stylus/cantilever assembly: https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16195371_1551292488222246_1696000909517507772_n.jpg?oh...

So if you want to use Jico look for Z1 model which is very cheap cartridge.
If you want a top performer look for X1, X1II or at least for X1IIE in perfect share and don’t forget to ask about damper condition.

P.S. There is also JVC X2 model branded JVC for European and US market, i never tried this, but it might be an upgrade over the X1II (they looks identical). 
I can’t comment on quality difference between X1II and X-2, but to prove that we need somebody else who has both on hands.

BTW the Victor X1 also branded JVC X1 in German catalogs for example. But in that catalog of all JVC cartridges you will not find X-1II model (only X-2). Why? logically betwen X-1 and X-2 must be X-1II (which was released after X-1). In my opinion the X-2 is nothing less than X-1II but made for the export and branded JVC instead of Victor with the same specs, same stylus etc. I think they just tried to simplify marketing using just X1 and X2 names to show the difference between these models, it's easier than using X1 and X1II and X1IIE in Japan. 

Just a different branding for different markets, i don’t think the quality demands is higher in Europe than in Japan to make an export version JVC any better.

This is just my opinion.

Everyone can check two JVC X-2 cartridges on ebay now (without styli of course) to find out they are made by victor company of japan. There is a specs for JVC X-2 in the listing from Italian seller. If someone will fins the difference in specifications between this European X-2 and Japanese X-1II please report here.
I will repeat it once again that orange Jico stylus for X1II-E is nothing special, it has cheap Alluminum cantilever and Elliptical tip, while the original has hollow pipe Beryllium Cantilever (equal or better than most expensive Boron) and Nude Square Shank Shibata stylus tip. The shape of this original cantilever is unique (not straight as you can see) and it’s hard to mix it up with Jico straight alluminum cantilever. The original is a day and night compared to Jico.

So the Jico replacement will bring a broken cartridge back to work, but this combination is far away in terms of quality compared to the original stylus in perfect shape (in case with Victor for sure). Same about most of the cartridges, even SAS (the most expensive Jico) is not beat the original styli of the top quality cartridges. I have posted long time ago that Technics 205ED4 (for example) was superior compared to Jico SAS, because the original has the lowest tip mass, nude diamond, hollow pipe boron cantilever etc. The SAS stylus is cool, but not better than the best vintage design such as Audio-Technica Micro Line (equal to Micro Ridge) etc.

Jico is a compromise between the cost and quality, it’s not for everyone taste. New generation of JICO SAS is expensive and it make sence only if the cartridge body cost nothing. Taking in count expensive cartridge generator and the cost of Jico SAS you will find out it’s easier to seach for the original working cartridge in very good stock condition for $400-700 (with the most advanced stylus like Micro Line) for exampe, than making hybrid of the old generator and new JICO NEO SAS stylus (which cost alone more than $400 for some models).

I have to mention that for the price they charge for JICO NEO SAS any original cartridge can be re-tipper or re-cantilevered by well known masters with the cantilever and tip of our choice.

Design of the JICO styli for some models (like technics 205) is awful compared to the original, same about Sound Smith design of his replacement styli for F-9 cartridges. I just don’t like the design and i don’t understand why they can’t make a perfect looking replacement if they charge so much for their products. Seems like the designers in the 70s and 80s were more qualified and i prefer their taste. I’m always up for the originals since each high-end cartridge tuned by the designer of the cartridge and the material of the cantilever and stylus mass selected expecially for each model for the best sound possible (at the time) ! 
it’s like apple and oranges
-the clear jico has straight alluminum cantilever
-the original has stiffer Beryllium cantilever with its unique construction (shape) with flat platform where the stylis is fastened (nude shibata originally invented by JVC Victor and Shibata-san).

I respect Don’s ( griffithds ) opinion, but personally i was more impressed by Victor X1II in mint condition than two used Victor X1 i have tried. Maybe it’s just because the X1II was mint (i already posted my pitures of the diamond of that one above). My X1II was mounted on Reed 3P "12 tonearm and it was definitely one of the best cartridge in my experience, stunning performer. The NOS unit went for $1300 on ebay this year. My cartridge at that time it was loaded only at 47k ohms, but i wish i could find another one to try it with my upgraded phono stage loaded at 100k ohms. The X1 samples i owned were not on the same level as the X1II

I don’t care about Jico styli, will search for the originals instead
Ok, i will add specs for comparation from an old German JVC catalog.

In this catalog of cartridges even Victor X-1 labeled as JVC X-1.

For this reason i think it’s just a different branding of the same products.
There is no JVC X-1II in the cat, but there is JVC X-2.

