Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


Dear friends: who really needs an MM type phono cartridge?, well I will try to share/explain with you what are my experiences about and I hope too that many of you could enrich the topic/subject with your own experiences.

For some years ( in this forum ) and time to time I posted that the MM type cartridge quality sound is better than we know or that we think and like four months ago I start a thread about: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1173550723&openusid&zzRauliruegas&4&5#Rauliruegas where we analyse some MM type cartridges.

Well, in the last 10-12 months I buy something like 30+ different MM type phono cartridges ( you can read in my virtual system which ones. ) and I’m still doing it. The purpose of this fact ( “ buy it “ ) is for one way to confirm or not if really those MM type cartridges are good for us ( music lovers ) and at the same time learn about MM vs MC cartridges, as a fact I learn many things other than MM/MC cartridge subject.

If we take a look to the Agon analog members at least 90% of them use ( only ) MC phono cartridges, if we take a look to the “ professional reviewers “ ( TAS, Stereophile, Positive Feedback, Enjoy the Music, etc, etc, ) 95% ( at least ) of them use only MC cartridges ( well I know that for example: REG and NG of TAS and RJR of Stereophile use only MM type cartridges!!!!!!!! ) , if we take a look to the phono cartridge manufacturers more than 90% of them build/design for MC cartridges and if you speak with audio dealers almost all will tell you that the MC cartridges is the way to go.

So, who are wrong/right, the few ( like me ) that speak that the MM type is a very good alternative or the “ whole “ cartridge industry that think and support the MC cartridge only valid alternative?

IMHO I think that both groups are not totally wrong/right and that the subject is not who is wrong/right but that the subject is : KNOW-HOW or NON KNOW-HOW about.

Many years ago when I was introduced to the “ high end “ the cartridges were almost MM type ones: Shure, Stanton, Pickering, Empire, etc, etc. In those time I remember that one dealer told me that if I really want to be nearest to the music I have to buy the Empire 4000 D ( they say for 4-channel reproduction as well. ) and this was truly my first encounter with a “ high end cartridge “, I buy the 4000D I for 70.00 dls ( I can’t pay 150.00 for the D III. ), btw the specs of these Empire cartridges were impressive even today, look: frequency response: 5-50,000Hz, channel separation: 35db, tracking force range: 0.25grs to 1.25grs!!!!!!!!, just impressive, but there are some cartridges which frequency response goes to 100,000Hz!!!!!!!!!!

I start to learn about and I follow to buying other MM type cartridges ( in those times I never imagine nothing about MC cartridges: I don’t imagine of its existence!!!. ) like AKG, Micro Acoustics, ADC, B&O, Audio Technica, Sonus, etc, etc.

Years latter the same dealer told me about the MC marvelous cartridges and he introduce me to the Denon-103 following with the 103-D and the Fulton High performance, so I start to buy and hear MC cartridges. I start to read audio magazines about either cartridge type: MM and Mc ones.

I have to make changes in my audio system ( because of the low output of the MC cartridges and because I was learning how to improve the performance of my audio system ) and I follow what the reviewers/audio dealers “ speak “ about, I was un-experienced !!!!!!!, I was learning ( well I’m yet. ).

I can tell you many good/bad histories about but I don’t want that the thread was/is boring for you, so please let me tell you what I learn and where I’m standing today about:

over the years I invested thousands of dollars on several top “ high end “ MC cartridges, from the Sumiko Celebration passing for Lyras, Koetsu, Van denHul, to Allaerts ones ( just name it and I can tell that I own or owned. ), what I already invest on MC cartridges represent almost 70-80% price of my audio system.

Suddenly I stop buying MC cartridges and decide to start again with some of the MM type cartridges that I already own and what I heard motivate me to start the search for more of those “ hidden jewels “ that are ( here and now ) the MM phono cartridges and learn why are so good and how to obtain its best quality sound reproduction ( as a fact I learn many things other than MM cartridge about. ).

I don’t start this “ finding “ like a contest between MC and MM type cartridges.
The MC cartridges are as good as we already know and this is not the subject here, the subject is about MM type quality performance and how achieve the best with those cartridges.

First than all I try to identify and understand the most important characteristics ( and what they “ means “. ) of the MM type cartridges ( something that in part I already have it because our phonolinepreamp design needs. ) and its differences with the MC ones.

