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

It is my subjective opinion, yes, that carbon fiber does not make "music".
I tend to agree with Lew on this one.
IIRC....didn't Lloyd Walker design a carbon fibre arm for the Proscenium?
This iteration did not last long and was replaced by a ceramic or titanium arm tube?
As I seem to recall from an interview.....Walker said much the same thing about carbon fibre?
Greetings Nandric,

I may have been quiet recently.......but I have been silently lurking :-)
Many changes to my system (Shindo power conditioner, Cardas Clear balanced interconnects, Cardas Clear speaker cable and Vandersteen Active bypass crossover for the 2Ws subwoofers) have raised the resolution quality to another level which has necessitated re-assessment of my previous cartridge/arm/turntable opinions.
This assessment process.....because of all the variables involved with the multiple combinations of cartridge/arm/turntable available to me.....is extremely lengthy (yet enjoyable).

In regards to Alex(Foxtan)........let me say that for many years, I have had a successful relationship with him.....having bought cartridges, headshells, tonearms and even my original Victor TT-81 DD turntable.
With the TT-101 for which he had been searching on my behalf for a year or so........he stated that it was in perfect working condition.
When we agreed on a price, he delayed sending it for a week claiming it was being checked by his 'technician'.
I then sent him a 'checklist' for his 'technician' to go through which included:-
*Both speeds to be accurate
*Brake function to be operational
He again assured me....
"Hi Henry,
As usual all my item are tested and
confirm in good working condition
before I list it.
Regards Alex"
When I received the TT-101.....I had to write back:-
"Hi Alex,
The TT-101 arrived today and I must say how disappointed I am after all the care I took in confirming that it was in perfect working condition?
1)The 'Power' switch does not function at all. It is always 'ON'.
2)The 'Stop' switch has no 'braking' action at all. The platter continues to spin.
3)The motor makes a continuous noise at both 33 & 45 speeds.
4)The motor switches off by itself after 20 seconds of operation on both speeds.
The cosmetic appearance of the table is fine but its operation could not be more dysfunctional.
Could you please inform me how to organise a return postage and refund?"

After I sent the turntable back (at a cost of $250)......I never again heard from Alex (despite many Emails).....nor was a refund forthcoming.
I had to go through PayPal Disputes to finally have them process a refund which didn't include the return postage.

Does one bad transaction make for a 'bad' Dealer?
Probably not......but his snaky behaviour during and after the transaction sure leaves a bad taste :-(
Thanks Lew.
I also am wondering about Raul’s evasiveness in revealing his two ‘choice’ LOMC cartridges?
Furthering your thoughts on trying the ZYX UNIverse LOMC cartridge………I have had three of them and for at least the last 5 or 6 years……it has been my ‘reference’ cartridge and easily the best LOMC that I have heard. It is also quite arm tolerant, sounding well in arms as diverse as the Hadcock GH 228, Continuum Copperhead, Graham Phantom II, DaVinci 12” Grandezza, Fidelity Research FR-64s and FR-66s.
The Fidelity Research FR-7f I recently acquired……comes the closest to it of all the LOMCs I have heard in my system (although the Lyra Olympos I’ve heard in other systems may indeed equal or exceed it in some ‘emotional’ aspects?).
As good as the UNIverse is though……….it still suffers IMO, in comparison to the best MM cartridges in the important areas of ‘realism’ which I mentioned in my previous post.

Raul,
Your references to colourations/distortions leads back to the quote at the beginning of my previous post….and the position of subjective vs objective which is close to the heart of our Balkan friend Nandric?

Once I had arrived at my ‘discovery’ of the Moving Coil puzzle……..it was as if an enormous weight had lifted from my shoulders?
No longer was I puzzled by my preferences…..nor was I ‘constrained’ by the accepted correct ‘sound’ of cartridges in general.
There are some MM cartridges which can sound tonally….close to LOMCs. Because of the prevalence and acceptance of the MC ‘sound’…….I feel that without consciously knowing it….we tend to favour those MMs (which approach the MC sound) as being ‘neutral’ or ‘uncoloured’?
But if I conclude that Moving Coils do not, to me, sound like the ‘real’ thing……why should I accept that Moving Magnets should sound close to Moving Coils?

Liberated as I now felt……..I listened to one of my favourite MM cartridges…..the Empire 4000D/III Gold mounted in the Copperhead tonearm on the Raven AC-2 turntable.
A liquid performance of emotional integrity enveloped my entire listening room.
Here was the ‘reality’!
No mamby pamby pussyfooted politically correct vapid ‘interpretation’ here!!?
Air…transparency…gut-wrenching bass…..three-dimensional imaging and…..the clincher……’believability’!!

I immediately reached for my other MM cartridges which were previously thought to be ‘coloured’ but shared the Empire’s DNA.
The Fidelity Research FR-5E and FR-6SE as well as the Empire 1000ZE/X and the Garrott P77.
Each one brought the emotional impact and ‘truthfulness’ that I’ve never experienced with say……digital?