The European models line is JVC X-1 followed by JVC X-2 (nothing in between).

JVC X-1 (labeled JVC on top plate):
.........................................................
- Nude Shibata mkII (0.15 mm square shank) DT-X1 ***
- Output 2.7mV (5cm/sec) 1kHz ***
- Channel Balance < 1dB
- Channel Separation 25dB (1kHz)
- Channel Separation 20dB (30kHz)
- Impedance 2,2kOhm (1kHz)
- Dynamic Compliance 12x10-6 cm/Dyn (100Hz)
- Loading 47kOhm - 100kOhm
- Tracking force 1,7 (+/- 0,15g) ***
- Frequency response: 10 - 60000 Hz
- Weight 6g ***


JVC X-2 (labeled JVC on side):
..........................................................
- Nude Shibata mkII (0.15 mm square shank) DT-X2 ***
- Output 3mV (5cm/sec) 1kHz ***
- Channel Balance < 1dB
- Channel Separation 25dB (1kHz)
- Channel Separation 20dB (30kHz)
- Impedance 2,2kOhm (1kHz)
- Dynamic Compliance 12x10-6 cm/Dyn (100Hz)
- Loading 47kOhm - 100kOhm
- Tracking force 1,5 (+/- 0,2g) ***
- Frequency response: 10 - 60000 Hz
- Weight 7,5g ***

*** The difference between JVC X-1 and JVC X-2 is output, tracking force and cartridge own weight, i think the stylus tip is the same.

P.S.

Looking at this specs i assume the Victor X-1 and JVC X-1 are identical !
Also the Victor X-1II and JVC X-2 are identical too.

The Japanese Victor X-1II called JVC X-2 to sell in Europe not to be confused with JVC X1 and that was a good idea.

I will say more, there is no difference between JVC X-2 and cheaper Victor X-1IIE (only the stylus tip), but the specs of the generator is the same.

Maybe someone has more specs copied from the manual, if so please add link to check.

And BTW: label JVC on TT-101 turntable does not make it better than Victor TT-101 turntable. 
@rauliruegas 
The JVC I speak is the one labeled X-1 at the top cartridge plate, the model is: JVC X-1 MK2 and is different on what you are attesting. The side labeled is different.

I have dejavu now
Here is a pair of my X1 labeled Victor.  

And here is my NOS X-1II labeled Victor on the side and on the top.
I've never seen any Victor JVC with lettering mk2, they use lettering X-1II only (as you can see on the box). 

Do you mean that on your sample you have lettering "MK2" instead of "II" ? But I think you're talking about X-1II (NOT the "X-1 mk2") cartridge labeled JVC or JVC Victor?     


@rauliruegas right, so we have one more misterious cartridge from JVC Victor and i'm intrigued, would be nice to see some pictures. Thanks Raul.  
@bimasta this is all bulshit, without original cantilever and original stylus this 205c MK4 cartridge is a waste of time and money. None of the existing replacement is equal to the original (the original has the lowest tip mass and hollow pipe Boron cantilever), even Jico Neo SAS (sapphire or ruby) is not on the same level, but way out of your budget.

Do you expect to pay $70 to get $800 cartridge back to life? What do you expect from the cheap aftermarket styli with aluminum cantilever and elliptical tip (probably bonded and not nude).

The best is Jico SAS, nothing else. But it looks ugly as they have plain black front side. A friend in Finland who purchased my 205c mk4 is happy with Jico NEW SAS stylus, but i was not happy and prefered the original, here is a picture of my originals. Great cartridge if you can find one with strong suspension (it’s almost impossible).

You can also rebuild the cartridge, but it’s expensive and take too much time. Axel in Germany did the job for some of my 205c mk4 and 100c mk3. It was lost time ago. The price is more expensive than Jico Neo SAS. When i finally managed to get mint original Technics 205c mk4 i realized it’s better than Axels rebuilded versions, but his version was better than Jico SAS (Boron). Not sure if Van Den Hul can do the job or someone can do that for him, but if you checked this thread you know that almost all owners of the more expensive Technics 100 mk4 asked for van Ven Den Hul treatment and it was very expensive option. 
I just realized that Victor X-1IIE has titanium cantilever, not sure if the information is correct, but here you read more. I thought it's beryllium, but if the X-1IIE (Orange, Elliptical) has a titanium cantilever, the only Berylluim one is the X-1II (Clear, Shibata) and the earlier X-1 model. 

