Alex, I did not do a survey, but for what it's worth, I use ProGold to clean contacts and Walker SST Extreme as an enhancer IF the contacts are not going to get hot, as in a phono system. For tube pins that do get hot, I also use ProGold enhancer. There is no doubt in my mind that the Walker stuff (and perhaps other products like it, because I have done no meta-comparisons) really works great. The difference is immediately audible. One display of its effectiveness is irrelevant to audio; we had a bad contact on a 15W bulb in our chandelier. The bulb was constantly going off due to being loosened by vibrations from footsteps. I put a dab of the Walker on the threads and on the contact point, and that bulb has never even winked since.
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.
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.
Showing 50 responses by lewm
Ddriveman, I suppose you get the point by now that the cartridge per se "floats" in almost all cases, meaning the cartridge is not grounded. That is why a cartridge is an inherently balanced device; there is signal at each end. (In a single-ended phono stage, one side of the cartridge is defined as "ground" by the labels on the cartridge body and the orientation of the RCA jack.) So, the only thing you have to be concerned about is grounding of the tonearm body and/or the turntable chassis to your preamp, if indeed that is necessary. (In some cases, it's not.) There are a few cartridges that do have internal grounding; one of the brands that is commonly of that type is Decca. If you don't use a Decca, then most likely no ground is needed. |
Dave, You wrote, "In my experience phono hum is typically picked up by exposed unshielded tonearm wires. Using screened tonearm wire and floating the screens at the cartridge end, deals with RF antennae effects associated with exposed wires. A separate physical ground to the cartridge body deals with ground hum issues unrelated to wiring. Some MM cartridges (Empire comes to mind) have a ground tab that connects the cartridge body to the negative pin of one channel. With a balanced phono stage I remove this tab and ground the cartridge body separately to XLR pin 1. I'm not sure whether this rerouting of physical ground of the cartridge body has made a difference, but it makes intuitive sense for XLR balanced operation." To begin with, hum (meaning a 60Hz or 120Hz tone) and RF are two different phenomena. The former is usually due to lack of grounding or a ground loop. IOW, I don't think shielding or lack of same has anything to do with it, but I am ready to be corrected. Shielding protects against RF, which is mainly high frequency stuff. As to the Empire ground tab, which I have not yet encountered, if it is indeed connected to the pin on the cartridge output that is labeled "ground", then by connecting it to pin 1, you may be losing any advantage of a balanced phono stage. In other words, you convert the cartridge to single-ended output, even though you do have a balanced phono. (I don't know what or whether that tab is connected to.) If you removed the tab and grounded the cartridge in some other way, how did you do it? If you found a metal part of the cartridge body that is NOT part of the mechanism, then I guess you can ground the cartridge body without losing the balanced output. I wish Ralph would read this thread and comment. But perhaps I am re-stating what you meant to say in the first place. |
Hi Raul, I thought you had evaluated the AT20SS back in the early phases of this thread. You liked it a lot, but you seemed to like the other Audio Technica vintage cartridges better. (I can never remember the nomenclature, but they have 3-digit numerical designations, like 170 and 180.) Do you now think the AT20SS is competitive with those? Thanks. Drew, as Raul will tell you, it IS easy, especially if you run the wires outside the tonearm proper. You only have to ground the shield to the preamp and the tonearm body to the preamp as well. The cartridge per se does not need to be grounded at all. Raul has photos. |
Rich, Cannot easily be done with ordinary benchtop tools. You need a test LP with a 1kHz tone recorded at a velocity of 3.54cm/sec or 5cm/sec (the two industry standards) and then you'd need a 'scope or a very sensitive AC voltmeter to measure the output. The LP is probably available, but most voltmeters are not sensitive enough to give you a decent reading. Keep in mind that the numbers are in fractions of a millivolt for MCs and a few millivolts for MM/MI. I have a scope and I think I have an LP, but I have never tried it. I usually measure the AC voltage of a test tone AFTER the first gain stage in my phono preamp. It's much easier there. (One thing of note: sometime in the last 20 years and without much fanfare, most companies switched from the 3.54cm/sec standard to 5cm/sec. Obviously, this inflates the voltage measurement by nearly 50% over the earlier standard. So, our vintage cartridges are even "hotter" relevant to our modern cartridges than their output numbers would suggest.) |
