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 lewm

Dave, Do you think the NOS XSV3000 replacement styli that I just bought will work on the Stanton 980LZS? There was a note to that effect that I saw somewhere.
I am listening only to the sound of ice melting off my rain gutters. We have had no power since some time Friday night/Saturday morning. Since it is going down to 14 degrees F tonight here in snow-covered Washington, DC, I am contemplating deserting our home in favor of a sleep-over at the home of a nearby friend who has heat and power. And more snow is predicted for tomorrow (Tues). Last night, as I tried to protect my nose from freezing while otherwise keeping warm under two down quilts in our frigid bedroom, I thought of those scenes in Dr. Zhivago, when he and Lara are hiding out in a deserted and destroyed mansion somewhere in the Russian tundra. Only I did not write any poetry. Anyway, all my audio system is getting a free cryo treatment.

I did retrieve my NOS Empire from the PO this morning. Have not opened the box.
Axel, It cannot possibly be the case that the effect of a parallel capacitance is opposite for MCs vs MMs. The mechanism by which a capacitance in parallel with the signal could tend to roll off high frequencies applies to either type. But other factors, such as the values of load resistance, and the cartridges internal resistance and inductance could tend to push the roll off effect up out of the relevant audio bandwidth. For example, most people (not all) would agree that a roll-off above 50kHz or 100kHz is entirely acceptable. So because of those factors, cable and input capacitance may be less worrisome for one type vs the other. (This is my considered opinion based on what I think I know. Since I am an amateur in this field, I stand ready to be corrected.)
Davev, I finally had a chance to look at my Empire. It is indeed a 1000ZE, no X. I think I will give it a long break-in before spending yet more money on it to buy a new stylus, but thank you very much for the "tip" on where to buy it. I will give mine a few trips thru the Cardas test LP, bands 2a thru 2c, before evaluating it's ability to play music. it took awhile to wake up the Ortofon M20FL Super and the Grado TLZ, so I won't rush to judgement.
Dave G, I had/am having similar thoughts comparing the M20FL Super thru the Ayre P5Xe and into the MP1 linestage vs my various MC types feeding into the MP1 phono section. There are ways to reduce the gain of the MP1 phono so as to be able to use it with higher output cartridges. (Look at the RTP3C schematic on the Vacuum State website.) I think I have to try that in order to find out what the heck is going on.
Dear Raul, You wrote, "Dear Downunder: Normally as you go higher on capacitance as the cartridge goes brighther."

As I see it, the capacitances of the phono stage and the interconnect, etc, are all in parallel with the signal voltage. Since the impedance of any capacitor goes down as frequency goes up, I would also expect more of the signal voltage to be shunted to ground via the capacitance, as frequency goes up. Therefore, I would have predicted the opposite of what you state, the sound should get a bit duller as the hf is progressively shunted to ground, assuming the load R is held constant. Can you or anyone point out the flaw in my thinking? Thanks. I realize my hypothesis may run counter to your listening experience; sometimes life is like that.
Woe is me. My Empire is a 1000ZE, not a ZE/X. My Ortofon is an M50FL Super, not an M50E. This reminds me of Janis Joplin's lament:
"Oh Lord, won't you buy me
a Mercedes-Benz
My friends all have Porsches
I must make amends"....

I saw a very interesting discussion on one of these websites of how the brain works to seek out and devour the new in favor of the familiar. Someone has written a book about it. There's nothing to prevent it, but to account for the phenomenon, I think we have to take a longer time to evaluate these items, and then, once one is familiar with the new, go back to the old or the most recent previously preferred sample, to see if the new obsession really holds up.
Axel, Timeltel, et al, The phenomenon of resonance is one of the factors that I did not specifically mention (along with load R, cartridge R, cartridge inductance, etc) that can alter the outcome when you add or subtract C load. There is nothing mystical about this. Nor does it negate what I wrote (or the two quotes noted above from authorities superior to me) to the effect that load capacitance per se will lower the roll-off frequency at the high end. But when C interacts with R or L, you can have resonance, which could, if the values are by chance conducive, give you a peak right before the response drops off rapidly. Further, Axel, I did acknowledge that since MMs and MCs are markedly different from each other with respect to these other parameters, the effect of load C can be different between one and the other, quantitatively but not qualitatively.