Any thoughts about Titanium Cantilevers ? 
@halcro right, i remember when i sold mine i was pretty sure it’s beryllium, but now i see a few sellers stated X-1IIE as titanium cantilever, i’m a bit confused. Maybe i missed something? Anyway, i think Elliptical X-1IIE is not extended to 60kHz as Shibata X-1II with beryllium cantilever, and 40kHz for X-1IIE is more realistic. But titanium or beryllium? I can’t sleep now.
What i can see under my macro lens:
-This is X-1II (Shibata/Beryllium)
-Here is X-1IIE (Elliptical/Titanium or Beryllium)

The are both original, but way different from each other, the X-1IIE is hollow pipe and straight (conventional design), but the X-1II is flattened (different shape) and this is Beryllium for sure.

But the X-1IIE can be Titanium, maybe it’s too dark on my picture, but in reality it is not so dark. Maybe there are two version of IIE model (one with beryllium and one with titanium?) 
@jls001
Where would the Astatic MF200 (or even MF100) stand vis-a-vis the X-1 II Shibata? At least the MFs show up once in a while NOS.

You’re welcome. In my experience the Victor X1 (Shibata) and Victor X1II (Shibata) are much better cartridges than Astatic MF100 / MF200 (or the Glanz MF31 / MF71).

Raul pointed that X1 is better than X-1II, but i think it depends on the condition of the particular sample on hands. My X-1II was superiour to X-1 (i owned two samples on X-1).

The X-1II is an exceptional MM cartridge and i sold my NOS sample due financial problems this year. I like the X-1II much better than X-1 because the built-in stylus protector of the X-1 may cause undesirable resonance (it’s been pointed by our brother Don), it’s old fashioned design, the later X-II has removable stylus protector and it’s better solution. Construction of the stylus/cantilever assembly (Shibata/Beryllium) is the same on X-1 and X-1II, but the latest model is a bit heavier and bigger (i like that too).

The slightly cheaper Elliptical version of the X-1II called X-1IIE and this cartridge is also amazing, but avoid the Jico replacement stylus, the color of the jico replacement is also orange, but the cantilever of the Jico replacement is alluminum and of course can’t compete with the original stiff (Titanium or Beryllium)! I think we have to find manual somehow to make sure was it a Titanium or Beryllium cantilever on the original X-1IIE model.

@ivanj unfortunately nobody really cares about high-end MM cartridges anymore, manufacturers focused on trendy MC design for audiophiles, dealers love it because margine is crazy. But the best MM cartridges are from the 70s and 80s. Those vintage cartridges are still available and worth the price today even in used condition. I don’t know why should we concern about modern MM cartridges if they are not even close to the best vintage MM cartridges? I think the High-End Moving Magnet cartridges are all about vintage heritage. Personally i was not impressed by the M2 series, each time people start talking about modern Ortofon i would like to address them back to the mid 70s or early 80s when all the best MM were made. It's nice than some big manufacturers like the Ortofon, Nagaoka, AT ... still makes MM cartridges, but do you believe those carts are equal to the old high-end MM design released back in the days when MM was a King, not the MC ?  

It’s seems like the best Ortofon MC is also not the last (modern) expensive models, but the old Ortofon MC 2000 (and not even the mk2) adored by many a’gon members.

If you are talking about blind test for "audience", Carlos, you must be a dealer or shop owner? You have to add some of the best vintage MM next time you will organize such blind testing and then you will see.

I'd like to expand the title of this threat to "Who needs a low output MM cartridge type when we have hight output MC ?" Seriously, i'd like to learn more sbout this subject. I have couple of High Output MC cartridges which i like a lot, as much as my low output MMs.

One of the rarest HOMC beast i have is Dynavector 30A with Shibata Type III stylus. I just mounted this beauty on my Sony PUA-7. This is my first Dynavector, it was released 1 year before the Karat series and 4 years before Karat Nova. The first high output Moving Coil Dynavector 30 was the next generation of the Ultimo cartridges. The Ultimo’s were manufactured by Onlife Research Inc., which later became Dynavector. The 30 series was the next generation and contains 3 different models DV-30A, 30B and 30C. All of them are headshell integrated models. 

With my JLTi phono stage i can use whatever RCA plug-in load resistors to experiment with different loading. I really like the sound of this 1.8mV HOMC Dynavector 30A

Not so much information available online about this rare cartridge, but see what Mr. Van Den Hul said about it:

"This Dynavector DV-30 was one of the best Dynavector cartridge they made. I have retipped this cartridge already a long time ago. You can read on the other side my inscriptions about when and what. The cantilever is made of beryllium, an actually not used material anymore. It was at the time a very high respected cartridge.