The concert grand piano is arguably the hardest instrument to record and reproduce convincingly?
It has the widest dynamic range of any instrument….and it can actually be played in a home so that the reproduction of it on our systems……can be truthfully compared.
The same can be said about violins, flutes, clarinets etc……but they are relatively ‘easy’ instruments to actually reproduce?
The piano is a percussion instrument….but it is also a ‘stringed’ instrument.
On the real thing, one can hear the ‘striking’ of the hammer felt and the vibration/reverberation of the strings.
Very few recordings exist which accurately capture these effects.
Two that do it the best IMO….are the 1981 recording of Daniel Barenboim playing the Liszt Sonate in B Minor on Deutche Grammophon and the Keith Jarrett Koln Concert on ECM.
When played with the MMs I have now elevated to ‘Golden’ status…..the reality of a concert grand in my living room is achieved.
Can I really ask for more?
Hi Lew,
I'm glad you found my posts of some interest.
I have, for some time, been ruminating on the puzzle (to me) of the LOMC attraction?
What alarmed me the most......was why I heard (or preferred perhaps).....differently to the majority or high-end audiophiles and reviewers?
It is similar to my inability to listen to digital reproduction for any length of time and certainly never to enjoy it?
As with my aversion to digital.......where many have told me that I haven't heard the very best hardware available......I was fearful that perhaps those same folk would claim that my 'system' (or phono-stage, tonearms etc) was not 'up to' the demands of the very best LOMC cartridges?
Which is why I have taken the last five months to 're-analyse' all the cartridges in my newly upgraded system.

It was only with the ability to quickly change from one cartridge to another and back again....from one turntable to another and back again....from one tonearm to another and back again....that I finally 'cracked' the conundrum?

To me....it was a significant 'Eureka' moment!
The 'lure' of the LOMC was in the INITIAL comparison to the MM.
We are all 'suckers' for increased detail?
The 'Quest for Detail'....as I call it....is nowhere better exemplified than in the continual 'discovery' of a better and (usually)...more expensive LOMC cartridge of the month by the foremost analogue reviewers of TAS and Stereophile?
When the judgment for a ‘better’ cartridge revolves around ‘more detail retrieval’…..and that is often the case…..then who can blame the cartridge designers and manufacturers for pandering to that conviction?
The unfortunate result however IMHO….is a sound that increasingly departs from that of the ‘real’ thing?
Is it any wonder then that we can become blasé about the sound of a ‘live’ symphony orchestra…..and claim that there is more ‘detail’ in our home systems?

It’s true that I have heard more ‘detail retrieval’ from a super SS preamplifier and amplifier than from comparable valve types….but does that equate to a more realistic presentation of the air, transparency and soul of real voices and instruments?
An easy test for this ‘realism’ vs ‘detail quest’ is with the crowd clapping on a recording of a live performance (preferably a very good one)?
Not a single LOMC cartridge that I have heard, recreates the volume and naturalness….the air and transparency….and funnily enough….the ‘detail retrieval’ of the best MM cartridges in this regard?

Detail retrieval is but one attribute of a cartridge’s performance.
Let us beware the absolute ‘Quest for Detail’ :-)

Regards
Henry
the exchanging of headshells is of some value, but that's a personal opinion.
And it's an honest opinion......
Trying to justify 'opinion' by speculation or invoking 'voodoo' science is annoying IMO.
Now there may well be some reasoned thought behind all these 'theories' on energy transmission and vibration but it doesn't make them right?
Nor does it establish a hierarchy of 'importance' in the actual design and function of tonearms and headshells?
I think Fleib answered his own question....can we actually HEAR it?

There are so many honourable convictions in audio....especially when it comes to analogue?
Sprung turntables vs rigid.....heavy vs not so......vacuum hold-down vs none....clamps vs none....belt-drive vs DD vs Idler.
High mass tonearms vs medium......uni-pivots vs gimbal bearings.....fixed headshells vs removable......straight arms vs 'J' or 'S' shaped....single length phono-cable vs junction box.
White papers can be produced on these....and many others.....which 'prove' the theoretical superiority of someone's conviction?

But can it actually be PROVEN in the listening?
Can we actually hear the evidence of these theories?....and I don't mean have each one of us proven to himself, the best direction for his audio choices?
I mean.....in a blind listening test on an unknown system.......who is willing to bet they can hear the difference between a uni-pivot and a gimbal bearing tonearm?
Who can tell the difference between a fixed headshell tonearm and a removable headshell one?
Who is willing to bet they can hear whether there is vacuum hold-down or not?...whether a clamp is used or not?...whether the turntable they are listening to is belt driven of DD?
And has anyone ever seen a blind listening test where any listener is able to verify whether a MM cartridge or MC is playing on a consistent basis?

Yes...theories are the beautiful minutiae of audio....but a 'single' theory is rarely its own reward?

And no more '?s' for you Professor until you learn to use them with the abandon of a non-academic like me!

Regards
Henry
Dear Fleib,
Agreed…..we do have a basic problem.
I’m not a great proponent of blind listening tests either…..however when a statement is made that a principle in audio is superior to another, that statement should be demonstrable in some scientific manner?
If it is claimed that a rigid headshell is better than a detachable one….this should be audible on any system…..not just one’s own?
It cannot be logically valid that a statement is true but cannot be proved to be true?

I have the luxury of having two turntables operating side by side with three different arms on each…….two with fixed headshells and four with detachable.
If I cannot tell the difference in any way between those arms……how accurate and reliable is such a statement?

I don’t mind what anyone believes is contributing to their system’s synergy or success as long as they don’t claim some universal laws which they cannot prove and which I have personally disproved?

I can believe the passion of those advocates of valve amplification…..but it does not negate the merits of solid state?

As someone once wrote……”There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

Regards
I also agree with Raul on these issues.
...but isn't a resonance that shows up in the electrical output on test equipment, more scientific than people listening on an unfamiliar system and being put on the spot?
'Scientific' would include controlled testing using a dozen different arms of differing shapes and materials, with a dozen different headshells with all testing repeated many times?
It would need to monitor the torque values used with the headshell locking collars and also test with and without the rubber gaskets between the collars and the tonearms. Different rubber gaskets would also have to be tested?