PS. What the heck does it mean to say that "load capacitance should be made equal to cartridge capacitance" (quoting words to that effect noted above)?

To all, I say when you fall in love with your latest cartridge, listen to it for several weeks and then go back to your previous analog love affair. You may be surprised to find that the old girl had virtues you did not previously appreciate. Not even Raul's brain is immune to the tendency to fall for what is novel vs what is well known and understood. In other words, an ABA comparison is much more valid than an AB comparison, even though not perfect.
Guys, my point was simple: the higher the load capacitance, the lower the roll-off frequency. If the roll-off frequency is so high as to be irrelevant to listening requirements, say above 50kHz, then it is a secondary issue or a non-issue. Yes, interaction of C with R or L (inductance) can also give a paradoxical resonance peak. This could account for the observation that adding capacitance may on some occasions make the cartridge sound brighter, rather than duller, if that resonance peak is just in the wrong place. I am sorry to have been a pain in the arse.
Dear Axel, Who said I aspired to a "higher intellect"? Also, which one of us is guilty of "continuing with the argument"? Habeas corpus. Je ne c'est quois.
A wet bird never flies at night.
Timeltel, You cannot go wrong quoting Groucho. My favorite is what he said about Doris Day, who was apparently quite a floozy in private but became America's darling after she made many movies that depicted her as a virtuous innocent. Groucho said, "I knew her before she was a virgin". Both Groucho and Doris probably used ceramic cartridges back in their day.
I like the idea of removing the M20FL Super stylus guard, in principle, but I have to admit that if you mount these things on removable headshells, as I have started to do, the guard is really useful, not to say "life-saving". Same goes for the Grado TLZ, that is sitting "cantilever up" but guard-protected in a Dynavector headshell on my cabinet. I don't want to admit how many times the guard has saved the cantilever/stylus from injury and death.
Forgot to say, instead of "glue", I would recommend some Walker Audio silver contact enhancer or a similar product. You could put that stuff right on the frictional surfaces to increase BOTH the solidity of the mating and the electrical contact across them. It's not as full-proof as glue but it is less irreversible. Use the Walker stuff after cleaning both surfaces with Pro Gold or the like. I bet that would result in some dramatic reassessments of some of these cartridges, where we are listening across a mechanical contact that is 30 years old in some cases and has never been cleaned (unless of course others have been cleaning these contact surfaces).
Dear Raul, It is not that I am not used to handling MC cartridges, which generally tend not to have a stylus guards. As you know, I am only a recent convert to the MM faith, and for two decades I owned only MC cartridges. Never once did I have an "accident". In fact, I too have a Colibri, and I would burst into tears if I were ever to damage it accidentally. (Well, not really.) What I am not used to is a tonearm with a removable headshell, like the DV505 I have been using. Now that i have that, I also tend to have a few cartridges lying around mounted in headshells. This makes it much more likely that I will accidentally damage the cantilever. With the Colibri (or the Ortofon MC7500 or the Urushi), if I ever dismount it, it goes right into its wooden box where it is completely safe from any accident.

Anyway, I would love to know if anyone removed the guard from an M20FL or M20E and whether that made an improvement or indeed an audible difference in the sound. I certainly do not disagree that it could make an improvement and never said that I disagree with that idea.
Yes, Rich, up in the back or "positive VTA" as we say. Don;t be afraid to raise the pivot of your tonearm by quite a bit, but listen as you go up to find the sweet spot for your own ears. You are not at all "behind", or at least you are not more behind than I am. I am still happily listening to the M20FL Super and comparing it on a daily basis to my Colibri. For one thing, I am lucky if I get more than an hour a day to do any listening at all. The M20FL is still very excellent by any standard. Just enjoy it and forget this thread for a while. When you come back to it, the world will have changed yet again, no doubt. None of us can have the Azden that Raul now likes so much, anyway. They are all sold.
Raul, that Signet cartridge still has no takers. The seller states that he used it on his Rabco straightline tracker. For this reason, I would be worried about the cartridge; the Rabco depends upon the stylus/cantilever to drag itself across an LP. (The cartridge has to move laterally to activate a small motor that then drives the pivoted end to catch up with the cartridge position.) You can see that the cantilever is slightly bent in the photos.