There was the 30 A: Aluminum cantilever. The 30 B with a beryllium cantilever and the 30 C with a boron cantilever. The A & B had equal output, when I do remember well. The C was much lower because there was an air-coil. The suspension wire was always from nylon, so very temperature sensitive. Tracking force was 1,75 gram. The best is to listen to this cartridge. At the time it sounded a bit harsh what was translated by the un-experienced ear in detail and resolution. Wish you success with this cartridge and, when you have time left, tell me what you did like and what not. With Best Regards" - Aalt Jouk Van Den Hul


So what is the benefits of low output MM (around 1.8mV) versus high Output MC or vise-versa ? Anyone can comment on this subject?   

Oh, sorry Carlos, i just mixed up two differen posts from two different persons, my apologies.

So my message about "blind test" was adressed @ivanj  about 2M cart.
@lewm the question is about low output MM versus high output MC
this high output MC is 1.8mV and close to the low output MM cartridges.

P.S. the high output MM is not the subject of my question (it can be as high as 9mV).
Haha, exactly @lewm 

@halcro well, the japanese seller (on ebay) confirmed to me that Victor X-1IIE has TITANIUM CANTILEVER for sure. This is new information for me. If it's true then the X-1IIE is different from the X-1II not only because of the Elliptical stylus, but also cantilever is different (Titanium vs. Beryllium). 

Can't remember any other cartridges with Titanium Cantilever, only the Audio-Technica. 
I remember everyone's favorite was AT20SLa and i'm still curious what's the different between AT20SLa and limited edition AT20SL (Beryllium,Shibata) ? Not so much info on vinylengine about them. Has anyone compared them with original styli (not the aftermarket ones) ? 
@halcro raul's review of AT200SS was more optimistic, but i'm talking about AT20SL  
@fourwnds i have Joseph Grado Signature XTZ which is probably the best Grado ever made. As you noticed i’m a big fan of Audio-Technica AT-ML series, this cartridges can compete with Grado XTZ and works fine at 47k standard. Not sure which Grado do you have and what is effective mass of your tonearm, but if you are looking for extended frequency range look for the vintage AT-ML170 or AT-ML180 with MicroLine (aka Micro Ridge) styli and you will never regret it! You can try to find replacement stylus of the higher model for your grado MI (or factory re-tip). But if you would like to try something different then the Grace F-9F with Shibata stylus is also very good cartridge. The rarest Grace LEVEL II BR/MR and F14 LC-OFC are absolutely amazing cartridges, i'm currently testing them (but they are very expensive). The original Victor X1II or X-1IIE are great carts with original styli. BTW you can replace resistors inside your prono stage, it’s easy. I did that with 3 of my phono preamps, started with the cheapest Grado PH-1 preamp, replaced cheap stock resistors with Vishay Naked Foid 100k resistors from Texas Components (bought on ebay) and it was huge upgrade. Then i did it with my reference phono stage before i bought the JLTi phono stage with plug-in load resistors (to avoid soldering each time i want to change the loading).
When i decided to change resistors i asked our Lewm how to do that. And actually it was pretty easy if you or some of your friends are ok with soldering. Locate the 47k resistor by looking at your phono stage (or check at schematic) unsolder them and replace them with Vishay Naked Foil 100k resistors (they are the best audio resistors available today on the market). You need 2 of them (one per channel). Actually the cartridges i have mentioned are nice at 47k, but can be better at 100k (especially Grace F-9F designed for quadraphonic records). Manufacturers stated 47 - 100k load. So if you're for some reason not happy with 47k then try 100k and most likely you will be happy. 
I wonder if anyone ever tried to re-build the AT-ML180 or AT-ML170 cartridges. Apart from the working units i also have some broken units (no cantilevers). The last AT-ML180 was destroyed by a friend who decided to touch the cartridge at my studio and later i realized that cantilever disappeared, damn. There is a collar left, but no tip, no cantilever. Not sure what to do... In the past i have had re-cantilevered (rebuilded by Axel) Technics cartridges and they were pretty good. Not sure who can rebuild the old AT-ML series. or maybe someone looking for generators only :) ? 
The Signet and Precept are just an export brands of the Audio-Technica, those cartridges are not for sale in Japan, but normally sells in the USA and Europe, but it does not make them better than Japanese Audio-Technica top models! The AT was an OEM company for dosen of other brands too. Their own top MM carts are the Audio-Technica AT-ML170 / AT-ML180 (OCC and OFC versions). At the state of the art MicroLine stylus of the AT-ML 170 / AT-ML180 looks like this under microscope. Those cartridges are hard to beat! 
@rauliruegas 

... not only that it can't outperform the 20SS ( it's almost at the same level. )


Very interesting, do you know AT20SL (not SLa) ? 

