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 halcro

Dear Professor (Timeltel),
I have to admire your persistence?
I can't remember more than one cartridge I have ever persisted with......which, having initially sounded poorly.......transformed itself into a spectacular swan?
On the contrary.........most of my valued cartridges sounded wonderful from the getgo?
Just mounted a NOS Shure ML140HE yesterday (thanks to a valued contributor here).......and can hardly contain my enthusiasm?!
This specimen may be too good to be true?
I need more time to collect myself?
I find myself in agreement with the Professor's 'treatise' on materials and their specific characteristics.
I also am firmly in the 'wood' headshell camp.....having never met a 'woodie' I didn't like?
Dover.....do you speak from personal experience with wood headshells? And if so.....which ones in particular did you find act as 'tone controls'?
My favourite 'woodie' has been the Yamamoto HS-1AS until recently when the Professor's favourite Ortofon LH8000 arrived unexpectedly at my doorstep?
Damn if this thing is even better than the Yammie?!.......because it's not nearly as beautiful as the HS-1AS which has a fine satiny black ebony sheen upon which is screen-printed its nomenclature in gold.
The LH8000 is covered in a cheap looking full-gloss sealant (obviously to prevent moisture absorption and consequent movement in the wood) making its appearance at the end of the FR-66S a slight disappointment.
But I bow to its supremacy!
And Professor.......I left quite a few ?????? out of this posting.....just for you :~}
For whatever reasons (at a certain point I personally stop caring what those reasons are) digital playback does more damage to that sense of visceral than does analog.
Well said Frogman.
To this day.......I have never heard digital playback which 'moves' me in any way.
And there are no question marks to follow THAT statement!
When I read that I posted that " I respect all your opinions but IMHO that could not happened and if you heard that was because two factors: or you are near deaf or you know nothing about live music performance level ".
Well.....I think this 'glorification' of 'live vs reproduced' is self-fulfilling.
If I were Raul....I could make some inflammatory statement to the effect that HIS system is simply deficient if it can't produce sounds able to approximate the sound of 'Live'?
Mine certainly can.
I've walked outside my place whilst a solo piano was still playing on my turntable and have had people say how lovely the 'playing' was.
And yes.......we've all heard the apocryphal tales of the wandering minstrel and the solo clarinet/saxophone in the street?
But I've also heard the Mr Wippy van roll past playing Greensleeves from its roof-mounted megaphones...and thought it was 'live'?
No-one dares to mention the live music events which simply fail to convince?......and I mean full orchestral music.
Just recently I was in Ravello in Italy sitting outdoors listening to the 88 piece Shenzhen Philharmonic Orchestra playing Wagner.
There were 10 first violins, 10 second violins, 10 violas, 10 cellos and 8 double basses as the string section alone.
I sat not 30 feet away in a variety of locations to see if what I heard could be believed?
There was little top-end.....there was little bass....and there was zero excitement. It was as if a tinny transistor radio were positioned on a picnic blanket in front of me?
And this is not an exceptional experience.
I saw Andrea Boccelli with the full New York Philharmonic in Carnegie Hall. I was dead centre in a private box on the second gallery level and the sound was lightweight and insipid.
I was at a function in a showroom once where they had a trio of musicians as 'background' music.....violin, cello, flute.
I could walk up to them and even around them.....yet the music had none of the 'realism' of my system? It was 'dead' and unattractive. I was deeply disturbed.
So please......stop this 'bleeding hearts' worship of the 'Absolute Sound'. It is a myth intended to bestow legitimacy and acumen on those who 'profess' it?
Yes......really 'great' live sound is intoxicating.
But it is just as hard to find as 'great' reproduced sound.
And if you haven't got it Raul.......please don't assume that others are similarly deprived?
Frogman,
I am not commenting in any way on the 'quality' of musical performances......just as those extolling the virtues of the wandering 'minstrel' or 'open window on live instruments' are not?
We are simply discussing the supposed 'superiority' of 'live' sound to reproduced sound and it's supposed easily heard distinctions?
If you've heard 'poorly' reproduced 'live' sound.......then I fail to see your argument?
Halcro, you were, in fact, discussing the quality of the performance. You mentioned how the flute trio sounded "dead and unattractive"; how the NYP's sound was "insipid". Those are all performance traits that don't have much to do with frequency range, dimensionality, sound staging, or harmonic distortion.
I was indeed discussing the quality of the 'sound'. Your rules that 'dead and unattractive' and 'insipid' are not to be used to describe 'quality'.......are not my rules?
I believe that the 'secret' to approaching the 'dynamics' of 'live' sound.....is the reduction (or elimination) of all possible distortions?
In that belief.....I am wholeheartedly with Raul.
I generally listen at 90dB or thereabouts.......but can comfortably turn it up to 95dB without strain.
My speakers are 99dB efficient and are sealed boxes with only two Duelund capacitors (one for the Scanspeak tweeter and one for the Scanspeak mid driver) whilst the 12" woofer is run 'full-range'.
With the addition of two Vandersteen 2Wq powered subwoofers and the M5 electronic High-Pass filters......the power demand on the two 200W Halcro DM58 monoblocks is seriously reduced.
The Halcro electronics are amazingly pure but are improved even further when using the Cardas Clear XLR interconnects in 'Balanced' mode.