After all that......we need to ask ourselves.....'Is this a more fundamental influence on perceived sound than the tonearm material?".....or the tonearm bearing?......or the fixity of the tonearm base?...or the rigidity of the cartridge to headshell connection?
Should we not 'scientifically' test all these at the same time?
And then how do we establish the hierarchy of 'importance' with all these tests?
I think you are missing my point here Fleib.......if I cannot hear the effects of this 'resonance' you are measuring compared directly to my tonearms with fixed headshells......why do you assume it is important or even more illuminating.....why do you assume it is 'bad' rather than 'good'?

If scientific testing determined our choices in audio......all valve equipment would be relegated to the dustbin of history?

Oh.....and all my headshells are occupied with cartridges. That is their sole purpose....not for tuning :-)

Regards
The Kebschull preamp uses internal MC transformers for the MC input, and does not represent a high gain tube phono preamp.
Hmmm....I've got it here right in front of me.
Can't see anything that looks like MC transformers? Can you post a schematic?
MC input handled without noise Koetsu Urishi, VdH Grasshopper, Clearaudio Concerto, Clearaudio Insider Gold and Lyra Helikon.
Enough gain if you ask me?
You may well have a skewed view of the tube world if this was your reference.
You may well be right.
It is still the finest, purist most transparent and transcendental sound I have heard in my system....or any other.
Visualize a bell shaped curve. Resistance will raise or lower the response in the vertical plane, capacitance moves the center left/right on the horizontal scale. By combining settings, equalization through loading is the effective outcome and a variety of responses can be obtained.
I like the Professor's explanation.......especially as I consider myself a layman/listener in this respect.
My Halcro DM10 phono stage allows continuously variable resistance up to 60K ohms which may not be considerably different to 47K ohms......although to my ears there appears to be an increase in HF response?
Apart from about 2 or 3 of my MM cartridges which need some taming and thus sound better at or below 47K loading.........I find the majority of my cartridges are happily listened to at 60K?
I then modulate the response using the variable Capacitance loadings built into the phono stage.
I can imagine that perhaps the Empires and the Fidelity Research MMs might benefit from a 100K loading?.........but that's all academic to me as I ain't fiddling around in the Halcro?
Similarly, suppose the goodness/badness of the Orsonic is traceable to its unique physical form (as opposed to, say, its metallurgical makeup); couldn't one draw a reasonable conclusion about another headshell that shared that form?
I would say so?.........
I never had three Orsonics......only one.....and there is some doubt (since the company Orsonic went out of business more than 10 years ago) if my sample was original or a copy?
Nevertheless....even whilst carrying a mild-mannered MM cartridge.....when the going got tough, and the music complex and loud.......I could actually hear the headshell 'bending' under the stress.
How do I know it was the headshell?........slipped on another five headshells complete with similar cartridges and played the same track.
I sold it shortly thereafter.
Looking at the Orsonic design from a 'structural' point of view......one would conclude that little engineering acuity was involved in its design?
The brief appears to have been.....'make it as light as possible'?
Now 'lightness' may be accomplished by choice of materials eg titanium, magnesium, carbon fibre etc..........or by 'eliminating' material eg holes or reduced thicknesses?
From an 'audio' perspective.......'rigidity' is the prime requisite for any headshell IMHO?
The Orsonic design places immense strain on achieving decent rigidity (in all planes) comparable to 'normal' headshells and thus will always be at a disadvantage when the 'going gets tough'?
But, good live sound (and certainly, the best live sound) is so superior to the best reproduced sound that it is I that fails to see the argument.
There is no way that any audio system can get close to a live sound...period. Anyone who thinks their system is close is living in cloud cuckoo land.
Well.......statements like these are obviously 'Gospel'......and so self-evident that only a fool would claim otherwise?
And they are such 'safe' statements because of that very fact?
Yet more than 30 years ago I believe......tests were conducted by Quad (I think).....where behind a curtain, a real violinist stood between two speakers and played the same piece as contained on the record.
Most listeners on the other side of the curtain were unable to reliably pick the live violinist?
Now I'm not claiming that the recorded sound can be 'better' than the 'best' sound of the real thing.........
But the 'best' sound of the 'real thing' is so rare as to be an endangered species.......and our dutiful grovelling to the altar of 'live' music is doing a disservice to the advances that have been made to our reproduction systems?
I have not heard a 'live' symphony orchestra performance I have attended over the last ten years which can't be bettered in every aspect......on my home system?
Admittedly.......only a dozen or so records I own, can accomplish this feat but that is irrelevant IMO?
Over 50 years of attending 'amplified' performances............probably only 30 to 40 remain in my memory as truly inspiring and yes........unable to be matched on my system (but this has a lot to do with live undistorted SPLs possible).
The other performances......I wouldn't wish to replicate in my home?
If this is not your experience......I'm happy for you......but please don't assume the mantle of righteouness as 'defender of the faith'?
The 'bible' is accepted only by its believers and blasphemy is rarely tolerated?
Dear Raul,
Whilst I agree that the bottom octaves are important in achieving a realistic presentation.....like you I have also heard 'hundreds' (not thousands) of speakers....but I disagree that
almost all ( decent speakers. ) performs very good from that frequency range an up
I find that almost all speakers sound like........speakers?
Almost none disappears......and in doing so.... presents an illusion of three dimensional instruments/voices?
Almost none creates a transparency and an 'air' around, between and behind the images?
Almost none appears to be effortless in its presentation?
Whilst the lower octaves are great to have.....they can never make up for the deficiencies in the mid to upper regions.
One of the most memorable speakers I heard with this ability.....were the original Martin Logan CLS electrostatic panels driven with valve electronics.
They had little bass.....yet managed to disappear and present a spooky facsimile of 'the real thing' which enticed one to actually walk around?
Lew,
If you really want to hear the very best of what LOMCs can deliver....I have two suggestions.
Firstly....the ZYX UNIverse which is .24mV and quite unfussy about arms (I used it with success on 6 arms from a Hadcock GH228 to the Copperhead and FR-66s.
It is now back in production with a new price of $5,000 from Mehran of ZoraSound ZYX
Every discriminating listener to the UNIverse has had nothing but praise for it.