Which model of Azden are you liking?
Has anyone tried the P20E version of the Azden? There are some still for sale. Raul? Remember that you and others were surprised at the performance of the elliptical version of the Ortofon M20, compared to the exotic FL stylus.

Whither the poor old Andante P76, dream-maker of the past? I haven't even listened to mine yet; it became passe' while still in the box.
Dear Raul, I am glad you are out there investigating these cartridges. You are doing the work for the rest of us, or at least you are leaving good ideas behind you. I, for one, do appreciate your efforts, but I cannot hope to keep up with you. That's perfectly OK by me. Carry on. I've got 3-4 cartridges that I have not yet heard, as well.
I have no intention of buying any more cartridges for now. I stopped a while back. And in fact I think the Azden seller on eBay has only P20E's remaining. I did not see the P50E for sale. The 20 series seems down a notch in specs from the 50 series. However, based on the table shown on eBay, it looks as though the model numbers are applied based on post-manufacture test results, except for the VL which has a unique stylus and cantilever. So you are safe, from my acquisitive nature at least. But there are others here to worry about. Carry on.
Dear Raul, In most cases that I am aware of, the adapter mounts to the headshell, and the Pmount cartridge is held in place by sticking it into the female receptacles on the adapter. Then the adapter is connected to the tonearm wires. So, how does one go about bypassing the connections in the adapter? The adapter is essentially blocking the direct access to the cartridge, and without it the cartridge is flopping in the breeze.

By the way, if you can't bypass the adapter entirely, I highly recommend Walker Audio silver contact enhancer to be used on all contacts. Don't leave home without it.
Second thoughts.
Dear Raul, In your method for altering the Pmount adapter, how do you maintain a rigid association between the cartridge and the headshell? It would seem to me that the cartridge tonearm wiring poking thru holes in the adapter would allow the cartridge to flop around, which of course would be unacceptable. Perhaps I have misunderstood your method. At times like this, we need to be able to mount photos.

So last night I had an alternative idea. Just remove the cartridge clips from your headshell wires and solder the bare ends of the wires directly to the adapter pins in the Pmount adapter. This does no permanent damage to the adapter, either, and achieves the goal of eliminating one of the two mechanical connections. It does require a bare minimum of soldering skill.
OK, if the cartridge is affixed to the adapter by some other way besides via the pins, then your way IS superior, I would agree, because the cartridge clips are generally superior to the pins in any adapter I have seen, as you say. I haven't yet taken a close look at the problem.
Raul et al, Over the last month or so, I have been "dialing in" the van den Hul Colibri while comparing it to the Orto M20FL and the Grado TLZ. The Colibri is in my Triplanar tonearm on a Denon DP80 with SAEC mat (thank you, Raul), while the MM/MI cartridges are in my slate PTP/Lenco on a Dyna DV505 tonearm. The Colibri is getting better and better. I found that it mistracked at the recommended VTF and slightly increasing the VTF made a huge and favorable difference. I am now 50-50, at least on which cartridge I favor. The Colibri is fast and lean but not so lean as to leave out the lushness of live music. The Orto is lush and lovely and I still think I prefer it on piano reproduction. (Of course, no two Colibris are necessarily alike; mine is a high output version, and I cannot remember what the coils are made of or the body, but those also are options with the Colibri.)
Rich, When selecting a mono cartridge, it is important to consider what type of mono recordings you want to play. The optimum choice of stylus shape and diameter is different for different periods of the history of recording. You will have to do some research on this, because I have forgotten what is best for what genre of mono recording. This means 78s are way different from early to mid-50s 33-rpm LPs. And 45 rpm rock and roll records may be different yet.
Oy. So I have to buy TWO mono cartridges? One for pre-58 and one for post-57 mono LPs? Actually, I think the great majority of my mono LPs are pre-58 vintage. Thanks for posting this useful information. I did some web-based research after posting above and came up with the same conclusions.

How should one treat post-57 mono LPs that are re-issues of pre-58 ones? Probably as if they were post-57, I am gonna guess.

