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 dgarretson

Lewm, I would have increased confidence in SS's $500 Grace Ruby stylus if Peter would post the promised photo of the product and fix the URL order link that currently describes a VPI Zephyr.
Thanks, Ecir38. I now see that there is a minor bug in SS's F9 URL link. There are two lines in the link to get further info on the Grace F9: one line leads to the F9 template and the other line leads to the Zephyr template.
Dear Nandric, the Acutex 4XX-series manual mentions use of "space-age[cantilever] materials like boron and titanium." One may presume that this would at least apply to the top 420 model.
Hello Acman3, The removable Trans-Fi headshell is in progress at the shop and should be finished next month. It will have front and rear counterweights and an uninterrupted balanced harness from the bayonet receptable to the phono stage, probably using Audio Note silver wire.
Dear Nikola, In this instance there is no arm tube. The headshell bayonet receptacle butts directly into the vertical pivot bearing. the tonearm wires run from soldered connections to the pins on the backside of the bayonet receptacle, through the pivot bearing, up to a gantry from which the five wires hang, and on to the phono stage. Please forgive an old american colloquilism: the Terminator is not your father's moustache.
Dear Nikola, this comes dangerously close to the storyline of Gogol's The Nose, in which a customer's missing facial part discovered in a barber's piece of bread signifies castration. A cigar is sometimes just a cigar, but a moustache is usually more than a moustache.
As one in the 'linear group' whose 'set' also includes both Acutex 420STR and 320III STR, I propose a further set division between flat- and long-nose cartridges. Through this distinction one also finds a useful simile to describe certain posters. Preferring 320III STR to 420STR, I am a flat noser-- perhaps with a linear flat nose.

On the other hand, to be in the long nose set one need not experience the 420STR-- there are many in the general set of audiophiles with very long noses, often easily recognized by others if not themselves.

Lew, having compared both cartridges on a linear arm, I would agree that the 420STR does some things that neither the 320III STR nor other top MM/MI that I've experienced quite match. As has been noted, it is extraordinarily vivid with lots of jump and boogie-factor. It does a great job of conveying the dynamics and flow of music. Also, to paraphrase Frogman, it is very direct, not pretty or kind, and as a pro musician he notes that much music is not pretty or kind. However, by comparison, the 320III STR has most all of these qualities and is cleaner and less coarse. Its quieter calmer background is much better at revealing depth and subtleties. This is suggestive that the 420's virtues are affectations. However, among all the MM/MIs the 420STR 'alternative' should certainly be experienced, as it is in the small company of cartridges that can tighten your wig.
Lew, my only info on point is a Trans-Fi friend who compared M420, M415 and LPM312 to a recently acquired NIB M320III STR. (I have compared all of these except for the LPM.) He felt that the M320III STR clearly surpassed the others, as well as all other cartridges in his experience including London Decca Reference. For both of us the M4XX series revealed a minor but stubborn sibilance that the M320III STR avoids. He found that sibilance is less of an issue with LPM312 than with M4XX. FYI, he mentioned that the Slovenian who is selling a Stanton collector's edition cartridge on Agon may have a few more NIB examples of M320III STR.
Lewm, I can confirm similar results with an Acme silver fuse at AC inlet on my BAT VK75SE. I have not tried their fuse holder.
Hello Don,

By Ruby "S" I assume that you mean Soundsmith F9 Ruby with OCL? I have been on the fence about ordering one. What does the SS stylus holder look like?

The Acme fuse was icing on the cake of many mods to VK75SE. In addition I bypassed the soft-start thermistor with silver wire-- which is also worthwhile.
With discussion returning to Grace, I recently pulled the trigger on a Soundmith F9 holder with ruby cant and OCL. Should arrive in mid November. Unfortunately I have nothing from Grace to compare it to, as my stock E stylus is broken.
Lew, I was on the fence about what to do with the F9 body--a $47 eBay purchase. The rising cost of retips tipped me toward SS. So the F9 will carry a stylus costing 10x more than the body. A good analogy may be to what in LA is referred to as a "torpedo stick"-- a twig of a girl with massive silicone.
Here is the Soundsmith Ruby OCL stylus:

http://cgim.audiogon.com/i/vs/i/f/1352189501.jpg

I sweated Ben Day dots detaching it from the silicone blob that fastens it to the acrylic box. It is an undocumented alien, save for recommended minimum VTF of 1.5gm. Its professional-looking engraved, anodized alum stylus holder fits snuggly into the cartridge body, mandating firm but gentle handling while mounting or dismounting to avoid a blunder with the hair-thin ruby cantilever. I was too eager to get this going to dally with the microscope. However, under a simple magnifier the OCL stylus looks perpendicular. At 1.5 gms it rides reasonably high. On the Trans-Fi linear arm the stylus deflects markedly until the air manifold is set dead level-- indicative of a relatively high compliance suspension.