Well, first than all is that are high output cartridges, very high compliance ones ( 50cu is not rare. ), low or very low tracking force ones, likes 47kOhms and up, susceptible to some capacitance changes, user stylus replacement, sometimes we can use a different replacement stylus making an improvement with out the necessity to buy the next top model in the cartridge line , low and very low weight cartridges, almost all of them are build of plastic material with aluminum cantilever and with eliptical or “ old “ line contact stylus ( shibata ) ( here we don’t find: Jade/Coral/Titanium/etc, bodies or sophisticated build material cantilevers and sophisticated stylus shape. ), very very… what I say? Extremely low prices from 40.00 to 300.00 dls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, well one of my cartridges I buy it for 8.99 dls ( one month ago ): WOW!!!!!!, so any one of you can/could have/buy ten to twenty MM cartridges for the price of one of the MC cartridge you own today and the good notice is that is a chance that those 10-20 MM type cartridges even the quality performance of your MC cartridge or beat it.

Other characteristics is that the builders show how proud they were/are on its MM type cartridges design, almost all those cartridges comes with a first rate box, comes with charts/diagrams of its frequency response and cartridge channel separation ( where they tell us which test recording use it, with which VTF, at which temperature, etc, etc. ), comes with a very wide explanation of the why’s and how’s of its design and the usual explanation to mount the cartridge along with a very wide list of specifications ( that were the envy of any of today MC ones where sometimes we really don’t know nothing about. ), comes with a set of screws/nuts, comes with a stylus brush and even with stylus cleaning fluid!!!!!!!!!, my GOD. Well, there are cartridges like the Supex SM 100MK2 that comes with two different stylus!!!! One with spherical and one with elliptical/shibata shape and dear friends all those in the same low low price!!!!!!!!!!!

Almost all the cartridges I own you can find it through Ebay and Agon and through cartridge dealers and don’t worry if you loose/broke the stylus cartridge or you find the cartridge but with out stylus, you always can/could find the stylus replacement, no problem about there are some stylus and cartridge sources.

When I’m talking about MM type cartridges I’m refer to different types: moving magnet, moving iron, moving flux, electret, variable reluctance, induced magnet, etc, etc. ( here is not the place to explain the differences on all those MM type cartridges. Maybe on other future thread. ).

I made all my very long ( time consuming ) cartridge tests using four different TT’s: Acoustic Signature Analog One MK2, Micro Seiki RX-5000, Luxman PD 310 and Technics SP-10 MK2, I use only removable headshell S and J shape tonearms with 15mm on overhang, I use different material build/ shape design /weight headshells. I test each cartridge in at least three different tonearms and some times in 3-4 different headshells till I find the “ right “ match where the cartridge perform the best, no I’m not saying that I already finish or that I already find the “ perfect “ match: cartridge/headshell/tonearm but I think I’m near that ideal target.

Through my testing experience I learn/ confirm that trying to find the right tonearm/headshell for any cartridge is well worth the effort and more important that be changing the TT. When I switch from a TT to another different one the changes on the quality cartridge performance were/are minimal in comparison to a change in the tonearm/headshell, this fact was consistent with any of those cartridges including MC ones.

So after the Phonolinepreamplifier IMHO the tonearm/headshell match for any cartridge is the more important subject, it is so important and complex that in the same tonearm ( with the same headshell wires ) but with different headshell ( even when the headshell weight were the same ) shape or build material headshell the quality cartridge performance can/could be way different.

All those experiences told me that chances are that the cartridge that you own ( MC or MM ) is not performing at its best because chances are that the tonearm you own is not the best match for that cartridge!!!!!!, so imagine what do you can/could hear when your cartridge is or will be on the right tonearm???!!!!!!!!, IMHO there are ( till today ) no single ( any type at any price ) perfect universal tonearm. IMHO there is no “ the best tonearm “, what exist or could exist is a “ best tonearm match for “ that “ cartridge “, but that’s all. Of course that are “ lucky “ tonearms that are very good match for more than one cartridge but don’t for every single cartridge.

I posted several times that I’m not a tonearm collector, that I own all those tonearms to have alternatives for my cartridges and with removable headshells my 15 tonearms are really like 100+ tonearms : a very wide options/alternatives for almost any cartridge!!!!!!