Tim, have you actually tried violating these "rules" and does it make a big difference?
There probably ought to be a "Who needs mono cartridges when we have stereo" thread. Raul, would you care to start it? I don't know whether you ever saw the movie "Treasure of the Sierra Madre", which takes place in Mexico, but your thread could be titled "We don't need no stinkin' mono cartridges".

Tim, I keep seeing some pretty nice looking SP10 plinths for sale on A'gon for "only" $650. Not cheap, but far below the boutique prices that others charge. Possibly you get what you pay for, but possibly also a bargain.
Hi Raul, Lately I have been giving a lot of thought to headshells. I know you like the Belldream, and I bought one from 2juki. But the Belldream weighs about the same as the stock Dynavector headshell that comes with my tonearm (~11 gm). I am thinking that for high compliance cartridges, I ought to have a few lighter headshells, like in the 6 to 10 gm range. Yet I have also read that you don't think tonearm effective mass is much of a player in the performance of MM/MI cartridges as it is for MCs. Apart from the Belldream, are there any other aftermarket headshells you particularly like or don't like for these cartridges? For example, on ebay there are some nice new headshells from Audio Craft, Yamamoto, Ortofon, Orsonic, Oyaide, Phase-Tech, and Ikeda, to name several. All of the above are between $100 and $200 each. Do you have any comments on any of those? The Audio Craft, Yamamoto, and Oyaide products each have some very nice features but no one of them stands out above the others.
Thanks Dgob and Raul,, I happen to own a Denon DA307 tonearm that came with my DP80 as a complete "record player". I don't use the DA307 (don't like it as a tonearm), but I think it has the PCL5 headshell. I guess I can put that into service on my Dynavector as a "lightweight" headshell without spending any more money. So I thank you guys for the idea. Of the ones I mentioned, the AudioCraft looks very good because of very rigid one-piece construction. One of the Yamamotos offers direct-connected wires between the rear of the shell and the tonearm. They claim to eliminate a solder joint there, I guess. But both of these weigh about the same as the Dynavector headshell, so no real advantage vis a vis high compliance cartridges. The Oyaide is carbon fiber and is lightweight, I think. (The differences are now blurring in my memory.)
Raul, This is a bit off-topic but what I don't like about the DA307 design is that it has a decoupling joint in the arm wand between the cartridge and the pivot point. This presents two theoretical problems: (1) vibrational energy from the cartridge may be reflected back to it at the joint, and (2) the joint itself affords some tiny amount of "play" (because there is a rubbery slightly flexible insert there) such that the coupling to the pivot is not perfectly rigid, as I believe it should be. Of course, I never listened to it. However, I continue to marvel at how good the DP80 turntable is after a complete electronic overhaul. It's performance is consistent in general with the excellence of Denon products, as you suggest.
Headshell science: Upon close examination of the Belldream, Denon PCL5, and a Yamaha headshell that was given to me by a friend, I see that there are even more mechanical contacts than I had imagined. So for Pmount cartridges that need an adapter, you would have a mechanical connection between cartridge and adapter, adapter and headshell wires, headshell wires and connector at the rear of the headshell, headshell connector and tonearm. That's FOUR mechanical connections in the space of a few inches, which is ridiculous. The easy thing (for me) to do is to hardwire the rear male connectors on the adapter direct to the headshell/tonearm connector, thus eliminating two out of 4. This could easily make a big difference in sound, as Raul suggests. I previously was not aware that the typical headshell wires have only a mechanical slip-on connection to the headshell/tonearm interface. Even with high level signals, as between amp and speaker, I have consistently heard big improvements associated with elimination of connectors, no matter how fancy and expensive they may be.
I guess there are two Lofgren alternatives (A and B), one of which is quite similar to Stevenson. So as Downunder says, that Lofgren would also "work" with vintage Japanese tonearms. (By "work", i mean you can align your cartridge with the grid on the protractor, and it will also be lined up with the long axis of the headshell.)
Dear Royj, I don't doubt your word for a second, and you are not the first to claim the superiority of an arc protractor over a 2-point one, but I cannot for the life of me understand why this should be. After all, if the cartridge is rigidly installed it will inevitably trace an arc when aligned by a 2-point protractor. Unless the 2-point protractor is inaccurate, that arc should be identical to the one described by an arc protractor. So I can only think that most folks have been comparing inaccurate 2-point protractors to (more accurate) arc protractors OR that most folks don't know how to use a 2-point protractor so as to find the correct arc.
Dave, Where are you setting VTA? How did you set azimuth, by ear or by electronic means? Thanks.
Royj, I use a Turntable Basics protractor, which uses 2-point alignment. And as you suggest, with my Dynavector (Japanese-made) tonearm, the cartridges end up twisted in the headshell a bit to the inside. This is because the Dynavector is designed for one of several alignment algorithms and the TTB is designed for another. (I forget which is which.) So it would seem that Thom's arc protractor must be designed for yet a third alignment algorithm, so as to require twisting of the cartridge to the outside. With my Triplanar (American-made) tonearm, the TTB demands that the cartridge be perfectly aligned with the headshell. So, all of this is to say that maybe Thom's alignment algorithm is superior to the others, rather than that an arc protractor is per se superior to a 2-point type, if both are correctly used. (The common algorithms are Stevenson, Baerwald, Lofgren A and Lofgren B. Of these two are identical to each other, so that leaves three different geometries.) Maybe Thom can comment.
I just mounted the Azden in my Denon PCL5 headshell, which does not particularly impress me as to structural ridigity. However, it weighs only 8.5 gms, which might make it a good mate for high compliance cartridges like the Azden must be. I also did the mods I described to diminish the number of mechanical contacts across the headshell from 4 to 2. I got to hear the first 3 minutes of Blues and the Abstract Truth, before my wife complained that it was too late at night to start a listening session. Raul, do you use positive VTA with this cartridge? I set it up that way. More anon.