This one replaces M320III STR with Axel's refreshed suspension. The initial impression is that the Ruby is in that league.

After 75 hours of break-in it is time for an update on the Soundsmith Grace F-9 Ruby OCL stylus assembly. To get this out of the way: Peter gets a poor grade for unresponsiveness to emails. No reply to my request for set-up advice or specs on the stylus, and no documentation with the purchase except for the recommendation of a minimum VTF of 1.5gm. This is at par with Soundsmith's silence during the eight months that it took for me to receive their retip of a Lyra Helikon in the 2009 timeframe. However, given the esoterica of custom styli, I don't care much about communication as long as the product acquits itself with honor. In fact, in an age of super-saturated networking, one may even take perverse pleasure in an eccentric hobby in which a service provider remains subbornly uncommunicative for months or years, only to resurface with something truly extraordinary.

It was only necessary to say this to unbruise my ego over the Helikon retip and as caveat emptor to any audiophile who expects coddling by customer service. To close on the point, the Ruby OCL assembly arrived inside of three weeks from order. Unlike the broken OEM stylus that came with my used F9, it fits snuggly in the cartridge body. Had the stock stylus holder fit better I might have sent it to Axel for a retip. However, it was too tempting to hear the F9 with a Ruby cantilever consistent with construction of Grace's original TOTL offer. Finally, in favor of working with Soundsmith, I felt it was worth the sporting bet of $500 to hear a fully finished product in which Peter had full control over the integrated assembly of SS holder, suspension, ruby cantilever, and diamond.

It is physically well-made, with a properly alligned cantilever requiring minimal azimuth adjustment. Consistent with his claim for the OCL diamond, there is a narrow range of VTA and VTF to get it right-- so far tail slightly up and VTF of 1.6gm on Trans-Fi linear arm.

It took 50-75 hours to reveal refinement in detail, expanded soundstage, concussive dynamic envelope, and full embodiment of well articulated LF. It is impressive in all of these and other respects, over-turning any preconception of yin-yang dichotomy between MM/MI and MC. It's right up there with the short-nosed Acutex M320III STR. The Ruby OCL may be a bit more resolving and perhaps a bit less enveloping. I need to revisit the Acutex to see if there is really any meaningfully difference between these two beyond confirmation bias that tends to favor the last mount in the saddle. Unfortunately I don't have an OEM Grace stylus to compare it to.

It's great that Soundsmith has an off-the-shelf turn-key TOTL stylus replacement for F9 that is generally available for instant gratification. This one changes the rules of acquisition for MM/MI. Had I started at this point I could easily have limited at least several diversions into vintage cartridges.
Lew, circa '09 I never had any luck by phone either. If you succeed in reaching Peter it would interesting to know if he thinks that the performance of his $500 turn-key assembly will exceed the performance of a $350 Ruby/OCL retip to your OEM Ruby holder. I imagine that the performance would be the similar-- assuming that he replaces your aged suspension as part of the deal.
Pryso, I was chiefly interested in compliance, output, and tracking angle specs-- mostly to compare to published Grace specifications. At this level of price and performance it is reasonable to expect such info from a manufacturer of finished goods-- though irrelevant to routine inspection & servicing of other manufacturers' cartridges. However, a degree of mysteriousness is inevitable in high-end audio, and after 8000+ posts hereabouts I suspect we all grownups when it comes to "blind" set-up.
Dear Raul, Thanks for suggesting to re-fuse the Velodyne. Over the past few weeks I've been incrementally installing Acme silver/cryo fuses and fuse holders in BAT VK75SE, Atma MP-1, and ARC PH-2, both at AC and on DC rails. This has been a small revelation-- far more than expected. Some of the improvement was immediately noticeable(e.g. rail fuses on BAT), and some took 10-20 hours of break-in. I forgot about the sub!
Dear Raul, Each substitution reduced congestion and improved resolution and timbral accuracy all across FR. Replacing the four DC rail fuses at 6C33C output in BAT amp is the most dramatic change by virtue of improved LF. I can see why Victor has eliminated rail fuses in his latest REX amp. As you indicate, the improvement is perceived as a clearing of LF and bass harmonics at higher frequencies. Plucked bass lines, nuances of single-coil vs. humbucker pickups, and baritone acoustic guitar strings come alive in a way that I've rarely experienced in audio.
Lew, with the improvement in LF performance of amplifier to main speakers that is audible down to the 30hz crossover point to the sub, I can now hear more clearly the discontinuity between mains and sub-- discontinuities of timing and of tonality. Maybe this can be resolved with refinements to sub set-up and re-fusing per Raul's suggestion.