You can find several of these MM type cartridges new brand or NOS like: Ortofon, Nagaoka, Audio Technica, Astatic, B&O, Rega, Empire, Sonus Reson,Goldring,Clearaudio, Grado, Shelter, Garrot, etc. and all of them second hand in very good operational condition. As a fact I buy two and even three cartridges of the same model in some of the cartridges ( so right now I have some samples that I think I don’t use any more. ) to prevent that one of them arrive in non operational condition but I’m glad to say that all them arrive in very fine conditions. I buy one or two of the cartridges with no stylus or with the stylus out of work but I don’t have any trouble because I could find the stylus replacement on different sources and in some case the original new replacement.

All these buy/find cartridges was very time consuming and we have to have a lot of patience and a little lucky to obtain what we are looking for but I can asure you that is worth of it.

Ok, I think it is time to share my performance cartridge findings:

first we have to have a Phonolinepreamplifier with a very good MM phono stage ( at least at the same level that the MC stage. ). I’m lucky because my Phonolinepreamplifier has two independent phono stages, one for the MM and one for MC: both were designed for the specifics needs of each cartridge type, MM or MC that have different needs.

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

we have to load the MM cartridges not at 47K but at 100K ( at least 75K not less. ).

I find that using 47K ( a standard manufacture recommendation ) prevent to obtain the best quality performance, 100K make the difference. I try this with all those MM type cartridges and in all of them I achieve the best performance with 100K load impedance.

I find too that using the manufacturer capacitance advise not always is for the better, till “ the end of the day “ I find that between 100-150pf ( total capacitance including cable capacitance. ) all the cartridges performs at its best.

I start to change the load impedance on MM cartridges like a synonymous that what many of us made with MC cartridges where we try with different load impedance values, latter I read on the Empire 4000 DIII that the precise load impedance must be 100kOhms and in a white paper of some Grace F9 tests the used impedance value was 100kOhms, the same that I read on other operational MM cartridge manual and my ears tell/told me that 100kOhms is “ the value “.

Before I go on I want to remember you that several of those MM type cartridges ( almost all ) were build more than 30+ years ago!!!!!!!! and today performs at the same top quality level than today MC/MM top quality cartridges!!!!!, any brand at any price and in some ways beat it.

I use 4-5 recordings that I know very well and that give me the right answers to know that any cartridge is performing at its best or near it. Many times what I heard through those recordings were fine: everything were on target however the music don’t come “ alive “ don’t “ tell me “ nothing, I was not feeling the emotion that the music can communicate. In those cartridge cases I have to try it in other tonearm and/or with a different headshell till the “ feelings comes “ and only when this was achieved I then was satisfied.

All the tests were made with a volume level ( SPL ) where the recording “ shines “ and comes alive like in a live event. Sometimes changing the volume level by 1-1.5 db fixed everything.

Of course that the people that in a regular manner attend to hear/heard live music it will be more easy to know when something is right or wrong.

Well, Raul go on!!: one characteristic on the MM cartridges set-up was that almost all them likes to ride with a positive ( little/small ) VTA only the Grace Ruby and F9E and Sonus Gold Blue likes a negative VTA , on the other hand with the Nagaoka MP 50 Super and the Ortofon’s I use a flat VTA.

Regarding the VTF I use the manufacturer advise and sometimes 0.1+grs.
Of course that I made fine tuning through moderate changes in the Azymuth and for anti-skate I use between half/third VTF value.

I use different material build headshells: aluminum, composite aluminum, magnesium, composite magnesium, ceramic, wood and non magnetic stainless steel, these cartridges comes from Audio Technica, Denon, SAEC, Technics, Fidelity Research, Belldream, Grace, Nagaoka, Koetsu, Dynavector and Audiocraft.
All of them but the wood made ( the wood does not likes to any cartridge. ) very good job . It is here where a cartridge could seems good or very good depending of the headshell where is mounted and the tonearm.
Example, I have hard time with some of those cartridge like the Audio Technica AT 20SS where its performance was on the bright sound that sometimes was harsh till I find that the ceramic headshell was/is the right match now this cartridge perform beautiful, something similar happen with the Nagaoka ( Jeweltone in Japan ), Shelter , Grace, Garrot , AKG and B&O but when were mounted in the right headshell/tonearm all them performs great.