@rauliruegas 
the problem with the 170/180 ML is that ceramic top plate in the cartridge body that unfortunatelly is way resonant.

I don't think so. Let me quote Audio-Technica's description from the original manual for the AT-ML170 cartridge:  

"To further increase the accuracy of the AT-ML170’s moving system, Audio-Technica engineers have ensured against unwanted parasitic vibration with an anti-resonance ceramic mounting base." 

For Audio-Technica engineers this is ANTI-RESONANCE CERAMIC BASE !  

Timeltel just proved what i said: if the Signet was made in Ohio, that’s the reason why those sub-brands (Precept and Signet) are not for sale in Japan, never been officially distributed in Japan, because the Audio-Technica made their own product placement in Japan. If there was a factory in the USA (like Timeltel wrote) i’m pretty sure it was controlled by the Audio-Technica USA and those sub-brands made for expansion on the US market. It’s not so important was it a Japanese cartridge for US market only, or Japanese cartridge made in the USA using AT parts and know-how to sell the product only in USA and Europe. It’s a good business model to have a factory in the USA to sell stuff in the USA under special brand (Signet). The Audio-Technica is a giant of the industry, but the Signet/Perecept is just a parent brand. All about marketing.

Now tell me why the sub-brand must be better than the giant company’s top models made for extremely high demand Japanese market and distributed worldwide? To be honest i just don’t care what is better, pretty sure they are all good, i just would like to add a bit of common sence.

Without Japanese know-how it would be impossible to make high-end cartridges in the 70s/80s era. Most of the American cartridges were made in Japan, even if the brand registered in the USA like my own belowed virtually unknown Argent MC for example.
@cleeds
That would be news to companies such as Shure Bros and Grado, who manufacture in the US, and other companies such as AKG, which manufactures in Austria.

You can add ADC and Sonus, Ortofon etc..., but do you really understand who supplied parts such as diamonds, cantilevers etc to them back in the days and to all models re-tippers and manufacturers today? Think about it.

 Japanese know-how is hard to deny or ignore in high-tech industry, especially in cartridge manufacturing.

Nandric, i knew about AKG and my memory is very good.
I think your answer addressed to Cleeds, not to me.



@pryso Namiki Jewel in Japan is the manufacturer of MicroRidge diamonds related to Shure. I can not speak for cartridge manufacturers in Europe, but another comapny is Ogura (Japan). The biggest European cartridge manufacturer is Ortofon, i don’t know any other big European manufacturer of phono cartridges. You’re underrate the impact of the Japanese Jewel manufacturers on Cartridge manufacturers worldwide.

The Grado family business is a small business, i have posted a video here about them long time ago. They sells more headphones than cartridges.
Thanks for the detailed info, Raul
Now it’s easier to imagine how big was the Audio-Technica, even in Mexico, amazing!

However, anybody tried the AT20SL model or it’s unknown to all of you guys ?

Nandric, thanks for reminding me about Benz cartridges. 
I think the Paratrace from UK is the closest to Stanton's Stereohedron (not MR), one day i will try it on my Stanton WOS    
Another reason why i trust AT-ML170 series (and AT-ML180):

"Kavi Alexander, auteur of the remarkable Water Lily Acoustics series of analogue vinyl discs, is monitoring disc production by comparing test pressings to the master tape. What cartridge is he using? Another moving magnet, this time the TECHNICS EPC 100 mk4. But he describes the AUDIO-TECHNICA AT-ML170 as very similar, and very close to the actual sound of the tape. In this comparison, he says, virtually no moving coil does so well; most have seriously apparent colorations." - TAS Article
http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html


Jessica, the F-8 is inferior model compared to F-9 line where the F-9F and F-9U were the best along with overpriced Ruby. But the luxury Grace Level II MR/MR model is much better than F-9 and should be added to the top MM list here, it is very rare. Took a long time to find NOS unit with spare NOS stylus. Another top of the line Grace is F-14 LC-OFC which is absolutely amazing MM cartridge.

P.S. It is not a good idea to promote current auctions here, no matter it's ebay or other sources, people are bidding on various things and nobody wants a higher price in the end to outbid each other. Personally i have no interest in particular items, but it's just a common sence. Win first and then tell us. I remember on other record collectors forum we had a strong agreement between the members not to promote other people auctions for rare items until it's ended, it is better for everybody! Also those prices in Japan is not a real price guide for many reasons, first we're in Europe should pay a high import tax etc. I see you're posting prices often, but it's relevent only to those who lives in Japan, for the rest of the world it is just a tease, i hope you understand.   
@fsellet

... currently use an F9U with a conical stylus. Here is what Grace said about it: "Grace deems the F9U a playback standard and recommends it with pride to music lovers, audio enthusiasts and professional users."
The original F-9U is not Conical, but LINE CONTACT type (similar to a cutter stylus according to manual) and your quote is about F-9D and F-9P (they are conical for broadcast use).