BTW, even when operating at a relatively benign sub-bass crossover point around 30Hz, getting the Vel. DD up to snuff has been an evolutionary process entailing modifications to plate amp, cabinet structure, and experimentation with stands.
Dear Raul:

"every single improvement in my system need it that I made it a whole new subs set up but when you are " there " ( " perfect " integration)"

My journey with the DD-15 sub has been along the same lines. Since last post I resolved the disjunction in timing by bringing the sub out of the corner and forward to the main speakers. The DSP set-up utility is versatile in allowing the user to adjust phase shift in small increments. However coincident timing may also be a consequence of room effects and placement issues that are less predictable than the DD set-up utility can address in itself. The long reflected wave form of sub-bass frequencies suggests that a sub's location in the plane of mains shouldn't have much to do with timing. With a sub we are really hearing the room as much as the speaker. However with improved LF articulation I do hear more accurate timing at the new position. Perhaps timing is detected more through higher-order harmonics than through LF fundamentals. This is a separate consideration from your point about IMD causing problems up the frequency range.

In addition, fierce LF vibration through the sub's cabinet walls may modulate the cabinet surface and propagate off the cabinet into the room as upper bass and mid-range frequencies. Whatever the Vel's strengths as a sub, the cabinet is pretty basic MDF that benefits from additional internal bracing and damping. I painted thick damping compound(containing ceramic silicate and brass dust)to its interior and added a Star Sound SP-1 rack. The solid coupling of the SP-1 is a big improvement over the soft coupling of a prior Auralex foam platform. I have a sack of micro-bearing steel on top. The microbearing is more reactive than lead shot and does a better job of dissipating vibration into heat. Other mods include discrete Schottky rectifiers and silver internal wiring(which IIRC you have done as well.)

I generally accord with Lew that most subs do more harm than good. When it's done right and the sub volume level is not exaggerated, it adds a satisfying skirt below 30Hz that pressurizes the room without the dreaded "thump."
Hello Lew et al, It's been too long since listening to 981LZS to comment authoritatively. LZS will be revisited, though probably not before CES. IIRC Stereophile denotes the de-listing of items from Recommended Components List that have ossified in memory. For me the LZS has slipped into this category. Most recently I've been toggling between M320III STR and Grace/Soundsmith F9 Ruby OCL. Reptilian winter conditions of 55-60F in the listening room require increase of VTF to 2-2.2gm on Axel-modified Acutex. Perhaps an increase in VTF will bring yours up to par with Stanton and Grace? I'm inclined to rate Acutex slightly above Grace-- better layering, rounder images, more relaxed background. It's a close call near the apogee of MM/MI. With LZS I'll try fresh tubes in MP-1 phono.
Dgob, My apologies, I was away at CES last week and in recovery most of this one. I just sent you all I know about Vel DD-15 mods.
Ct0517, of things analog at CES I particularly enjoyed the new Triplaner 12" on an SP-10 MK3, a Pass-modified MK2 with a custom balanced heavy platter(improbably good with MA505 arm), and several Air Force One TTs, one with new Graham and another with a $30K pivot arm that I want to erase from memory due to price. The Kuzma 4-Point with redesigned Stabi TT(now with a single DC motor and a relatively stiff flat belt) was very effective--particularly as demonstrated by a personable Franc K. The Grand Prix Monaco failed to match the analog magic of these others.
As if guided by a Ouija board I just ordered a used Precept 220 body from Witsolutions and a 550ML stylus from Lpgear. The mechanics of PayPal echoed the muscular twitching of a corpse, as mentioned somewhere in Joyce. After purchasing fifteen or so MM/MIs, I certify that this is my last one-- unless shown to be superior to Grace F9 with Soundsmith OCL ruby stylus and Acutex M320III STR. In that case the bar is raised.
The Precept 220 body with NOS 550ML stylus now has five hrs on Trans-Fi linear tonearm and modified ARC PH-2 phono stage loaded at 100K. My wife, a jaded observer of windmill fighting, says it sounds "big and buttery" in a good way. Beck's Sea Change Mofi sounds voluptuous and detailed like the SACD and far more enveloping and seductive than the same LP I heard on a $400K system at CES. Dylan's Time Out of Mind-- certainly not an audiophile recording-- is rich and emotional and enigmatic, with more saturated colors than I've heard before down in those grooves. The question is whether this is real or exaggeration. So far so good.
Acman3, Good to have your update on Precept. At 20 hours my experience with 220/550ML accords with yours, except that at winter temperatures in this old house I need around 1.5gm VTF to get good tracking on Trans-Fi arm. The Precept has an almost preternatural combination of smoothness, detail, timbre and embodiment above the waistline through mids and treble. There is a little abdominal fat below the waist-- not quite as articulated and dynamic LF as Grace F9 with Soundsmith OCL Ruby.
Yes, she meant "big and buttery" as a compliment. I don't think she was refering to me.
While staging replacement of tubes at 1500 hours in my BAT VK75SE during the past week I have been astonished by the improvement in performance of the Precept 220/550ML. I'll take a hit upside the head on this. Unless one is set up to make instant comparisons between cartridges, owners of tube equipment need to factor aging tubes into their memory of cartridges. Henceforth I'm going to keep a fresh set of tubes on hand for each cartridge evaluation.