Dave, I try to do what you say with all tonearms (a straight shot from cartridge to preamp with zero mechanical connections after the cartridge), but if the tonearm has a removable headshell, connectors are a fact of life.
Raul, I have to disagree with you on the weight of the PCL5, at least the PCL5 that came on my own DA307 tonearm, (Maybe that is not the PCL5? I would not know, but it IS the correct original Denon headshell for the DA307.) I weighed mine in at about 8.5 gm, including the weight of the little shim that goes inside between cartridge body and shell. I used a digital scale that I have calibrated with a known 10gm weight. Anyway, it's academic. The question is how will the Azden sound on that headshell, and I will find out in the coming weeks. Can you confirm that you use "positive VTA" with the Azden? I set up mine so that the bottom of the little red plastic piece that surrounds the cantilever/stylus is parallel to the LP surface. When you do that, the tonearm wand is exhibiting very positive VTA.

Is it even worth listening to the Andante P76 these days? Or have these other cartridges blown it into the weeds?

Along the lines of Janice Joplin's lament ("my friends all have Porshes", etc), I still don't own a Nagaoka MP50, Garrott P77i, or Grace Ruby. Is life worth living nevertheless?
Tim (Pryso), Thank you for calling that to my attention; I had not previously noticed that you provided a link. Based on the page you referenced, my headshell is either a PCL4 (Alu) or a PCL7 (Mg) in terms of shape. (It has that characteristic crimp that runs longitudinally from front to rear.) Based on the weight, I would guess that mine is a PCL7. I dunno what that means, but that's what I must have.
Dear Halcro, Not to butt into your conversation with Royj, but there is very nice P mount adaptor for sale every day on eBay, for about $12. I've got one and it is of very decent quality in terms of the connectors. I think the make is "Pfanstiel" or something like that. To me it appears superior to the one that comes as an extra with the B&O MMC1 cartridge, which I would have expected to be high in quality. The one you referenced may also be good. Some of the better Pmounts, like the Technics, the Azden, and the B&O, originally came with their own adaptors.