Other things that you have to know: I use two different cooper headshell wires, both very neutral and with similar “ sound “ and I use three different phono cables, all three very neutral too with some differences on the sound performance but nothing that “ makes the difference “ on the quality sound of any of my cartridges, either MM or MC, btw I know extremely well those phono cables: Analysis Plus, Harmonic Technologies and Kimber Kable ( all three the silver models. ), finally and don’t less important is that those phono cables were wired in balanced way to take advantage of my Phonolinepreamp fully balanced design.

What do you note the first time you put your MM cartridge on the record?, well a total absence of noise/hum or the like that you have through your MC cartridges ( and that is not a cartridge problem but a Phonolinepreamp problem due to the low output of the MC cartridges. ), a dead silent black ( beautiful ) soundstage where appear the MUSIC performance, this experience alone is worth it.

The second and maybe the most important MM cartridge characteristic is that you hear/heard the MUSIC flow/run extremely “ easy “ with no distracting sound distortions/artifacts ( I can’t explain exactly this very important subject but it is wonderful ) even you can hear/heard “ sounds/notes “ that you never before heard it and you even don’t know exist on the recording: what a experience!!!!!!!!!!!

IMHO I think that the MUSIC run so easily through a MM cartridge due ( between other facts ) to its very high compliance characteristic on almost any MM cartridge.

This very high compliance permit ( between other things like be less sensitive to out-center hole records. ) to these cartridges stay always in contact with the groove and never loose that groove contact not even on the grooves that were recorded at very high velocity, something that a low/medium cartridge compliance can’t achieve, due to this low/medium compliance characteristic the MC cartridges loose ( time to time and depending of the recorded velocity ) groove contact ( minute extremely minute loose contact, but exist. ) and the quality sound performance suffer about and we can hear it, the same pass with the MC cartridges when are playing the inner grooves on a record instead the very high compliance MM cartridges because has better tracking drive perform better than the MC ones at inner record grooves and here too we can hear it.

Btw, some Agoners ask very worried ( on more than one Agon thread ) that its cartridge can’t track ( clean ) the cannons on the 1812 Telarc recording and usually the answers that different people posted were something like this: “””” don’t worry about other than that Telarc recording no other commercial recording comes recorded at that so high velocity, if you don’t have trouble with other of your LP’s then stay calm. “””””

Well, this standard answer have some “ sense “ but the people ( like me ) that already has/have the experience to hear/heard a MM or MC ( like the Ortofon MC 2000 or the Denon DS1, high compliance Mc cartridges. ) cartridge that pass easily the 1812 Telarc test can tell us that those cartridges make a huge difference in the quality sound reproduction of any “ normal “ recording, so it is more important that what we think to have a better cartridge tracking groove drive!!!!

There are many facts around the MM cartridge subject but till we try it in the right set-up it will be ( for some people ) difficult to understand “ those beauties “. Something that I admire on the MM cartridges is how ( almost all of them ) they handle the frequency extremes: the low bass with the right pitch/heft/tight/vivid with no colorations of the kind “ organic !!” that many non know-how people speak about, the highs neutral/open/transparent/airy believable like the live music, these frequency extremes handle make that the MUSIC flow in our minds to wake up our feelings/emotions that at “ the end of the day “ is all what a music lover is looking for.
These not means that these cartridges don’t shine on the midrange because they do too and they have very good soundstage but here is more system/room dependent.

Well we have a very good alternative on the ( very low price ) MM type cartridges to achieve that music target and I’m not saying that you change your MC cartridge for a MM one: NO, what I’m trying to tell you is that it is worth to have ( as many you can buy/find ) the MM type cartridges along your MC ones

I want to tell you that I can live happy with any of those MM cartridges and I’m not saying with this that all of them perform at the same quality level NO!! what I’m saying is that all of them are very good performers, all of them approach you nearest to the music.

If you ask me which one is the best I can tell you that this will be a very hard “ call “ an almost impossible to decide, I think that I can make a difference between the very good ones and the stellar ones where IMHO the next cartridges belongs to this group:

Audio Technica ATML 170 and 180 OCC, Grado The Amber Tribute, Grace Ruby, Garrot P77, Nagaoka MP-50 Super, B&O MMC2 and MMC20CL, AKG P8ES SuperNova, Reson Reca ,Astatic MF-100 and Stanton LZS 981.