Secondly.....if you want to save yourself $1,500 yet own possibly the greatest LOMC cartridge ever made.......buy a Fidelity Research FR-7f FR-7f for $2,000 and get a Fidelity Research FR-64s tonearm for $1,500 FR-64S
If you send the FR-7f to Axel.....for €179 extra, you will have the best LOMC anyone has ever heard. Better than the legendary Olympos!
There are other sessions when the components seem to not want to have anything to do with each other.
Greetings Professor,
I know what you mean and I sympathise.
This last week.....for the first time in a year....my phono-stage has been destroyed by the vagaries of the power grid.
And this...despite the fact that I installed a Shindo Mr T power conditioner for the turntables and preamp since this last happened?
To hear the soundstage collapse taking with it, the transparency and emotional content is heartbreaking.
At these times it is hard to reconcile the beauty and 'soul' which one listened to only yesterday....with the hard-edged brittleness akin to the worst digital reproduction?
I can perhaps understand the vagaries of the electrical supply in the wilds of Kentucky :-).........but in the midst of a metropolis of nearly 5 million like Sydney......I am aghast.
In my system this phenomenon seems only to attack the phono-stage.....leaving the line-level inputs untouched?
I believe there is a case here for the Discrimination Commission?
I hope your occurrences are not often?
Who is Phillip Holmes?
Are you as sick and tired as I am, of reading the same shallow, uninformed drivel that masquerade as 'Reviews' by the majority of audio writers today?

I was browsing through Dagogo last night...and stumbled upon a reviewer I'd never heard of before......but one who, not only can write.....but appears to have a knowledge and experience and passion, sorely lacking in the current mainstream crop?

His name.....Phillip Holmes.
Just read this Review of the AT150MLX he has written and see if you agree?
He also goes some way to explaining why those people with some valve electronics.....do not 'get' the benefits of MM cartridges?
I have never seen this mentioned before?

This man seems to know his 'onions'?
Greetings Professor,
Some of us experience excitement when discussion turns to audio. This is as it should be.
Quite right.......and excited you should be with a NOS AT-155Lc stylus assembly.
I thought I had five of these beauties but I was wrong......I have six!!
And four of them have the white silicone undisturbed sealant over the compliance screw.........but you know.....sometimes they may have run out of WHITE silicone and who could really blame the technicians in the laboratory if they then used black? :-)
Two of mine have just that!
And that black dot on the end of the cantilever is actually a deep cobalt blue. And sometimes the technician had a little too much on the brush and coated the last top end of the cantilever as well as the end point.
All the line contact styli however are perfectly identical.
Enjoy.....and I found your cartridge comparisons extremely valid and informative.
I look forward to more?
Regards
Henry
Dear Raul,
For months maybe years I know exactly what kind of sound is enjoying Halcro and he can't believe it because I never been at his place but I know very well almost all his audio system items and his posts help me about.
There is no experienced or respected audiophile who has the temerity to write such rubbish.....except you?
You have never heard my speakers as they were a pair of only a dozen ever custom built in Australia.....and mine have had extensive revisions including new Scanspeak Mid and Tweeter drivers as well as Duelund capacitors.
As such....there are no others like them anywhere in the world.
You have no idea what my listening room sounds like.
You have no idea what an Axel-modified FR-7f mounted in an FR-66s tonearm sounds like....nor an Axel-modified Dynavector XV1s mounted in a Copperhead tonearm sounds like.
Yet you continue to make outrageous claims about 'knowing' the sound of other people's systems.
Perhaps you could give professional audio reviewers some tips on 'how to make their lives easier'?

But you're in luck Raul.......
In a few weeks, Thuchan will be visiting Sydney and will hear my system.
Why don't you describe on this Forum exactly what you 'know' my system sounds like in detail (hopefully using specific record tracks to make your points).....and then Thuchan, after his visit.....can proclaim you the prophet you think you are?
Here is an opportunity Raul, I hope you will take advantage of?

Regards
Dear Raul,
A perfect speaker the best can do is to reproduce the signal with out degradation and there is no perfect speakers/rooms.
Well I believe that the the sound of any system is primarily the result of the speakers and room interaction.
So if you believe that the speakers are unimportant......it lends even further credence to your claim that you 'know' the sound of my system?
Now please describe in detail....the sound that you 'know' so well.
Here is your opportunity Raul, to prove your claims.
I hope you are not backing down from this simple 'test'?
We all know that the German audiophiles laugh at you and your claims....so please don't give them even more proof of your insecurities?