"Shield" = braided metal tube thru which the tonearm wires pass. Then you solder a little tag at one end of the jacket and attach the tag to the chassis of your preamp via the ground lug on your RCA or XLR, only needs to be grounded at that one end. Braided shield in many sizes (by internal diameter) can be purchased from Michael Percy and probably a million other vendors as well. It's not an absolute necessity, but with phono wiring most people do it to block RFI. |
I am about to try out the LPM320 in a Saturn V headshell (ya gotta love that early 80s name). But I also have to report that after I repaired my preamp, which it turns out had a glitch in each channel (two different unrelated problems, one due to my own error in failing to solder a joint and one due to a resistor that failed), I had a listen to my Stanton 980LZS. This is a fab cartridge. Really great bass definition and depth. Great soundstage, lovely highs, excellent tracking now. (I previously ascribed the distortion I was hearing to mistracking. Not so.) I am not ready to rank anything, but it seems to best both my Orto M20FL Super and my Azden P50YL (or whatever it's called), but now I have to re-audition the Azden, because one of those two problems affected the linestage in one channel. (The Azden feeds an Ayre p5xe which feeds the MP1 linestage. The Stanton is feeding the MP1 phono stage direct.) |
Rich, Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's. If you want help forming an opinion, there are reams written about this subject in other threads. Try searching this Analog Discussion section and Vinyl Asylum, also Tweaker's Asylum, if you want to really confuse yourself. There does seem to be agreement that eliminating metal to metal mechanical contacts in the signal path is a good thing to do, as far as it can be done. |
Thanks, Silvio. As an owner of a Grado TLZ purchased about 25 years ago and resurrected from storage thanks to this thread, I have been struggling to get the best out of it (again). If I recall correctly back when the TLZ was my one and only cartridge, I owned an Alfason HR-something tonearm. Right now, I am trying to play it on a Dynavector DV505 in a Dynavector headshell. Perhaps this is too much mass and I need to find a lighter weight shell, at the very least. Any further ideas would be appreciated. The tone is good, but there is a bit of distortion that suggests the suspension might have stiffened up over time. I hate to increase VTF too much for fear of damaging my LPs. I am using 1.6g at the moment. |
Dear Aolsala, You wrote, "Cartridges in the late 70s and early 80s are truly better than anything in the 60s. I am sorry but speak with any engineer in cartridge design and he will agree." I guess you may be feeling battered by now, but as far as I know, this thread has mainly concerned itself with cartridges from the 70's and early 80's, and I don't see where anyone ever wrote that cartridges from the 60's were inherently superior to them, ("Inherently" is the key word; some early stereo cartridges did get good reviews here.) I do recall when the ADC XLM(?) was nominated king of the hill by HP. I bought one and found it to be not so wonderful (but not bad) in my own system (yes, with all the qualifications about the ancillary equipment of those days). Back then, a lot of the stuff reviewed in TAS was accessible in terms of cost, and I and my audiophile friends often auditioned items recommended by HP. (These days, who could afford to do that?) We usually did not agree with his recommendations. The HK Citation 12 preamp is one example I remember well. HP thought it was the greatest. We thought it was shrill, the epitome of bad transistor sound. Halcro or anyone else, What are you hearing with the Azden that you deem to be due to "RF"? |
Tim, Could not remember whether the Citation preamp was #11 or #12 so took a shot at it. Thanks for correcting me. Good to know you felt the same about it as I (and others I knew) did back then. As to the cartridge, the one I owned was definitely the first version, the XLM. I'd like to have it back for a listen on today's gear. |
Aolsala, You jogged my memory of the XLM. I too remember now about the sample to sample variation, which was quite broad (ranging from very good to very mediocre). I supplied an English dealer with several samples, purchased in bulk from a local discount house (in the Washington, DC, area). He and I noted that one or two of about 10 samples were grossly defective right out of the box. But they were so inexpensive that one never thought to complain about it; just buy another. |
Dear Raul, That is one phenomenal review (of the AKG P100LE). A few months ago I picked up an AKG P8ES vdH II. How would that one relate to the P100LE. I wonder since in both cases the stylus was made by vdH. My cartridge is very similar in appearance to the P100LE, except it lacks that red insignia on the forward aspect of the stylus assembly. |
I am a virologist by trade (I.e., I do research on viruses). After 30 years in this field, I see that work done 20 or more years ago (some of it by me) is being repeated by the younger group of scientists, only using more modern technology to prove the same thing we already knew. And such papers are nevertheless accepted for publication in important journals. The new technology makes the old finding itself seem new. This is the human condition, I guess. Ergo it does not surprise me at all that there is such merit in vintage audio gear, everything from cartridges to speakers. But does this thread really represent a "resurgence" of interest in MM/MI cartridges? Insofar as there is little evidence that important cartridge makers are paying any attention, I thought we were more like a lunatic fringe group. |