Finally, several members have said that Grace recommended loading their cartridges at 100 k ohms, however the manual clearly specifies 47 k. Yes, the measurement that is printed in the same manual (of an F9E) was made at 100 k, but it also shows a rise in the upper frequencies, which I assume would not be there at 47 k. I would appreciate clarification of this point.

If you’re looking at Grace catalog on vinyl engine where all the models are listed on two pages (except Ruby) you will see that the measurement made ONLY for the top of the line Grace F-9F Discrete-4 designed for CD-4 (Quadraphonic) records and that’s why this model with Shibata Type Stylus loaded at 100k as it should be loaded to reproduce CD-4 records with high modulation. Frequency response of the Grace F-9F is 10-60000 Hz (the next one is F-9U 10-50000 Hz) Those models must be loaded at 100k. The rest of the models in F-9 series does not reproduce high frequency that much (below 45 000Hz for F-9E and much lower for the rest of them).

I think it was me who said those Grace must be loaded at 100k, but i don’t care about F-9E model (and others with elliptical or conical tip), because the F-9F with Shibata is much beter cartridge and 100k on preamp is a must have for it (Overall capacity: 80pF , 1.2g tracking force)
@jessica_severin

Did you ever listen to the F-9L or F-9E (elliptical) or did you never bother with them? Would you guess that the F-9E or F-9L might also be better than the F-8L?

Yes, i have tried most of them and already posted about it here. The best one in F-9 series is F-9F with Nude Shibata type stylus designed for CD-4, the next one is F-9U with Line Contact type stylus. The most popular is F-9E with Elliptical stylus and the most expensive is good looking F-9 Ruby with Elliptical stylus and Ruby Cantilever (the reason why it’s expensive or "overpriced" as i said). The rest of the models in F-9 series are not interesting at all. I don’t like the sound with Conical styli, no matter what manufacturer made it (so i don’t like the sound of Denon DL-103 or Ortofon SPU with conical styli, no matter what other people think about, those cartridges are extremely popular for some reason, but in my opinion they are not interesting at all).

The Grace F-9 is OK untill you will be able to check the LEVEL II, F-12 and F-14 made in the 80s. Those High-End Grace models comes with BORON cantilevers and MICRO RIDGE styli, there are optional Beryllium Cantilever / Line Contact stylus for F-12 and others, depends on the type of the various original stylus replacement. The Grace F-12 are impossible to find cartridge, while the LEVEL II and F-14 are uber rare and normally very expensive even in Japan. Those models are state o the art MM phono pickups, so the F-9 Ruby with its elliptical tip is just mid level model compared to top of the line Grace LEVEL II, F-12 and F-14 LC-OFC models. There is also special calibrated model called "F-14 Excellent" that you will not find in any catalogs, and i’m a proud owner of it. The potential of Grace was far better than F-9 Ruby, but unfortunately F-14 LC-OFC was the last high-end MM cartridge from Shinagawa Musen Co. LTD in this world.

P.S. They are also made Grace F-10 MC model, but i never tried this one. 

@fsellet well, i'm sure it's OK and inexpensive cartridge, but with direct comparison Conical/Spherical stylus is always lose its charm when the Shibata/LineContact, MicroRidge/MicroLine can be used instead. For those who are into vintage vinyl (like myself) it's important to reach the virgin part of the used records deeper in the grooves, untouchable by Conical tip, because most of them have been played by Conical styli over the years. It's easy to bypass the worn part of the grooves by using at least LineContact or better styli, which goes deeper in the groove. Another reason is much wider frequency response etc. 
That's right, the conical styli were made by Grace for professional market to use on radiostations, anyone can read about it, search for the Grace history (Shinagawa Musen Co., Ltd). The word "professional" in audio does not mean a better quality, but special needs for radiobroadcasters and radio deejays / club djs (don't forget about Grace "Disco" series designed for club DJs in the 70s). Those old Conical tip required much higher tracking force, it is more durable for everyday use on the radio or in the clubs, it's cheaper to replace styli every month etc. Those styli are bonded, not nude which makes them inferior by default. And yes, the conical stylus is more forgiving to setup errors, it does not require absolute alignment and this is the reason why conical styli are still dj standard (like 9mV Shure M44-7 that works fine with 3-5g tracking force)! Any other styli will be bent, worn and broken if used by djs. This is all good for professional needs when you play record near 200-2000 dancing and jumping people and your turntable is shaking and you use 3-5g tracking force to avoid skipping in process, but not necessary for home use in high-end system @fsellet      