There are other ones that are really near this group: ADC Astrion, Supex MF-100 MK2, Micro Acoustics MA630/830, Empire 750 LTD and 600LAC, Sonus Dimension 5, Astatic MF-200 and 300 and the Acutex 320III.

The other ones are very good too but less refined ones.
I try too ( owned or borrowed for a friend ) the Shure IV and VMR, Music maker 2-3 and Clearaudio Virtuoso/Maestro, from these I could recommended only the Clearaudios the Shure’s and Music Maker are almost mediocre ones performers.
I forgot I try to the B&O Soundsmith versions, well this cartridges are good but are different from the original B&O ( that I prefer. ) due that the Sounsmith ones use ruby cantilevers instead the original B&O sapphire ones that for what I tested sounds more natural and less hi-fi like the ruby ones.

What I learn other that the importance on the quality sound reproduction through MM type cartridges?, well that unfortunately the advance in the design looking for a better quality cartridge performers advance almost nothing either on MM and MC cartridges.

Yes, today we have different/advanced body cartridge materials, different cantilever build materials, different stylus shape/profile, different, different,,,,different, but the quality sound reproduction is almost the same with cartridges build 30+ years ago and this is a fact. The same occur with TT’s and tonearms. Is sad to speak in this way but it is what we have today. Please, I’m not saying that some cartridges designs don’t grow up because they did it, example: Koetsu they today Koetsu’s are better performers that the old ones but against other cartridges the Koetsu ones don’t advance and many old and today cartridges MM/MC beat them easily.

Where I think the audio industry grow-up for the better are in electronic audio items ( like the Phonolinepreamps ), speakers and room treatment, but this is only my HO.

I know that there are many things that I forgot and many other things that we have to think about but what you can read here is IMHO a good point to start.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas

Showing 50 responses by timeltel

Regards, Raul: "IMHO this depends on each audio system quality level performance."

Nicely phrased but I'm not buying entirely into it. Try an AT440MLa at 100k, you may want to cover your ears first. ;)

Peace,
Regards, Raul: Understood, and your comment on the level of system performance is also unarguable.

If the condition of "Purist" is the highest state of audiophile evolution, please remind yourself that comments relative to the Grace (I've two, they're not for sale) originate from a knuckle dragging midrange junkie. Nolo contendre. Your patience and civility are observed and appreciated.

Peace,
Regards, Nikola: Send your "incredible" cart to me! Currently experimenting with replacing mounts with wood. I think you'll agree you've never heard it sound like it does when returned. ;)

Peace,
Regards, Nikola: It's easy, just a matter of knowing the right incantations, the correct parts and a properly calibrated caldron to stir them in.

Poem, by Henry Gibson.

Stylus of a Shibata snake,
Cantilever at the coil will shake;
Banish overshoot add tone of analog,
Wool of bass the cantilever's like a log,
A pinch of inductance and blind-worms sing,
A constrained layer mount to combat barrier resonances' ring,
For the charm of powerful treble,
Titanium and three poles distortion will level.

Be fast, bold, and resolute; laugh to hear
The power of music, not of woman but muses born
Come, lively highs or lows;
Mids without artifice deftly show!

Thou art too like the spirit of Banquo: clown!
Thy sibilance does sear mine ear-balls.
And thy second cart, shrieks like the first.
A third is like the former. A fourth! Stop soon!
What, will the grain reach out like the crackle of doom?
Another yet! A seventh! I'll hear no more:
And yet the eighth appears, sound of breaking glass
Horrible sounds! Now, I see, 'tis true;
For the conical stylus Banquo inflicts upon me,
Finer points, some beryllium is my plea.

It's all very scientific. :)

Peace,
Regards, Slaw: A suggestion, if I may. Try a piece of electrician's tape between the stylus assembly and top of the engine. 1/8 x 1/4" is more than sufficient. As to compliance, not sure how Acutex determined their stated cu, marketing dept. maybe?

Enjoy your Acutex.

Peace,
Regards, Chris: Suggest you look elsewhere for your next cart. Nikola is by his own admission inseparable from the one in question.