For someone as confident of his abilities as you are......this is your perfect 'test'.
Please describe the sound of my system on this Thread,

Regards
My take is that digital mis a lot more accurate, " natural "/non-colored and lower distortion alternative where we are nearer to the recording and nearer to the live event.
My take is......that this statement is one man's opinion.
And perhaps just as valid as his opinion on valves vs SS?
There has never been a digital playback that I have heard......which sounds remotely like the 'real' thing.
Perhaps I am not putting that clearly?...........never, ever, ever...have I heard a digital playback which has 'fooled' me into thinking that's about as close to a 'live' performance as I can get.
Yet many times......no.......hundreds of times.....I have heard vinyl sound so spookily close to the 'real' thing.....that I've gasped in wonderment.
Raul speaks of the CD Gladiator.
After less than 6 minutes of listening to this on my system......the 'Eject' button on the remote is just never close enough.......
If this is what Raul thinks 'live' music sounds like......it perhaps explains a lot about his cartridge preferences?
Raul can produce all the facts and figures he likes to 'prove' his claim about the superiority of digital.......but there are equally many facts and figures which prove the superiority of analogue.
But who needs 'facts and figures' to prove this particular argument?
It has been raging unabated for 30 years, and if Raul was right......vinyl would have died 20 years ago as we all feared it would?
Instead...it is the CD which has 'died' whilst the vinyl disc is being produced in greater and greater numbers.
Michael Fremer never wavered and nor did I and enough audiophiles who continued to carry the baton.
There are more and better turntables available today than ever before....and also tonearms and cartridges the likes of which we couldn't imagine 25 years ago?
So Raul.......you can claim whatever you want about the mythical 'superiority' of 'digital' over 'analogue'.
You can also claim that 'black; is 'white' for all I care.
It doesn't make it so.....and indeed it is NOT so.
And this poppycock about changing the rest of our systems to 'accommodate' the horrors of digital?...........perhaps that is your problem?
Is it possible we are back to "people hear different"?
I know many audiophiles who can't tolerate the sound of digital reproduction for a period of time.
I have also read the writings of many reviewers and contributors to Audio Forums who are similarly intolerant.
I have never read nor heard of.........anyone who can't tolerate the sound of vinyl on a turntable (source material being adequate of course).
For those who can hear it.......there is definitely an artifact of digital sound reproduction which is tantamount to 'distortion'?
This is my fouth time under Agon scrutiny and perhaps not the last one.
Dear Raul,
I can understand the monitoring of you and your posts.
You......can offend people :-)
But the gentle Professor and Thuchan?
Regards
I was going to write something on the Garrott P77 Original vs Garrott P77/SAS.........but Don just covered it so well.
Everything he says is spot on.
The Garrott Bros certainly did modify the internals of the original A&R P77.
Dover actually worked with them in Sydney and is more qualified to comment on the details.
When Don says the P77/SAS sounds like the AT 155LC.....I can see (or hear) what he means.
I however believe that the sound is more robust and euphonic than the 155LC with possibly greater bass extension?
The bass....whilst extended on the P77/SAS....is not yet what I would call completely 'controlled' or 'tight'?
I'm hoping this may improve with time....although it is not a noticeable criticism overall.
I have another Garrott P77 with the original Garrott stylus and concur in totality with Don's comparisons.

Regards
I'm with Fleib on this one......😷
For 5 years, because of Raul's influence.....I ran all my MM cartridges at 60K Ohms Resistance as this was the highest the Halcro DM10 could go.
Only in the last year have I moved away from this 'mantra'.....and been amazed at the differences...😳😍
Not only is 60K Ohms too high (bright😖) for most of my MMs (let alone 100K)😱.....I find that some of them sound better when loaded as low as 10K Ohms...😎⁉️....and 20K, 30K, and 40K are all very much the norm in achieving a smooth, lush and convincing presentation....👍👏
Combining this versatility in Resistance loading with the variable Capacitance the Halcro DM10 allows....gives me the opportunity to 'contour' many of my MMs to sound very much the same as each other 'tonally'...😳
Of course things like Soundstage, Attack, Depth and Emotion are all unaffected by Loading and are fundamental to each cartridge's individual character.
Unlike Resistance....which generally tilts the upper frequencies as it itself rises.....with Capacitance I find no such universal relationship 👀⁉️
Sometimes a figure of 70pF Capacitance will give the correct delicacy and translucency to the 'highs'.....whilst sometimes a figure of 430pF will be correct for another cartridge.....depending always on the Resistance being used...😱⁉️
And because of the varied competencies of the recording, mastering and mixing engineers involved in the myriads of records out there.....I find myself often changing the loadings on specific recordings.....and sometimes even for different tracks on the SAME recording....😡😑😰⁉️

All this does not make my life easier or more fun 😢.....but I am now 'trapped' in this endless contouring for perfection.....but never really sure that I have achieved it....❓😳
I need help...😗
Why no variable resistance MM/MI phono stages? There is, as we see, a market.
My Halcro DM-10 Preamp has an inbuilt Phonostage with both variable Resistance AND Capacitance......for the MM Section only..😎
The MC Phonostage has fixed Resistance of 220 Ohms..😊
Displaying an understanding and appreciation of the merits of MM cartridges at the turn of the millennium.....was a brave (and almost unique) position for a high-end amplifier designer....👍
If I could have my wish for an ideal phonostage granted today....it would be for a MM (only) active stage (I would use an SUT for LOMCs) with electronically remote-controlled variable Resistance and Capacitance capability...😍
The changes (particularly for Capacitance) can be quite subtle and need to be heard from the listening position IMHO 😊

In terms of both loadings....every MM cartridge has potentially a different 'ideal' combination...😳
Some of my cartridges....like the Fidelity Research FR-6SE and Garrott P77 like the 100K Ohms loading with minimal Capacitance....whilst others like the Signets and ATs, prefer 40K with a bit extra Capacitance...👀
But this of course assumes that all records are cut 'FLAT'.....which is rarely the case...❓
Using Resistance and Capacitance loadings like 'Tone Controls' from record to record (or even track to track)....can be valid and quite satisfying...😎

Now where is that remote-control....❓👀
Lewm kind of inspired me with his saunter down 'memory lane' and the mentioned MMs of yore...👀🎶