With the reduction in distortions and the efficiencies in driving the speakers.....even the tiniest distortions heard with various LOMC cartridges are discernible.
And that segues nicely into this entire Thread topic?
Yes Chris.........a lot of work?
Do you know what the result was?
I can't seem to find this anywhere?
An addendum to my previous posting........is it just me or do others find the weakest link in audio to be 'speakers'?
In over 30 years of listening.......I can count on one hand the speakers I have heard which actually sound convincing?
Leaving aside Planars, Electrostatics, Horns and other specialised technologies like Ohm and MBL......moving coil 'box' designs appear to have 'lost it' (if they ever 'had it')....since the advent of SS amplification?
The 'failings' IMHO appear to be linked with Low Impedance, Low Efficiency, High-Order and/or Complex Crossover design and Porting?
I think the ONLY commercial speakers I have heard recently which to me.... come close to presenting a convincing 'image'.....were the Magico Q5 (which are now superseded by the M5).
Is it so hard for designers to hear the benefits of High Impedance, High Efficiency, Minimal Crossover, Sealed Box designs?........or is it simply 'easier' to design for theoretical flat frequency response in the computer, using these other models?
Hi Lew,
Yes.....you're right about the Magicos seemingly being in the same 'camp' I appear to be disparaging?......yet its efficiency is quite high, its impedance curve is not difficult, its crossover is first order (I believe).....and it isn't ported.
But I mention it only as an example proving the exception to the 'rule'?
Dear Nicola,
My experiences with Apogee were not as positive as yours?
My friend had the Apogee Divas which he drove using the big Naim NAP250 amps left over from his tri-amped Linn Isobaric period.
To me, the Divas sounded too much like......metal?
Which to me, is not surprising since that was the resonating medium?
I didn't know the early CLSs were built in Australia?
How did that come about?
I had my FR-7f originally re-tipped to original specs through Dertonarm's Japanese Master in Tokyo.
So I heard it with brand new conical stylus.
When this new diamond spontaneously sheared one day.......I sent it to Axel.
As far as I know.....I have the only FR-7f that Axel has re-tipped with a new Line Contact diamond?
So 'I' am the ONLY one of 'ANYONE'.......and thus blessed.......feel safe from contradiction?
For the time being.........
Dear John and Dover,
I think almost everyone who heard the original CLS over 20 years ago were similarly stunned?
I remember listening to them in the Dealer's showroom on a Saturday afternoon with my friend Richard.
On the following Monday morning he had ordered them.....and by Wednesday evening they were singing in his listening room powered by the Audio Research SP-9 preamp and D-115 power amp.
Unfortunately.......like most samples of those speakers......the panels shorted after a few weeks and after having new panels installed.......the same happened to them after a few more weeks.
It was a problem that spelled the end for the CLS......and the CLS/II was a entirely different (and unsuccessful) final gasp for that particular concept?
It's footnote in history however.......will remain until we too.....expire?
Ooohhh Nikola,
You are in for a treat.
On your beautiful FR-64s......I await your verdict with excitement and apprehension?
Regards
Dear Nikola,
It's good to see you enjoy the FR-7 cartridge in the FR-64s arm.
A match made in heaven IMHO.
Dover....I also have the FR-64s with 'SILVER INSIDE LEADS' and the B-60 VTA Tower.
I had one with copper wiring prior to this one......but I can't validly claim to hear differences?
The FR-64s is the greatest bargain in used tonearms IMHO......and I consider you very lucky to have yours.
In my experience.....a truly universal arm which manages to extract the very best from all types of cartridges I have tried.
Without interchangeable headshells.....my DaVinci 12" Grandezza gets little use amongst my 6 arms and I was looking at replacing it with one that does have removable shells.
After looking at most of the possibilities, and weighing up the risks involved......I thought to myself....."How can any arm be better than the FR-66s"....which I already own?
So I bought another one!!?
But the prices of these monsters make those of the FR-64s look like ridiculous bargains?
The B-60 VTA Base is an interesting story.
Fidelity Research originally made these for their big 12" arms like the FR-66s whilst the smaller FR-64s usually relied on manually loosening grub screws to lift or drop the arm.
I don't know how many B-60 Bases were made for separate sale.......but as a result.......there is a scarcity of original B-60 Bases and the last one on its own I saw advertised about 2 years ago, was priced at $1100?
There have been a few copies of the B-60 Base over the years, and they vary in quality.
A 'giveaway' that you are looking at a copy includes:-
* The black knurled knob for adjusting height on the original is 19mm diameter. On the copies.....it is 17mm diameter.
* On the original.....looking down on the circular plate....the stainless steel is linished (brushed) in a circular pattern. On the lesser copies....the plate is polished.
* On the original top circular plate there are no fixing screws at all. On the copies....with the knob at 6 o'clock.....there is a fixing screw at 3 o'clock (countersunk grubscrew on the good copies and surface mounted Phillips on the poor).
* There are also a few additional screws and/or holes on the side barrel of the copies which you don't really see once installed?
* The 'oozing' clear grease on the VTA barrel is another feature of the copies which isn't there on the originals.
* The 'action' of the knurled black knob is tight on both originals and copies but on the originals......there is a slight free movement in both directions before 'takeup' whilst the copies have no movement.