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: Hi, Henry. As it's a Signet, needless to say I'm familiar with the AM-10. As with all later Signets, PC (to 6n's, IIRC) OCC copper windings, hand wound & bench tested to meet spec. The AM (Analog Master)-10, it's a sleeper. The AM-10 is 490 mH, a relatively low inductance. The remainder of the series is 550 mH, all are 780 ohm DC res., 5.0mv output.

Faraday's Law states "---a voltage is induced in a circuit whenever relative motion exists between a conductor and a magnetic field and that the magnitude of this voltage is proportional to the rate of change of the flux". Voltage is determined by:
1). The number of turns of wire in the coil.
2). The speed of the relative motion between the coil and the magnet.
3). The strength of the magnetic field.

Lenz's Law states that: "the direction of an induced emf is such that it always opposes the change that is causing it". Fortunately this is not a difficult concept, even for me. It's very Neutonian. In dealing with higher output cartridges, an induced current will always OPPOSE the cantilevers' motion or change which started the induced current to a greater degree than is to be observed with a lower output cart. Think LOMC.

With some higher output carts, one may observe a gain in presence but let's not forget the laws of conservation of energy, there are opposing forces. Due to increased magnetic attraction, leading and trailing transients as well as dynamic sweep may suffer. It's been mentioned before, compliance/mechanical damping, effective tip mass, cantilever length, cross-section diameter, length and rigidity are factors to be taken into consideration. So we have here a fairly high output cart, capable of dynamic impact and body, that's the "excitement" aspect.

What about lesser detail, nuance & dynamic swing? AT carts utilize the "V magnet" configuration to move moving mass nearer the pivot, a reduction of inertia relative to output when compared to more conventional cantilevers is claimed. With the magnets aligned at 45*, they are congruent to stereo groove modulations, AT thinks this is important. Signet, being upscale, refers to this as "dual flux". Introduce laminated plates to the coil, a four pole generator in order to minimize IM & maintain accurate balance, then reduce moving mass in order to recover transient response (rise/overshoot). Time to think about the stylus asembly.

The AM-10 is a bonded 0.3x0.7 elliptical, the AM-20 is a 0.3x0.7 "miniature" square cut/grain oriented nude elliptical on a "micro mass" alloy tube. Henry, although not a fan in general of elliptical styli this one (IMHO) is excellent, given response is 10-30k. Signet states that the moving mass at the end of the cantilever is critical to performance (duh!), combine a hair-thin alloy cantilever with a stylus that is more easily imagined than seen in association with a high output/low inductance engine and mount it to a non-resonant headshell. Henry, IMO your report is accurate and unusually restrained (other than your associated value, which seems a tad high). :)

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: Let me say (write?) how much I enjoyed your post. Next, (excuse me, Raul) disregard Rauls advice to send the AMS-20 stylus to Axel. Remembered from several years ago, Raul posted his opinion of the AM-30, he wasn't impressed. Raul stated that the AM series were the succesors to the AT-22/25 - Signet TK9/10 carts, and were not viewed as an improvement. (Raul, I hope it would not be considered a criticism to observe that you hold yourself to some very exclusive standards.)

Henry, if you enjoy the OEM styli as is, then don't fix it as it ain't broke, the diamond quality is superb. Even if you might have to squint to see it. The assembly's configuration is comprable to any number of AT P-mounters, these will provide relatively inexpensive donor vehicles for Axel to perform his magic upon, should you choose. A BTW, the cantilever for the AM-30 is tapered alloy, the AM-20 a straight "Micro mass" alloy tube. The 40 an LC on beryllium, the 50 is ML on gold-plated beryllium.

The specs given (Fleib) were from a Signet publication. If one refers to the brochure accompanying the AT440MLa, output impedance is given as 3.2k ohms. If you or any of the better informed readers can resolve the two standards of measurment, I'd be grateful. I've not heard the 440ML, my 440MLa has resided in its case unused for three years. There are other carts that are enjoyed on a regular basis, a Signet AM-20 among them. It's a matter of personal preference so draw your own conclusions about the carts, styli, or this listener. It should also be noted that the AT440 engine is on a plastic mount, the AM carts are fixed to a solid metal bar similar to the TK9/10 carts. This makes a difference.