In this post about conical styli i'm just trying to put the facts together, it's up you what kind of styli is better for your ears. When i bought my NOS Denon DL-107 MM cartridge i was impressed by the sound quality of that nude and very well polished conical stylus,but it was long time ago. Since that day i have tried many cartridges and i would never go back to the Conical stylus, but it's just me. The music i'm into is very well recorded in the 60s, 70s and early 80s on original pressings, conical tip never gave me satisfaction compared to LineContact, Hyper Elliptical, Stereohedron, MicroLine, MicroRidge etc. 

Conical stylus is old school, some people still plays 78rpm vinyl using cacti stylus, but who cares? 

Even Ortofon released their best SPU Royal GM mk2 with Ortofon Replicant stylus after all. 
@fsellet

Grace made the decision to offer a conical option with its best cartridge (so did Ortofon, Garrot, etc.) Not only that, they called it a playback standard... That tells me the designer cared enough about the sound produced by this "primitive" stylus. Again, so does Ortofon with it SPU. Clearly, these designers and their happy customers cannot all be deaf.

You seem to be insulting these poor cartridges by calling them OK and inexpensive. But their stylus is conical by design: it is none of their fault, nor choice (otherwise they would have gone for the fancy diamond, I am sure). More seriously, I don’t think that the F9D was cheap in its time.

The "best cartridge" and "conical tip" are two different things and can not be compiled together. The most advanced Grace MM desing is F-14 with Micro Ridge stylus tip. Can’t remember Garrott with conical tip, their best (original p77) was Micro Tracer and now Micro Scanner MKII and Fritz Gyger. The "best" ortofon SPU is Royal GM MK2 with Ortofon Replicant stylus tip (similar to Fritz Gyger). Happy customers are not crazy like us (trying to buy all the best vintage cartridges to test them), maybe they are more happy.

To answer the second part of your post i want to make it clear that "OK and inexpensive" meant not expensive, nothing bad. Check the dealers price in Japan (below) in 1975.

the cheapest in F-9 series:
Grace F-9D price: 18,000 Yen
Conical RS-9D replacement price: 9,000 Yen

the most expensive in F-9 series:
Grace F-9F price: 25,000 Yen
Shibata (Discrete-4) replacement price: 12,500 Yen

The rarest grace is F-12 with Diamond Cantilever (98 000 Yen in 1981)

Something much better than F-9 is LEVEL II with Boron cantilever and Micro Ridge stylus (37 000 yen in 1983)

And the next one is F-14 LC-OFC with Boron cantilever and Micro Ridge stylus (49 000 yen in 1985)


@fsellet

I was so curious about SPU sound 3-4 years ago, bought one new SPU Classic GM MK2 with Conical tip for my Thomas Schick tonearm which was designed for SPU and Denon in mind. It was the worst cartridge in my life! Heavy monster with huge diamond required very high tracking force up to 4g! I like ONLY how it looks (design) which is beautifull, but the sound is so boring. Like you, i’ve been reading so many positive feedbacks online about this classic cartridge and i have seen so many statement that conical tip is actually very good one and 4g tracking force is also normal. Some people call it "very musical" cartridge as oppisite to high-end cartridge. At that time i had ZYX Airy III with silver coil on Technica EPA-100 tonearm and that was a high-end cartridge. And you know what? I like the high-end cartridges and in my opinion Conical SPU is not musical cartridge at all, but just boring to death. I ried to play Jazz LPs with Conical SPU. I never had any problems with tracking etc, but each time i was thinking about my ZYX Airy III with Micro Ridge tip, because it was fantastic cartridge compared to uninvolving Conical SPU on dedicated heavy tonearm. I have high efficiency system with no crossover (full range drivers, 101db) with Push-Pull tube arm and various phono stages. The conical SPU was the worst cartridge ever!

But i decided to try a better SPU DESIGNED ONLY FOR JAPANESE MARKET and i bought very rare SPU Spirit (LIMITED EDITION MODEL, ONLY 500 UNITS MADE) with much better coil wiring and Elliptical tip. This cartridge was much better than Conical SPU! It was a very good cartridge in the same set-up (SP-10mk2 and Schick "12 tonearm), but i’ve noticed some misstracking on various LPs, so i decided to return the cartridge to the Japanese shop and they accepted my return with full refund, the serial number was 500 and it was the last SPU Spirit in production line.