No matter how good the copies.....when I look down and see the smaller black knob and screw-hole......I feel slightly disappointed?
Lewm,
* On the original top circular plate there are no fixing screws at all. On the copies....with the knob at 6 o'clock.....there is a fixing screw at 3 o'clock (countersunk grubscrew on the good copies and surface mounted Phillips on the poor).
Looking DOWN on the top of the circular plate with the black knurled knob.
I never claimed that the Fidelity Research B-60 Base was the best VTA adjustment device I have experienced?
That accolade must go to the Micro Seiki MA-505 device which uses an ingenious cam device which one operates by sliding a horizontal lever in a clockwise or anti-clockwise direction. The lever locks with a twist of the fingers at the end....so that 'on-the-fly' adjustment becomes a quick, one-handed operation. Sheer genius!?
Why no-one else has copied this method continues to puzzle me?
Likewise for their dynamic VTF adjustment which.....unlike the FR Series arms....is able to be dialled in 'on-the-fly'.
Did they stop there?.......how about Anti-Skate adjusted 'on-the-fly' as well??!
And then there's the Azimuth adjustment screw which most of these types of tonearms are missing?
Micro Seiki knew their onions alright.....but is there a weakness in their solutions which prevents other designers from imitating?

The FR B-60 base is just a well made fairly basic device which, because of its robustness....continues to perform flawlessly 35 years later.
I don't think the same can be said for that of the Phantom VTA adjustment?
It's interesting to note that Continuum designed their VTA Tower very similarly to that of the B-60?
In fact when I was designing my bronze armpods....I designed the internal 'cut-out' to accommodate the 'barrel' of the Continuum VTA Tower.
When I inserted the B-60 Base for my FR-64s......it fitted with not even 1mm to spare?!!
Thank you Continuum!
Dear Nikola,
Yes, Lew eschewed the 2mm difference in diameter as a negligible concern....and in truth...so did you?
But the smaller diameter of the knurled plastic knob was only one of the differences I listed to assist anyone in their discovery....as indeed....until a week ago, I was ignorant on these issues.
But the thing that causes me concern.....is the visible (and sometimes surface mounted} screw on the top-plate!
Trust the aesthetically challenged lawyer and medical researcher to miss the real point?
If I mentioned to Lew that I had a perfectly functional replica of a Porsche 550 Spyder which I can drive around the streets every day instead of keeping the $1Million-$3Million real one in the garage.......he would (I imagine) take a different stance altogether? :-)
Oh yes In_shore,
My MA-505s is my 'go-to' tonearm for any new MM cartridge I obtain......because it's so easy to find the correct VTF, and VTA which I can then transfer for this cartridge in all the other arms.
And just like you......I also have only used MMs in my Micro. I'm a bit loathe to try the low compliance LOMCs in case I'm disappointed?!
I'll have to do it some day I think. After all......the ZYX UNIverse sounded just fine in the low mass Hadcock GH-228 I used to have?
I didn't know that about the Micro headshell?
There is the 303X and 304X I think? One has the 2 holes and one doesn't. I have three of those that DON'T have the 2 holes.
But does that mean there is a jig for setting the overhang of the cartridge a la Phantom?
The only beaf I have with the 505.....is trying to find the centre of the pivot to measure spindle to pivot distance?
There is simply no indication? :-(
Other than that.....I believe this arm to be the other great bargain in used arm prices.
It has never failed to extract the best performances from my MMs.
And it's just sooo beautiful! :-)
An important consideration......just ask Nandric!
Dear Nikola,
Not hearing any 'fatness' with the FR-7f(mod) in the FR-66s on the Raven......however, with my UNIverse in the FR-64s on the TT-101.....I am currently experiencing what seems like another half octave as well as a widened soundstage.
There seems to be an anomaly here as the UNIverse has never sounded quite like this......nor has any arm/cartridge combination?
I'll see if it's the hashish when I listen tomorrow?
My MC loading is fixed at 220 Ohms in the Halcro DM10.
The loadings and capacitance are only variable on the MM input.
Dear Nikola,