With two turntables, six arms and thirty odd cartridges......I have found myself cycling through a group of about a dozen loved units over the last year or so....😊
It's easy to forget those MMs which had their 'day-in-the-sun' on this Thread many years ago....😔
With memory jogged....I quickly attached the Acutex LPM420STR and the Empire 4000D/III and gave each a renewed listen...🎤🎹🎺🎸
As my system has improved since the last time I listened to these two......I can reveal that I was 'floored' by the experience....😘
Both these cartridges exhibit a rich sound full of colour and dynamics yet with an unmistakable 'accuracy' of tone and detail from top⬆️ to bottom⬇️.....which (dare I say it) makes most LOMCs I've heard, sound anaemic....😷
Welcome back David....👀
Your contributions have been missed...😥
Fleib has 'held the fort' on behalf of the cartridge 'boffins' in your absence..👏
Part of the theme of this thread has always been value for money, and the ability to achieve true top level "High Fidelity" performance at price levels that are at least an order of magnitude lower than the current TOTL market, and frequently several orders of magnitude lower!
It's timely to remember this important fact for most 'high-end' audiophiles still believe the road to Nirvana resides in the next 'new' $8,000 LOMC cartridge...👀😷❓
There is a hint of snobbish 'elitism' I fear, in the total rejection of vintage cartridges by some....especially of the MM variety..😥❓

And speaking of which....there has even been some displayed on this Thread with a palpable absence of discussion about the once ubiquitous Shure V15/III..❓😎
The imminent scarcity of some of our favourite MM cartridges....and the discussion on the JVC X1 and Z1 illuminates this....limits the opportunities for those yet to enter the vintage MM market...
I have tried several of the modern production MM and LOMC cartridges like the Cleraudio Virtuoso, the AT150ANV, the ZYX Universe, Lyra Titani and find them lacking in the sheer emotional content available from the best of the vintage models..👀❓
A year ago...I bought a Shure V15/III with original stylus virtually NOS....and its performance astonished me...😘
Better than my original Garrott P77....😜
With the replacement to the Jico SAS stylus....the Shure and Garrott both leapt in performance to a level difficult to achieve with most other cartridges...👍
Now there must have been millions of Shure V15 cartridges produced in its lifetime...so that the possibility of finding one is very good although the craze for these beauties world-wide has now pushed the entry price to around $300-$400.
With a SAS stylus at $130....this makes for a great MM experience at $400-500...👏🎶
Happy hunting...😀
Fleib,
I seem to remember specific criticism, why the TK7LCa was not recommended.
Please refresh my memory....
While the 5Ea, 7Ea, 7SU, and 7LCa share the same body and your opinion may differ with stylus substitution, none of those other relatively high inductance carts are worthy of cart of the month IMO.
You're entitled to your opinion....however my point was that we (or I in particular) were not always (and still) rhapsodising about Raul's 'Cartridge of the Month' as Lewm's post seemed to indicate. And as we have already established...you have never heard a genuine 7LCa so your thoughts are somewhat ephemeral....
Point taken about the TK3Ea...but should you ever have the chance to insert a 155Lc stylus therein...you may indeed be surprised.
You and I continue to clash on your 'theoretical' evaluations regarding a cartridge's 'sound' based on its specifications as opposed to my actual listening experiences. I don't quite understand your intentions...
Fleib,
Quote from you on another Audio Site 15th Jan 2015...
If the generators of the 7Su is the same as the 20, then the 7LCa is odd man out. It's 5mV, 550mH, 800/900 ohms.

The 7Su is an earlier generation having a round plug? I believe the 7LCa has a 100 series rectangular plug.