Since Acutex is once again fashionable, I accidentally "tore up" a Shure M75E-T2, then intentionally did the same to an Acutex LPM415 ;). The Shure is an old stand-by, a work horse with a solid bass, compeling mids & non-intrusive hf response. Pulled the cart on it's headshell out of the pile to listen to some vintage vinyl & the thing fell apart. The engine just dropped from it's plastic shroud. Hmmm. Out to the shop, fired up the table saw, drill press, belt sander & chisel. Hacked up some cocobolo wood & epoxied the M75 engine in, snugging the stylus assembly to the wood as the adhesive set. Bass is less pronounced but somewhat tighter, hfs are reduced, mids gained an immersive warmth. Pleased to report the results were very un-Shure.

There's this Acutex LPM415. I can listen to it for most of one side of an LP then it's got to go. Reminds me of irritatingly poorly rendered digital. Can't use the 415 in the car so it just sits there alot. IMO, the Acutex tri-pole engine is noteworthy for its absence of IM distortion, channel balance and soundstaging ability. It is also frequently described as "flimsy". The previous LPM3xx mount, if examined, is sturdier. An exchange of engine/mount between the two results in an audible difference. For those prone to fiddling with such, a note of caution, PUSH the cart out of it's sleeve from the rear, don't PULL it out as the backplate with the out-pins is prone to seperation. Don't bother to ask how this came to my attention. Fortunately, no harm, no foul.

Three or so weeks ago global warming took a teeny little break, so out to the shop I went to try my hand at some cart warming. When Edison was asked if he felt he has wasted time in all those failed experiments in producing a workable incandesent bulb he replied; "No, now I know XX ways not to do it". I resemble that statement. FYI, the engine is (nom.) 5/16" wide, hardware is (nom,) 1/8" ea, on a 1/2 mount headshell, the remainder is 1/16" or a max. of 1/32", each side. That's some pretty skinny wood. The OEM mount is not a suitable model for anyone inclined towards wood buchery but it can be rigged to work. Sorta'.

Next attempt will be more in line to a glued up three piece open-front/open bottom style incorporating blind nuts to capture the screws. At the top, a 20* wedge tapering to near zero at the rear, about 3/4 (+-) long & wide. It should be obvious it's a work in progress. The 415 is transformed. Glare, grain, glass, gone! Hey, I can listen to it now, and I do. 415 mk.111 this weekend?

Henry, enjoy your AM10-20, it's a Sigmutt. For a little more in the mids & if you just happen to have one laying around, a 155LC stylus is compatible.

Excuse the length of this post & always,

Peace,
Regards, Raul: Allow me to address your comments concerning mid level carts and what I "like".

Raul, you wrote: "The AM30 is in the middle line, is not the top of the line but if you " see " the AM50 design on cantilever/stilus is almost no different with other top AT cartridges." It is inconsistent to label a cart "mid" and then state that with a different stylus, it is "almost no different" than other TOTL carts. Shall we look into this?

Carts are electro-magnetic generators. The quality of the windings, construction of cores and the care with which they are assembled are important. Once beyond electron flow and resonance characteristics of the cart, the stylus assembly is the predominant influence on audible performance. Signet carts are hand assembled with more than the usual care encountered in production examples and although a good elliptical has its charms, the midrange clarity and delicate hfs of a nude LC or Shibata profile on beryllium are a personal preference. These are rarely described as "mid level".

Let's keep in mind that for the AM20 through 50 carts the generators are identical. The AM10 is of lower inductance and build quality is equivalent. There are those who would consider the lower inductance cart preferable. Cost-wise, as with so many other carts the stylus assembly is the determining factor. Examples include Goldring x800, x900 & 10xx carts, the AT15 variations, AT20 series, AT22-25, Signet TK9 &10. Let's not forget about ADC carts, the QLM-30 through XLM for instance. The examples are numerous. Your comment, as written, is inaccurate.

You are in error when you write: " -as you die for the ( not me ) Signet's middle of the line models". I'll not speak for Halcro, Henry can speak for himself and in relating his experience with a cart offering an unusual quality of performance, he did so and with his usual eloquence. I read that the strengths of the cart in question were elsewhere than the mids and while midrange performance was not objectionable, Henry found those other qualities commendable. Overly polite, it ain't. There was also reference to a headshell he'd not tried before & it was found to be of some merit.