I know you wish to have the best....especially regarding cartridges......however I think there must be differences between the FR-7, FR-7f and FR-7fz which go beyond the stylus profile used?
If not.....I would be inclined to consider my FR-7f(Mod) to be an FR-7fz because of the change to a line-contact stylus?
But the output voltage,load impedance and output impedance are different between them both. And that's only the specifications which are published?
The output impedance and dynamic compliance...as well as the stylus profile....are all different between the 7 and 7f (not to mention the colour of the body from silver to black :-))
I daresay there would be many cartridges which share similar specifications to each other....yet are different animals in terms of motor, coils, magnets etc...and also sound completely differently?
Perhaps there are others here who know more about the intrinsic differences between these Fidelity Research models?
In any case.....the main thing is how happy you are with the sound of your FR-7?
And from the sounds of it....the answer is....VERY?!
Regards
Henry
Thuchan,
Thanks for the Link.
I'd forgotten about that thread?
Great info and comments. I too miss T_bone.
Last I heard....he had bought The Beat turntable and was moving to a boat-house in Japan.
Then someone wrote that he was moving to another country?

Don,
Thanks for the Axel Link. I keep playing it over and over again....hoping that somehow the German will be understandable?
Dear Nikola,
Here in Australia.....when someone is sick......he normally seeks treatment to effect a recovery?
From your behaviour on the 'cartridge' pages of EBay......I would proffer the opinion that you are 'hooked'....and as an 'addict'....you should either go 'cold turkey' or find a chemical substitute? :^}
Having interchangeable headshells I fear......has merely fed your obsession?
Regards
With your record Dover......I'm surprised it's not a higher percentage :-)
Having not been one to previously embrace the 'sound' of the Acutex cartridges......the 420 STR has finally developed into an interesting proposition?
The secret........more than 50 hours of 'break-in'.
Now I'm not a patient listener when it comes to cartridges.
Unlike the Professor who I suspect has a masochistic streak to his gentleness (as indeed do most Kentuckians).......if a cartridge does not interest me after 2 days of listening......I usually let it play amongst the traffic outside our house.
I've tried with the Acutex 310, 312 and 315 to extract something.....anything...that will entice me to listen through the horror.
With the 420STR mounted in my SAEC WE-308N tonearm on the Victor TT-101.......after more hours than any cartridge should warrant......it has finally blossomed.
Now the SAEC is a particularly fine performer with MM cartridges and exceeds the abilities of most other arms I have experienced......so if you have the 420STR.......my advice is fit it to the best arm you can find........and then play it, play, play it?
Dear Nikola,
It seems you have slithered firmly across to the LOMC camp and have forgotten your allegiances to the 'low-cost' MM brigade?
An Olympos........really?
For that kind of money I could buy an SAEC WE-8000/ST tonearm and still have enough over for a UNIverse or 20 good MMs?
Don't you find it absurd that nearly all the top LOMC cartridges cost more than the very best vintage Japanese tonearms?
And the arms don't wear out......
Dear Nicola,
Although my favourite cartridge (Signet TK7CLa) is difficult to find........it at least is POSSIBLE?......I just bought a NOS one on EBay.
But with your and Dgob's mythical Glanz 5 and 7 cartridges......I have not seen one on EBay, HiFiDo, Audiogon or TopClass?
It reminds me of Thuchan showing us his super rare and unobtainable SAEC WE-8000/ST tonearm which took him 5 years to find?
I would dearly love to sample these Glanz 'wonders'........but if they don't exist, can you hear one if it falls in the forest?
Ah Professor,
It is appropriate that you re-introduce the Empire D4000/III to this discussion?
I well remember that after re-mounting the only MM in my possession (Garrott P77) after reading this Thread......the first 'new' MM cartridge I purchased via EBay was the Empire 1000ZE/X followed closely by the D4000/III.
I thought I had reached Nirvana (as Raul says).....and so I bought another one thinking that would last me till I died?
Well......we all move on and learn more (as Raul says).....but still.....those two D4000/III get regular air time chez Halcro :-)