Dear Weseixas, The Grado cartridges under discussion here have included the TLZ and XTZ and the one called "Amber Tribute", which Raul likes a lot. Another one is the Signature III (or something like that). The TLZ and XTZ are purely vintage devices, whereas there is a company in Australia that at least was selling NOS Amber Tribute cartridges. I have read negative comments on the Gold. The Denon is an MC and so has not been discussed. The Clearaudio like the Gold is a current offering and also has not been discussed here, though I have read elsewhere that it is a good one. Raul, Have you actually compared the Stanton 981 LZS and HZS head to head? |
My listening experience is in agreement with Raul's; HOMC cartridges as a class have never sounded as good to me as LOMC or MM/MI types. I have owned a couple of Blue Point Specials, a Benz Glider (original version, I think), and a Transfiguration Esprit. Maybe that's why I was so blown away by the Koetsu Urushi, when I switched to it from the Transfig Esprit. Obviously it is possible that there exists one or more HOMC cartridges that is in the same class with the other two types, but it must be a rarity. |
As regards tonearms, I have long thought that we should discuss what tonearms work best with these rather high compliance cartridges. Modern tonearms tend to have been designed with low compliance LOMC cartridges in mind, so not only are the good ones very expensive, they are also probably not the best choice for MM/MI. Here are some low mass tonearms I am looking at: ADC LMF-1 and LMF-2, Micro Seiki MA707 (which has adjustable effective mass), Infinity Black Widow. I can also put a very lightweight headshell on my Dynavector DV505. Can anyone comment on the relative merits of these and/or does anyone have some other suggestions? I know Dave Garretson has taken steps to lighten up the arm wand on his Transfi, too. |
Raul, On the tonearm issue, you have said that the standard correlation of low effective mass with high compliance is only a gross way to determine what combinations of tonearm and cartridge will perform optimally. Is or are there one or more tonearms that you think are particularly excellent with these high compliance cartridges? I gather you like some of the Audio Technica ones, and I appreciate Dgob's suggestion re the Moerch. (Actually, Moerch should have been on my original list; I forgot about that one.) The ADC tonearms are quite cheap when available and are lowest possible effective mass; are they any good? |
You make an excellent and valid point, IMO. After 30 years, we don't know what we are working with in terms of compliance. John Ellison, over on Vinyl Asylum, developed a very easy way to determine the resonant frequency, if one knows how to hook up the output of the turntable or the preamp to a computer screen with a time vs frequency amplitude display. Working backwards from the actual resonant frequency and knowing the tonearm effective mass, one could determine whether the compliance has changed over time or not. However, the fact that many of these cartridges have no problem with relatively high mass arms does suggest that compliance may have changed. What about your cartridges that have been lately rebuilt by van den Hul? Does vdH give you any data on the expected compliance after their rebuilds? I was interested on the other thread to note that you do not seem enchanted with the Allnic phono stage, as many others are. Have you heard one? I am curious. |
Wayne, I would have thought that the SME 3009 had a much higher effective mass than 6 or 6.5 gm, given the S-shaped arm tube and the fact that the arm tube is made of metal. Can you confirm that number? If it is correct, I might consider buying one. The SME III does have a very low mass, and I have one friend who is happy using it with a Pickering MM cartridge. Sounds excellent to me, too. But he likes one of his other inexpensive tonearms even better. The cool thing about this is that the megabuck tonearms are generally on the mid to heavy side, so one need not pine for them when using these cartridges. Raul uses a few tonearms that are not very expensive at all, like the Acos Lustre and those Audio Technica ones he mentioned. The ADC and Black Widow carbon fiber tonearms, like the Sumiko, are "dirt" cheap (as long as you don't use a professional landscaper). |
Timeltel, I don't know about you, but I am sure I will never hear a 2db difference in output that occurs above 15kHz. However, do you think that because you know the measured frequency response variations, you might be biased to hear the two cartridges in different ways? I note that your descriptions of their respective sonic characters correlates with the measurements you describe. I have had to make some repairs to my system and so have not yet had a chance to compare the 315, 320, and 412, all of which I acquired thanks to your help. But I will let you know when I have some feel for these Acutex offerings. (Raul, I bought all these Acutex cartridges and styli because I felt so bad about not having a Technics EPC P100C. Now you've made us all feel deprived, because none of us own an AKG P100LE. By the way, does the P indicate that this AKG is a P-mount type?) |