Raul et al, after an hour or so with the Azden, I am pleased but not ecstatic. The forte of this cartridge is great bass definition and the ability to impart a holographic quality to instruments. Highs are quite nice as well. So, it seems to be VERY good but it does not blow away the M20FL Super, at least not so far. I would maybe say it is one tick up from the M20FL, if that. Perhaps I need to play with VTA, etc. In fairness, I have been playing newly acquired LPs, mainly, not my usual "test" LPs. (Hey, this cannot be all "work" and no play.)
Dear Raul, As you suggest, I did not mean my remarks to be taken as a final judgement of the Azden. In fact, pursuant to getting the most out of it, I asked you several days ago about VTA. I set mine up so that the little red plastic piece at the bottom of the cartridge is parallel to the LP surface. This results in quite a bit of positive VTA. Is that how you use yours, or do you set VTA lower? Last night I could hear no reason to set the VTA much lower, because bass response was indeed superb on LPs that have good bass to begin with. On that score and after even so little break-in time, the cartridge is a real winner.

As to your inquiry about wiring, I hard-soldered the headshell wires at both ends, thus eliminating two out of 4 mechanical contacts between the cartridge pins and the female end of the tonearm wand. I was looking at my Dynavector headshells, and I now see for the first time that they too use mechanical connectors at the rear of the headshell, where the wires join the male connector that joins with the tonearm. Apparently this is a near universal way of doing it. Therefore, I have more work to do to eliminate those mechanical junctions. At the same time, I will install new and better grade wires, as I did for the Azden now riding in the Denon PCL7 headshell. So perhaps that way I will get more out of the Ortofon M20FL Super and the Grado TLZ than previously appreciated.
Dear Franklin, I used to own an original HO Glider. I realize that there have been some revisions, so my remarks do not apply to the current version, BUT I would say that the M20FL (never heard the M20E), the Grado TLZ, the Azden, in other words all of the vintage MM/MI cartridges that I personally have auditioned, would be superior to the Glider, not to mention many fine LOMC cartridges that I also own, altho the latter generally cost a lot more than the Glider. I found the Glider to be sterile and unexciting yet not so detailed as to make that a virtue. It was a phase of my audio life where I could not get satisfaction from either analog or digital. Thankfully, those days are over.
Dear Raul, Do I understand correctly that you got an NOS Technics and sent it to van den Hul for.... what? Did they re-tip an NOS cartridge? It would be helpful if you could clarify just what they did to it. Do I also understand correctly then that your review pertains to a Technics that has been massaged by vdH? The sound could be quite different and certainly would be at least subtly different from a completely stock item.
Alex, I just assume it is "high compliance" and start from there. But someone here will probably have the exact and probably inaccurate factory spec. Given the age of these specimens, it is almost certain that the compliance is no longer what it once was; compliance is probably lower now. I am having no problem with tracking or LF resonance using it in an 8.5gm headshell on a Dynavector tonearm, where the P-mount adapter adds 2-3gm of mass. Hope that helps.
Timeltel, "300pF" with what resistive load? The two parameters interact, so it would be good to know both. Just by eyeball, I would say that I right now am set at quite a bit more than 1.5 degrees positive VTA, more like 3 to 6 degrees, but very hard to tell exactly. I would guess that 1.5 degrees would be barely discernible by eye. Reading your comments, those of others, and based too on my own listening, perhaps the unique thing about this cartridge is its bass and treble extension (in both directions) and detail, while midrange so far is just "good". But because bass AND treble are so good, I am at a loss as to how to adjust VTA further to effect any improvement. Maybe loading is key. I will just listen for now.
Dear Wdi, I would like to echo Raul's sentiment. That Lenco looks gorgeous! If you made the plinth yourself, you are an artiste. If not, you still have great taste and acumen. You can go to my system site and see a fairly bad photo of my Lenco L75 in a PTP top plate on a slate plinth. I can only take artistic credit for choosing the colors of the platter and top plate (black in both cases). I am doing all my auditioning of MM/MI cartridges, so far, on that rig.
This thread is about vintage MM and MI cartridges. There is no attempt to analyze the relative merits of MC cartridge (relative to each other, that is).
Here is a list of vintage and new MM or MI cartridges that you can buy today. All of these have received good reviews in this thread. I personally have not heard them all:
Nagaoka MP50 or MP500 (the newest new version)
Garrott P77i (new version of the Garrot P77, look for the Australian dealer)
Andante P76 (one of many P-mount cartridges discussed here)
Ortofon M20FL Super (available on eBay from William Thakker)
Ortofon M20E Super (ditto)
Several Grado models
SoundSmith MI cartridges
B&O MMC1, MMC2, MM20CL (rarely can be found NOS)