And that Shure ML140HE you steered me to?.........gives my Signet TK7LCa a fair run for its money.
Regards
Greetings Thuchan,
I'm pleased you like the TK7LCa?

And Raul.....that SAEC WE-8000/ST you just saw recently on EBay....is sitting happily upon one of my solid bronze armpods surrounding the Victor TT-101.
And might I say........I appear to like all the same 'distortions' as Thuchan and the Professor.
Not that there's anything wrong with that......?
Hi John,
Don't give up posting yet.
You history indicates that you have only recently started posting.......and this thread is the 'first' one to receive those?
Until the moderators see that you can be trusted......are not a 'troll'......they will check before publishing.
After a suitable number of approved posts.....you will be set free?
And now suddenly.....I am up for 'Moderator Approval'?
Ohhh how the mighty have fallen?!
It's interesting that Don and Fleib reintroduce the Clearaudio Virtuoso into the discussion?
After Raul proclaiming it the COTM (cartridge of the month) a while ago....I found a cheap used example (black) in Tokyo (HiFiDo) and sent it to Axel for an aluminium cantilever and pressure-fitted nude line-contact stylus transplant.
The returned Virtuoso Black became an instant 'Reference' for me and both Nikola and I waxed lyrical on this Thread about it.

A fair time has passed and new tonearms and other cartridges have occupied my attention since then.
How quickly one forgets?
With my 'new' SAEC WE-8000/ST tonearm apparently designed with high-compliance MMs in mind......I removed my Virtuoso from its aluminium headshell and re-aligned it in the wood Ortofon LH-8000 which allowed me to 'twist' the cartridge for perfect Baerwald alignment.
Raul, you should try this with your WE-8000 as it allows the use of interchangeable headshells without the unobtainable SAEC off-set ones?
Geometry now set and with a VTF of merely 1.1Gm.....I sat back and listened.
Now Raul has extolled the dangers of the 'Wow' factor in audio many times......noting its alignment to his famous 'distortions theory'.....and indeed sometimes, a 'Wow' response can happen because of some anomaly in the design of a particular cartridge?
But the 'Wow' that I experience with this Virtuoso in the Ortofon headshell on the SAEC tonearm......is so alluring and constant...that I fear for my other cartridges?

What does one do with a cartridge that projects the sound in a way that makes others sound reticent?
If the mid-range is strong and vibrant and natural AND the bass is controlled and deep and tight AND the treble is delicate and extended and shimmering.....all at the same time......what particular 'artifice' or 'voodoo' is at work in this design?
Why do I feel guilty about being so seduced by this 'sound'?
For three days now, I have been awaiting the revelation of 'the three-card-trick'.....and I'm still waiting?
I cannot force myself to attempt the restitution of another arm or cartridge for fear that:-
a) The audio world as I have known it will collapse or
b) This magical sound will somehow disappear and never be recaptured?