At this point I can find no fault whatsoever in Precept.
Harold, History will reveal that Copernicus listened to the music of the spheres through a linear tonearm and that Ptolemy was a pivot guy.
Frogman, Sorry I was unclear. The perceived improvement in the cartridge was due to the retubing. It's not a deep insight, but a reminder(as Raul notes in several other contexts) of the sometimes undetected elephants in the room that bias reviewing. I can't recall reading any reviews in which retubing is explicitly mentioned. However the effect of replacing aging tubes may be more dramatic than the difference between some of the great cartridges of this thread.
So far I've had two SS products. At Peter's recommendation, for Lyra Helikon I opted for his OCL tip glued onto the stock ogura-manufactured boron rod cantilever($550). For the Grace F9 I bought his turn-key replacement assembly comprised of alumimum holder, ruby cantilever, and OCL stylus($500). I choose the finished assy because the stock plastic holder that came with my F9 was a loose fit to the body. The SS holder is a nice tight fit. I don't know how Peter's propriety suspension compares to an original Grace Ruby.

One of these days I'll do a SS ruby/OCL retip on Acutex M320III STR.
As noted on the turntableneedles.com site:

Precept PC110(Ivory colored needle PCN110E)

Precept PC220 (Gray colored needle PCN220XE)

Precept PC440 (Black colored needle PCN440LC)

No color is ascribed to PCN550ML. Mine acquired from LPGear is blue. All of the photos of purported PCN550ML shown on several web sites show blue plastic. QED any blue one acquired from LP Gear is none the three above. Unless it is entirely fake, it may be reasonably concluded to be PCN550ML.
Lew, That's a good idea. I have an original(gray plastic) 220 stylus that I may send to SS for an OCL ruby rebuild. Perhaps this would put the 550ML in its place-- which is already pretty high on the totem pole IMHO. I'm inclined to think of it as ersatz rather than bogus-- a slightly more nuanced view of this very good if not TOTL performer. This with 100K load and positive VTA to bring up the HF.

Have you had a chance to try out your SS F9?
Jah is for me. It's worth $299 to settle the controversy about blue whatever.
Don, as Jagger said, it's only rock n' roll but I like it. For a clear comparison I just need to find a better microscope.
Don,

You may find it here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Audio-Technica-Precept-PC550ML-With-Original-Box-Stylus-Accessories-/300905777631?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEWNX%3AIT&nma=true&si=wkJJNY54UOLxCmAahyG4%252F4Q6JR8%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

Regards,

Dave
Dear Raul, I received the 550ML and indeed its (dark blue plastic) assembly is quite different from the ersatz (light blue) LP Gear offer. I have not yet examined it under the scope, but casual inspection suggests a solid rod cantilever and a smaller diamond. After a time in the saddle it will be interesting to compare to your JVC X-1.
I've had three balanced phono stages: BAT VK-P10, AtmaSphere MP-1, ARC PH-2. I recollect that in the first generation P10 the first gain stage is single-ended, the rest of it is fully balanced. In subsequent P10s the first gain stage is fully balanced.
Lew, If you can wait a day or two I can email you enlargements of the legitimate (dark blue) PC550ML beryllium stylus that I recently acquired with a 550 body.
I posted a few rough photos to AA of the (dark blue) Precept PCN550ML stylus

http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/bbs.mpl

Clearly in evidence are a solid rod cantilever and non-bonded square shank translucent diamond.