Dear Timeltel, I was merely referring to the fact that my own hearing is practically non-existent much above 12 kHz and certainly non-existent above 15 kHz (probably more than 6-8 db down from 1kHz). I had it measured about 8 years ago by an audiologist. Yet I cling to the notion that I can distinguish good treble from bad, because 95% of musical instruments roll off above 8kHz. It's the harmonics that I may not hear well. Ach! Quien sabe? |
Wayne, I would say "no" to your question, if you want to make rules. As a rule, the need to match cartridge compliance with tonearm effective mass is still valid, but it is obvious from everyone's experience that there ARE other factors at play (e.g., the difficulty of measuring actual compliance under dynamic conditions, the other elements of tonearm design) that sometimes result in good sound from unlikely tonearm/cartridge partners. Anyway, really, the compliance/mass thing only applies to determining the resonant frequency, which only needs to be within a fairly wide acceptable range. After that, everything else (e.g., bearing friction, apparently) counts. So the bottom line I would live by is that if there is any reasonable possibility of a match, try it. |
Dear Raul, In your remarks about bearing friction, I presume you refer to friction in the lateral plane. Yes? Of course for the DV tonearms, we have two different pivots, one for lateral and one for vertical. Does DV publish the figure you quoted (40-50mg) for friction of the bearing in the lateral plane? Thanks. I would not be surprised if you were correct. OR perhaps you are talking about vertical friction, since the MMs have such high compliance. |
Not to be a nitpicker, Raul, but the data you quote say "less than" 50mg for the bearing friction of a DV507. This means to me that there is some sample to sample variation but that the value is always "less than" 50mg. However, one hopes that is a very conservative statement, because that's a fair amount of friction for a high end tonearm. |
Dear Ecir, For capacitance values in the picofarad range, you don't have much choice in terms of materials, but silver mica or polystyrene are the best available and are both good sounding. M Percy has all the polystyrenes you may need. Don't really know if you can get silver micas in low pF values. |
Dear Franklin, Do you know the phrase "garbage in/garbage out"? It means that the conclusions reached by computation are only as good as the input data. In this case, the data are not very good, so don't worry about it, and give it a try. As Raul and I and others have mentioned many times, the compliance figure is almost certain to be worthless due to the age of the suspension materials. Anyway, even 7Hz is not untenable. |
The Audio Technica cartridge naming system has to be the most arcane one ever devised by any manufacturer. It is impossible to guess the vintage, stylus type, or operating principle, unless you already know. Plus, they seem to have produced more different models of cartridges than anyone, ever. (I am sure some one of you will now enlighten me and show me how simple and logical it is.) For ambiguity, only Acutex can compete. Anyway, I have an AT20SS, and that's it for me. |
Would not characterize the Azden as "soft" or "warm". I really don't feel qualified to comment otherwise. My system has been out of commission for nearly 3 months, but I think, over this past weekend, I finally identified and repaired the problem I was having with one monoblock amplifier. Operative phrase, "I think". |
Ed, Would you care to expand on your point? I don't get it. Are you referring to adding or subtracting capacitance? No one here is talking about "loading down" an MM cartridge. There has been some discussion about optimal resistive load with preferences ranging from 33K to 100K ohms and occasionally beyond that. Raul and many others have often expressed a preference for the high end of that range, i.e., 100K ohms. Such resistances can hardly be described as "loading" in the sense that one loads down an MC cartridge. Messing with the capacitance would typically be done to comply with the recommendations of the manufacturer. |
Timeltel and everyone else, Almarg has explained the relationship of load capacitance to frequency response for both MC and MM cartridges, better than any explanation I have seen. For me it unravels the paradox of how increasing capacitance could improve hf response, in some cases. Turns out the equation I offered is only half of the story. One needs also to take into account the inductance of the cartridge. I would suggest that you go to the post I have cited here. It's on the "MM cartridge and capacitance" thread. �There will be a quiz tomorrow. http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1286155618&openflup&9&4#9 |
Thanks, T. I was just wondering whether the relationship between R and C follows the formula for a first order Butterworth filter: f = 1/2*pi*R"C, where f is the -3db point in a 6db per octave filter. As you can see, both R and C are inversely related to f in this formula. So, if R goes up, C must go down to maintain the same value for f. etc. It's simple algebra. |