Others can add to this list.
If you do not fear buying a used cartridge, there are several truly NLA cartridges that have received raves herein. You just have to read the thread and look on Agon and eBay for what you might want. Best bang for lowest bucks? One of the Ortofons, IMO.
Gosh. Everyone wants to pick on the M20FL. What do you mean by "refined"? Yes, the FL is a bit on the Technicolor side, but that's not a bad thing entirely. If we move away from that, we also move toward MC-ville. Been there. Problem is we are scattered all over the world and we have different tastes and systems. Given that, the degree of agreement is remarkable.
At some point perhaps I will get around to the Empire 1080LT, but at the rate I am able to evaluate these cartridges, that day may never come (as the Godfather said). In my sonic memory dating back probably 30 or more years, the Empire cartridges were always smooth, but smooth to the point of being hi-fi-ish. With modern gear, the sonics might be entirely different.

I have been using the Azden playing into the Ayre P5Xe set to its lowest gain setting. This is the first truly "high" high output MM I have tried. (The Grado TLZ and the Ortofon have lower output voltages, I think.) I am wondering whether the Azden could be overloading the Ayre on peaks. In my private emails to Charles Hansen on another subject, he seemed to think that my spending time with MM/MI cartridges was quaint but definitely a trivial pursuit, so I wonder whether he has designed in the necessary headroom that these cartridges demand. OR I just need to increase VTF a tad. Is anyone else using the Ayre?
Dear Raul, I applaud the use of metaphor, but I am afraid you've got me this time. Can you explain your remark? Did you mean to say that the Ayre is not good enough for the Azden? I doubt that. But it may fall down in the respect that it cannot handle the max voltage output of the Azden on musical peaks without overloading and distorting. Or as I mentioned it may be that I need to tweak VTF or some other parameter of alignment.
Tim, That's exactly what I was trying to do, list the ones that are readily available new or NOS. I think you one can still find an NOS Andante P76, which would be the only one on my list that is indeed open to question as regards its availability. But heck, I have two of them in NOS condition myself. I would also admit that it would take a bit of luck to find an NOS B&O MMC1 or MM20CL, but I did. Perhaps those two should not be on a list of easy to find ones.
Downunder, I have the Ayre on its lowest gain setting, as you surmise. This gives 44db gain in single-ended mode, but I am using balanced in and out, which is why I bought the Ayre in the first place, to feed my all-balanced MP1 with a balanced phono signal. The lowest setting in balanced mode gives 50db of gain. But that is not the parameter of interest. What one needs to know is (1) what is the voltage output of the Azden on peaks, and (2) what is the upper limit of voltage input of the Ayre at the lowest gain setting before it would start distorting. All phono stages are subject to overloading, but the information that would help one to know the amount of overhead available is often buried in a data sheet, if it is available at all. (The gain setting only determines what the linestage sees from the phono stage; it does not tell you what the phono stage [any phono stage] is capable of handling in terms of cartridge signal.) At the moment, the Azden is very good in terms of throwing a holographic image and in terms of bass and extreme treble response. Right now, mine is not doing so well on complex musical transients, at least compared to an expensive highly regarded LOMC cartridge in a top notch tonearm.

So, DU, based on your comment above, I guess you will not be selling your Technics to me. Heh-heh.

Royj, Both cartridges were set-up with a Turntable Basics protractor. I do not own any arc protractor at all. One confounding factor is that the geometry of the Triplanar matches that upon which the TTB protractor is based, whereas I had to twist the Azden (and all other cartridges) a bit in the DV505 headshell to line it up with the grids on the TTB. This is common practice, but it occurs to me that the peculiar construction of the DV505 may create unfavorable force vectors when the "twisted" cartridge encounters a warp or other surface irregularity in an LP. I do have a mind to get an arc protractor that matches the geometry of the DV505. Somehow though I do not think this is the cause of my "problem".

I wonder whether any of you guys have tried the Grado Statement Reference (their top "low output" MI cartridge), which can actually be bought new, albeit for fairly big bucks. I am curious about it.