neo
The question marks about the plug profiles of both the 7SU and 7LCa appear to indicate no familiarity...?
If I am wrong, I apologise... 🙏
They say you have to kiss many frogs before you find your prince...🐸
Luckily with vintage cartridges...that adage doesn't necessarily apply..😍
Over the last six years the majority of the fifty or more used vintage cartridges I have bought have given me much satisfaction as well as knowledge.
As one's ears become keener and more selective, the purchases become more informed and perhaps esoteric......and through Forums like this....newly discovered gems can be unearthed.
And so it was that through the words of Griffithds and with the help of Banquo...I acquired a Victor Z1 and Victor X1/IIE.
There is no 'burn-out' with phono cartridges as each new model promises to deliver a unique experience...
In the case of these Victors....that is exactly what occurred...👅
I know the majority of 'high-end' audiophiles sneer at the very thought of a humble MM cartridge and smugly write a cheque for the next $8,000 LOMC panacea to their vinyl playback, and if one compares the current available range of production MM cartridges...I may agree with them.
But the simple fact is that the art of MM design and production reached its zenith 30 years ago and some of those models are simply better than the very best current LOMCs produced and certainly better than modern MM design.
Why is this so...❓👀
Possibly for the same reasons that some turntables and arms designed and produced 30-40 years ago are better than those of today...😎
In the world of analogue audio, it should be remembered that many great minds, many great companies and more funding than can be imagined today were concentrated towards the ultimate betterment of the analogue chain..🎼
Well, in those times I found out in Europe the last and only one in the world NOS MK2 stylus
Perhaps mine is the illegitimate 'forgotten' one from Japan?
http://i.imgur.com/DOtiqTR.jpg
From where incidentally.....they were all made and sold initially 😜
My experiences mirror those of Fleib and Griffithds.
I have two Victor Z1 and one X1/IIE bodies and styli
http://i.imgur.com/kdZ6QOZ.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/W0EFgRB.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/DOtiqTR.jpg
I have the original elliptical stylus and cantilever of the X1/IIE and the original Shibata on beryllium for one Z1 as well as an original spherical for the other
http://i.imgur.com/5JKvL0a.jpg
I also have the SAS Shibata on boron replacement stylus which fits all of them
http://i.imgur.com/0cshL30.jpg
I have listened extensively to all cartridges on three different arms with a multitude of different headshells and whilst the X1/IIE is superb when mounted in the right headshell, the Z1/SAS is slightly better albeit with a more pronounced lower and mid-bass output.
Like Fleib and Griff, I have difficulty in telling apart the X1 and Z1.
It is only the original spherical stylus on the Z1 that is noticeably inferior in my system.
Hi Jeff,
Peter Lederman of Soundsmith has a number of alternative options for the Grace re-tip but if you're patient and alert enough, you could get lucky and find a near mint F9E complete with original stylus and cantilever.
Good luck...
Hi Jeff,
Gosh.....top five...INCLUDING MC and MM ⁉️😩
I’m glad you didn’t ask this 3 months ago....or 1 year ago because the list would probably have been slightly different. The point being that this is an ’evolving’ subjective list which is not meant to be dissected and criticised by others as I certainly don’t mean it to be a recommendation for other folk whose systems and tastes will inevitably be different to mine.
But you asked....so here goes in no particular order 💤
* Victor X1 &Z1
http://i.imgur.com/kdZ6QOZ.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/9s7oAaR.jpg
* Signet TK-7CLa
http://i.imgur.com/8BAKq4i.jpg
* Acutex 420LPM/STR
http://i.imgur.com/ydiY5jm.jpg
* Grace F9E
http://i.imgur.com/yKK0bVk.jpg
* Decca London Reference
http://i.imgur.com/1KxbuA6.jpg
* Garrott P77/SAS
http://i.imgur.com/TKdO1Yi.jpg
* Fidelity Research FR-7f/Lc
http://i.imgur.com/JvSfnPj.jpg
* Ortofon SPU Silver Meister II
http://i.imgur.com/hiLdGyS.jpg
Whoops......is that more than five..❓
Sorry Jeff...I couldn’t do it..😛
Each of these cartridges in my system, gives me the tonal, emotional and detail retrieval capabilities that fully satisfies.
There are many other cartridges which offer differences that are interesting and also enjoyable...so this list will keep on evolving and possibly changing.

Regards
Henry
John,
Do you prefer the Grace 9E over the Ruby?
Easy question to answer......I haven't heard the Ruby 🤔
I have though, read many apocryphal tales of its legendary qualities.
The chance of hearing one perhaps in the future excites me.
The Acutex 420LPM/STR may indeed be inferior to the 320 which I haven't heard.
When I first played the 420 in a metal headshell 4 or 5 years ago.....it didn't strike me as particularly unique. Wind forward to 3 months ago when I mounted it in a Yamamoto wood headshell on my SAEC-WE8000/ST tonearm and it caused me to look up 👀
It was transformed into a 'Killer Cartridge' with holographic soundstage, prodigious and tuneful bass combined with ethereal highs. married to an all-important natural and convincing midrange.
A cartridge that continues to be a joy to return to.
If you have a wood headshell like the Yamamoto Hs-1AS or Ortofon LH8000...you should try it again...

Regards
Henry
It's been years since I listened to the M20FL Jeff but I never really had it in my list of 'greats'.
I recall it being smooth, full-bodied and pleasant but I preferred other more detailed and refined vintage MMs.
My sample now resides in my son's collection....but even he prefers the Empire 4000DIII/Gold.
The Victor X1 and Z1, Garrott P77/SAS and Acutex 420LPM together with the perennial favourite Signet TK-7LCa are still to my ears......the cream of the vintage MM crop in my system.
Regards

You didn't attach the Link to my post Jeff.....but the M20FL was one of the first MMs I bought after finding this Thread and I can believe that I was impressed enough to compare it to the XV-1s.
Just to cruel your impressions even more, the XV-1s is not even in my top 5 LOMC cartridge favourites......👀 Sorry to say 🙈

The Garrott is almost impossible to find...even in Australia from whence it originated so you might have more success with other models.
The Grace F9E is certainly worth the hunt and there are thousands of Shure V15/III samples out there which are really elevated in performance with a SAS stylus implant.
Good luck...

You were lucky to find a SAS for your V15/III Jeff.
Here's the original Shure stylus
http://i.imgur.com/yP83LIg.jpg
and here's the SAS
http://i.imgur.com/0WKmX9k.jpg
The SAS is a worthwhile improvement.
As I said.....if you find a Grace F9E in good condition
http://i.imgur.com/GBj1vBB.jpg
you'll be equally lucky 😄
Let us know your impressions when you receive the SAS?
Regards
Glad to hear you like the V15/III/SAS Jeff, although I wouldn't go so far to describe the original V15/III as "boring...lifeless"?
Perhaps there is something wrong with your original stylus?
The substitution of the SAS on my V15/III added to the refinement, extension and transparency of an already good and exciting cartridge combining all the necessary traits of the vintage MM genus.
Enjoy...😎
Welcome to the Thread mrubey.
You raise an interesting question....or questions.
"Consensus"......hardly.
Favourite CURRENT production HO cartridge....?
Frankly....I haven't heard a current production MM cartridge that can play in the same sandpit as the great vintage MMs of the late 70s and 80s.
I think you would do well to read as much of this Thread as you can and write down a list of the oft-repeated MMs which pop up.
Most fanatics here have built their collection from buying these vintage cartridges on EBay or HiFiDo or similar outlets and if you shop carefully and patiently...you will need to spend no more than $300-$400 for a cartridge which will give you as much, or more pleasure than a $1,000 current production model.
There's also fun in the hunt..😎
Good luck.