Performance is in a different league from my other PCN styli, which include an original PCN220XE and LP Gear ersatz PCN550.

There are minor differences between the 220 and 550 bodies-- I believe the 550 body sounds slightly better than the 220 independent of stylus. The 550 body weighs 5gm; the 440 body weighs 4.9gm. The 550's coil resistance is 440 ohms; the 440's is 458 ohms.

The cartridge came with an original manual. Here are the stated 440LC and 550ML specs:

-----------------------440LC------------550ML
FR-----------------15-40,000hz------5-45,000hz
Output(1 kHz, 5 cm/sec)--4.2-----------4.2
Channel separation
1khz---------------------31------------33
10 kHz-------------------21------------23
Channel balance---------.75-----------.75
VTF-------------------.75-1.75------.75-1.75
VTA---------------------20D------------20D
Stylus shape----LC sq. shank nude----ML sq. shank nude
Cantilever------Beryllium------------Beryllium
Load R------------------47K------------47K
Load C----------------100-200-------100-200
Here is a working link:

http://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html?forum=vinyl&n=1051821&highlight=Precept+550ML&r=&search_url=%2Fcgi%2Fsearch.mpl%3FForumSelect%3DSelected%26author%3DCarlos%26

Regards,
BTW, en route to Bethlehem three wise men walk into a bar. Sayeth the bartender, "Who do you think you are, three wise guys?"
Dear Raul, 100+ hours with Precept PC550 confirms the initial impression of excellence. I can't find fault with any aspect of performance, except perhaps a bit less precision in LF delineation than ideal. It's a great tracker down to 1gm, exhibiting no sibilance or obvious distortions. Very detailed, smooth, and continuous from mid-bass to very extended HF. Ambient queues float all around the speakers and fill the room from side to side and front to back to greater effect than lesser transducers.

I'm just now installing a new custom pivot/wand assembly for the Trans-Fi arm that will accept standard removable head shells. I've acquired several head shells including Ortofon woody, Ortofon magnesium/CF, and AT magnesium. This gets me into the game of quick cartridge changes. The first step will be to mount Grace F9 Ruby, AT 20SS and few others and compare to PC550.
Yikes, my editor went missing in above paragraph. I meant to write that ambient cues float all around the speakers and fill the room from side to side and front to back to greater effect than with lesser transducers.
Dear Raul, thanks for your perspective on the 440ML as a top or near-top performer. This evening after a slight increase in VTA I was able to tame LF of PC550ML into a tauter presentation consistent with your experience of 440LC. Part of my problem with cartridge set-up has been transitioning from winter to summer temperatures in the listening room. A 10-15 degree increase has greatly improved cartridge performance as well as sensitivity to minor adjustments. I suppose I should retire entirely from posting during winter, or else pony up to increased heating bills. However in that event I must become resigned to affording fewer MM cartridges.
Dear Raul, FWIW I was considering purchase of a London Decca Reference until my friend and designer of the Trans-Fi Terminator tonearm disposed of his after comparison to a NOS flat-nose Acutex M320III STR.

Regards,
Dear Raul, I guess it's time for me to revisit the Sumiko Virtuoso DTi that has been in storage since my fork in the road into MM/MI. I believe at $1200 this was Sumiko's TOTL HOMC, though uncertain where it fits in sequence with the Alchemist IIIS. The Virtuoso was my first high-end MC following the Shures and Stantons of the day. It has a diamond plasma coated Ti cantilever. I recall it as an average performer relative to the Scantech AQ7000NSX Fe5(great model designation!) and Lyra Helikon to follow. However, my example has seen lots of use and may be in need of retip.
Dear Raul, I've delayed mounting my Virtuoso Dti due to back order of TX2575 resistors to change loading from the 100K currently in my MM phono stage. Based on your experience with Alchemist, do you think it's worth giving 100K a try?