The stylus tip does metter even for SPU, that’s why i said that the best SPU is the one with Ortofon Replicant Stylus, the model is SPU Royal GM MK2. And this model is extremely popular in Japan. The superiority of the conical SPU is just a myth! Raul used the right word for this phenomena - this is anachronism.

the manufactures is giving the conical option because of the price, there are so many SPU models, but the Conical models are the cheapest. Some people can not afford 2200 Euro SPU Royal GM MK2, but they could probably afford 750 Euro SPU Classics. This is marketing, the reason they are still available is just because it’s a classics, they can hook you up with the cheapest model and then you want to upgrade later.

Let’s go back to the GRACE now:

I have no idea why do you think that F-9D is much better than F-9P? Do you have a picture of the stylus to make sure is it NUDE or BONDED?
The difference in price between F-9P and F-9D is just 2000 Yen (not the big deal, still much cheape than all others in F-9 series). It seems like the F-9D is higher in compliance and that’s why the tracking force is lower (maybe the stylus is nude). But Grace stated (by mistake) in all catalogs the tracking force for all models from 0.5g to 1.2g which can’t be true. I assume that the conical styli of professional F-9P require higher tracking force (at least 2-3g). For some reason the price for F-9D in the 70s was even lower than for F-9P, maybe it is also mistake, i’m not sure. But as i said earlier those cartridges are just cheap alternative for those you can not spend more, it is also marketing and that’s fine to have a product for beginners. The F-9D is definitely not a high-end model in F-9 series, but if you would like to believe it’s " audiophile cartridge" with conical tip then no problem.

I don't think we have missinformation in this thread, at least we are trying to spread the light on various missinformation coming from the manufacturers sometimes. I made so many prints in my life and i know there might be typos, so no wonder if the manual printed with typos and it was too late to fix it. 
@harold-not-the-barrel we have very little info about F-14 models because it’s a short lived series, for example the original F-14 BR/MR was instoduced in 1984 and discontinued in 1985.

F-14 LC-OFC appeared in 1984 and discontinued in 1989.

Before there was F-12 model - the one with Diamond Cantilever (the most expensive Grace ever made) and it was also available for a few years from 1981 till 1983.

The LEVEL II model was there from 1982 till 1988 (and LC-OFC version appeared in 1984).

But the most popular F-9 series existed from 1974 till 1981 and along with LEVEL II it was long lived series.

The mid 80s was hard times for Grace and many others, CD era killed many cartridge manufacturers, maybe those model were not distributed very well, or many not so many units were made. One of my LEVEL II BR/MR has Sumiko sticker, this company was their distributor in the states.

@harold-not-the-barrel 

Stylus tip for F-12 Ruby and F-12 Diamond is elliptical, but i have never onwed those models and information can be wrong, because they are mega rare. 

My F-12 stylus is clear, model L12B (Line Contact? Beryllium Cantilever?), impossible to find any info about it. 

I have plain black stylus on my F-14 cartridge, not sure what it is and can't find any info about it, but the sound is great.  

LEVEL II Ruby is 0.2 x 0.8 mil and they call it Super Elliptical (or Hyper Elliptical) or Advanced Luminal Trace. 

but LEVEL II MR/BR is Micro Ridge tip and Boron cantilever, i'm sure it's the best combination!  

The F-14 LC-OFC was released also with SAP (Sapphire Cantilever) and MR (Micro Ridge) stylus tip. 

... and another F-14 RC LC-OFC has rare Ceramic Cantilever with New Line Contact Stylus.

I think the F-11 does not exist, but the F-10 is MC cartridge available in 3 different versions. 

And another virtually unknown MC is Grace Asakura-1, 03mV output (86000 Yen in 1986), replacement MC stylus with Solid Boron cantilever and Super Luminal Trace stylus tip. 

I think the Asakura-2 was MM (not the MC, output is 5mV). Beryllium Tapered Pipe cantilever, same Super Luminal Trace Stylus tip, the price for this cartridge in 1986 was 48000 Yen. This model looks exactly like the earlier Grace F-12, stylus replacement also looks like the F-12 replacements.    

Asakura-San was the Grace founder and those Asakura-1 and Asakura-2 models are signature models released in 1986 and discontinued in 1988.

And the absolutely unknown model is "Grace F-14 Excellent" - specially calibrated series, i got this one and love it.  



 
I see, this F-11 MC looks exactly like F-10 MC

Only F-12 MM (and Asakura signature model) looks way different from all others