I fear even attempting a change to VTF after reading Fleib's 2.4 Gm recommendation.....I fear ANY change?
I fear the possibility of a 'mirage' which may vanish?
But meanwhile.....as long as it lasts......I am glued to this currently produced MM cartridge which may.....just may.....become my standard reference?
I also tried posting 24 hours ago suggesting a Shure cartridge to Thuchan......but that one has disappeared into the ether after being 'held' by the Moderators?
Land of the Free indeed?
Now that THAT post appears to have 'slipped ' through......the Shure ML140HE is a real contender.
Trouble is.....it's as scarce as the Signet TK-7LCa according to the Professor.
Hi Thuchan,
The Shure ML140HE is a true contender.......if you can ever find one?
They may be scarcer than the Signet TK-7CLa models......or so the Professor thinks?
Thanks Audpulse.
I agree that the paint over the Halcro DM10 circuit boards affords protection against possible corrosion...as well as helping with damping as you point out?
Just makes for difficulty in others being able to work on the electronics in case of any fault?
Just heard back from the Moderators.
Apparently it was not I who was being 'moderated'..........but the whole MM Thread thanks to the appearance of an 'intruder' a few weeks ago?
I guess we can be thankful that they 'monitor' the thread....rather than just shut it down?
If form follows function, then I think the ML140HE is one of the most beautiful cartridges I've ever seen!
This is a clear case of BEAUTY being in the eyes of the beholder?
Hi Don,
As Nikola says.......the 'intruder'....or 'troll'.....turned our thread into personal attacks on one or more people we know.
They were inappropriate and offensive posts which have since been notable by their absence.
Thanks In_shore.
In regard to your 'lost' channel.......I also had exactly such a problem with one of my FR-S4 headshells.
After storing it for some time with a mounted cartridge.......the right channel went missing on re-insertion.
I thought it was a headshell problem and had it replaced.
Long story short.......it turned out that the contact points of the headshell were not making full contact with the arm 'points'.
Really tightening the collar on the arm solved the contact problem and voila.......two channel listening was re-instated.
Good luck.
Dear Professor and Raul,
Sorry to give the impression that my phono-stage is 'down'.........I was merely sympathising with the Professor's frustrations at his system sounding poorly from time to time?
My Halcro preamp is working perfectly......however last week.....outside work on the power cables caused havoc with the 'sound' of the built-in phono stage despite the intervention of the Shindo power conditioner?
All is back to normal at present :-)
Dear Nikola,
Retired Balkan lawyers in Holland must have some good superannuation......or else the state is very generous with its benefits?
Regards
Greetings Professor,
Your crystal ball needs refreshing.......it's summer here and more like 28°C (82.4°F)....
Power is clean at the moment :-)........but 'fire up the barbie' season sounds good!
Haven't seen a typhoon in Sydney since...........???
All the very best to you and everyone over the holidays and into the New Year.
Dear Professor,
As Nikola will agree........having 2 turntables and 6 tonearms is both a blessing and a curse.
The Virtuoso is on R&R whilst I listen to the Signet MR5.0LC, the UNIverse, the FR-5E, the Signet TK-7LCa, the Signet AM10/155Lc and the FR-7f(Axel).
I have been known to listen to all these cartridges in one listening session......but not today.
I'm off to neuter a nearby abattoir :-)
Regards
Henry
I'm inclined to agree with Raul on our lack of 'scientific' knowledge regarding turntables in general and plinths in particular?
I don't doubt that plinths make a difference to the perceived sound of various turntables.......but how do we assess whether those differences are bringing us closer to the 'source' or merely adding attractive colourations?
I listen to my Victor TT-81 and TT-101 without a plinth.......and they sound pure, uncoloured and transparent to me.
If I placed either one in a plinth........it will conceivably alter the sound.
Does this sound like anything other an 'addition' to the sound I am now hearing?
Much is made of the necessity for a heavy plinth for idlers like the Lencos and Garrards......yet the EMT 927 and 930 are simply mounted in an open welded steel frame and reputably sound the best of any idler (or any turntable at all...according to some?).
And nobody seriously speaks of changing the plinth material for the big Micro Seiki SX/RX5000 and SX/RX8000 belt drive decks to improve their sound?

I am certain that many turntable manufacturers have scientific and field data built up over many years in some cases.......but they obviously would not share this proprietry information?
The most recent 'scientific' analyses of turntables and tonearms to my knowledge.....has been those of Continuum Audio who had a collective band of highly qualified scientists and audiophiles working within universities utilising the most advanced computer program's and methodologies.
The Caliburn, Criterion,Cobra and Copperhead were the results of this research.

Those who can....do.
Those who can't.....fill Audio Forums with homespun theory and speculation :-)
Happy New Year to all.....and enjoy the music.
Dover,
Thank you so much.
I closed down all the local abattoirs over the holidays.....and I have never heard such purity, openness and transparency as a result :-)
Who knew that vegetarianism was the path to audio Nirvana?
Regards
Hi In_shore,
In the 'Nude Turntable Project'.........we could find no-one who had exhaustively tried a 'nude' DD deck against the same one in various plinths and could describe the differences experienced?
If you have done so.....it would indeed be valuable if you could contribute your comments to that thread?
Regards