Good choices mrubey,
Both the Soundsmith and London Decca are not MM cartridges.
I have a London Decca Reference which is superb but didn't want to recommend a cartridge which costs as much as some exotic LOMCs.

If anyone has any experience on both Z1S & F-9E :
What can I expect by changing from boron to sapphire?
Since I’ve already have a (cantilever less) F-9E ,could it be wise to prefer the OCL?
Is there any chance to possibly exceeds the Z1S ?

Dear geoch,
I have both the Z1S and F-9E and whilst the Grace is very, very good.....I can't say it's up to the Victor Z1/SAS.
Be happy with the boron SAS.....
You won't better it with the sapphire or ruby...😎

Regards
Good to see you back here Geoch 😀
Excellent choices of cartridges over the years.....
I too am a big SAS fan having one in my Garrott P77, Victor Z1 and V15/III.
I'm currently in the process of testing the differences between the original SAS, the Neo-SAS(S) and the Neo-SAS(R) on my P77 👀
One of my early LOMC cartridges was also the VdH Grasshopper (aka Symphonic Line)....and I recall the unbearable high-lighting of the upper frequencies 😱
Strange because one of my favourite LOMC cartridges at the moment is the MIT 1 which has a VdH stylus on a beryllium cantilever 👐

I too admire the SAEC tonearms having owned the 308N, the 407/23, and finally the 8000/ST....
Which arm do you use for your London Ref?

Regards
Looking at those FR graphs for the different loadings of the X1-II Chakster....I hope you will realise that your liking for 100K Ohms loading is a subjective aberration which bears little relation to 'flat frequency response'.....🤔
Chakster, for years I ran many of my MM cartridges at 60K Ohms thinking they sounded better.....🤔
In the last three years I have found that virtually all of them sound better at 47K or lower.....
There are probably only two or three left, out of 40....that I prefer at 60K Ohms 😎

I too am able to infinitely adjust the loading for my MM cartridges between 60K to 20K Ohms 'on-the-fly'.
Unless you can hear in real time, the comparisons.....It is hard to distinguish the very subtle differences.

You have to try 100k then, 47k vs 60k is not the big difference

Why would I do that if I find 60K mostly too thin and edgy....?
The jump from mm to mc requires a significant investment in both turntable and system. 
A statement devoid of explanation or scientific fact.
So now you add a complete and detailed description and pricing of a system which was totally missing in your first generalised statement....
My former system of Rega Planar 3/Hadcock GH-228/Garrott P77 and Kebschull preamp with inbuilt phonostage for both MM and MC required zero investment to "turntable and system" when I moved to a series of MC cartridges over 20 years ago.

Your original statement proclaims the word "jump" as a descriptor for MC against the supposedly 'lower' MM and as such is false.
Many turntables and systems may benefit from "significant investment" regardless of, and independent from, their choices of cartridge types.
Chackster,
Lew is being fair in his responses and giving you full credit for the subjective evaluations of your cartridges.
It is one of the most difficult areas of analogue high-end to equate subjective experiences of phono cartridges.
There are so many variables that can affect each user's individual experiences....from turntable to tonearm to headshell to phono-stage to SUT.
And a significant factor can indeed be the attention to set-up....🤗
To illustrate the point.....I have owned a vintage Sony XL-88 LOMC  for several years after having owned its bigger brother, the XL-55 for even longer.
The XL-55 is a romantic, ballsy cartridge which delivers delicious full-bodied images totally in contrast with todays analytical/detailed products.
If one imagined the XL-88 to offer similar tonal 'house-sound'.....one would be shocked...🤔
The contrast between the two is enormous....the XL-55 is a monster...10 Gm and massive in comparison to the XL-88's 6.8 Gm diminutive stature.
When I first mounted the XL-88 in one of my FR-66s tonearms on the Raven AC-2 and ran it through the Kondo SUT.....I was disappointed in its diametrically opposed presentation to the XL-55.
Instead of the gutsy full-bodied bloom presented by the XL-55......a somewhat insipid and lacklustre performance relegated the XL-88 to one of my FR-5 cartridge storage boxes.
Today I mounted the XL-88 in my FR-64s on the Victor TT-101 running through the Halcro MC phonostage and my jaw dropped at what I heard.
This may just be the best sound I have yet heard in my system...😎
But it is a sound that remained 'undelivered' when mounted on the Raven/FR-66s/Kondo....So, absolutes are dangerous in audio and can vary enormously...
that's why we usually write....YMMV 😁
Regards


Hi jtnicoosi,
I have bought and listened to many ’current production’ or ’recent’ MM cartridges and IMHO there is none that can compete with the vintage MMs produced in ’The Golden Age’ of analogue (70s and 80s) 😪
There is simply a ’magic’ produced by the vintage cartridges which somehow eludes the current contenders....and I have found the same in relation to LOMCs.....
Many of the really great vintage MMs require patience (and luck) to find (generally on EBay)....but are still available 😃
My stock advice to those wanting to taste the best of the vintage MM story which are readily available cheaply is:-

Both these cartridges are available (Victor on eBay and V15/III on HiFiDo) in numbers and the condition of their respective styli should not be of concern to you because you will want to immediately replace the stock stylus with a brand new Jico SAS (available directly from Jico in Japan).
The Victor is superior to the Shure but both can provide close to the best sound available in analogue today IMO.

I agree with Chakster about the merits of the Garrott P77.....I have two of the originals (both with their original styli).
The difference however, when you replace the original stylus with the Jico SAS......is astonishing 🤗
If Chakster thinks highly of the P77 with original stylus.....he will not believe the transformation with the SAS...

Good luck