As apparently you and I are both familiar with the cart, the stylus and the headshell I wonder why we'd not agree there is much to enjoy from the presence, range of response and articulate performance this particular combination offers. Posts similar to Henry's, in the past, been referred to as "a learning opportunity". One might think to thank Henry for sharing the information?

You are welcome to your opinions and they are respected as being your individual preferences BUT please refrain from ascribing, unheard, a diminished quality to anothers gear, or miss-stating the preferences of others to fit certain unsubstantiated preconceptions. This is not productive behavior.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Regards, Nikola: Generic styli=caveat emptor. Quality is "all over the map". For the generics, VTF is given anywhere between 1.5 & 5.0gm downforce, the quality (and condition) of the suspension may be somewhat questionable.

This vendor's information is (typically) accurate:

http://www.turntableneedles.com/Needle-707-DE_p_1318.html.

There are other references to this assembly's (Pfansteil #707-DE) similarity to the Piezo Y-308, I believe this was discussed on this thread a year or so ago.

Another vendor:

http://www.thevoiceofmusic.com/catalog/part_detail.asp?PNumberBase=707&SearchType=MfgNameNeedles&MfgName=Piezo&Categories=

The 4-digit code (4707) preceding the description (DE -> Diamond Elliptical, 707-D7 would be a diamond 0.7 conical) usually indicates generic, 3-digits (707), OEM.

For a fresh assembly from a reputable source, search JICO. They'll have the Piezo stylus as well as an offering for several of the cross-referenced carts from the above list.

No association with the above vendors. Good luck!

Peace,
Regards, Raul, Storyboy: Styli for 1xxx, 2xxx, 4xxx & 8xxx carts tested using a compass. No effect. Carts do have magnetic influence, the bass rich 8000 swings the needle from several inches away.

Peace,
Regards, Porto, Harold-n-t-Barrel: Raul is owed the honors for bringing the AT20SS to our attention. For the first twenty or so hours it was a disappointment. Anemic was, IIRC, my description. Around thirty hours it started waking up, enough so that tweaking alignment actually made a difference. On the 12" Pio. arm, it's simply glorious. The Acutex's went the other way. Fortunately the EPA-250/SP15 is now doing duty in an office system, the Acutex are restored to their former glory through a serviceable Kyocera A-710 MOSFET integrated and modest Tannoy DC-3000 floor-standers.

A 320 (described as low hours) on a headshell, plus a SaturnV integrated headshell with an extra generator is offered on ebay. Search if interested. No association.

Porto, does your cat demonstrate a preference for the LPM 320 ;) ?

Peace,
Regards, Porto: The question was one of genuine curiosity. I have a cat, Pi' sant, who's main goal in life seems to be the shedding of copious amounts of hair. She'll join me in listening sessions, sometimes for lengthy periods if she approves of my selections. In adjusting anti skating I've learned to trust her ears. She's very attentive to soundstage depth/width & center image.

Pi' sant tolerates Pink Floyd but disdains electronica in general. You mentioned your cat's dubious acceptance of Harry Belafonte, Lenco Heaven, the "Acutex...Bar" thread.

Wishing you good listening &

Peace,
Regards, Raul: Lucky you! I'm going through nearly the same situation with an EPC-U25. Same family as the Technics P23 or EPC-205 and with a solid 1/2" mount. One stylus from Nagaoaka, another "generic", not impressed. Have ordered a JICO SAS for the U25. With laminated cores, single point cantilever suspension and relatively low inductance, the cart should perform better than it does now. Jico shipping notification last Fri.

A red generic for the AT-20SS? Want it?

Peace,
Regards, Grbluen2: If the cantilever is simply rotated and not bent then you may be able to correct it yourself. Pull up the AudioKarma turntable forum, find "Search", enter "rotated cantilever" & click on Google site search. This is not an uncommon occurrence.

If inspection of the "V" magnets proves them to be in the correct 45* position relative to the pole pieces but the stylus is not vertical then replacement/repair should be considered.

A user initiated cantilever swap is another option. It is more easily accomplished than might be thought. Research & deliberation are advisable, incantations optional. Our contributor "Fleib" has given good advice regarding the CA modded AT95 (last year) in this thread, perhaps he'll check in?

Peace,
Regards, Acman3: Hi, Danny. If your carts are of the LPM series, the 312 stylus is bonded, on a round bushing. Eff. tip mass is higher, 0.6mg versus 0.5 for either the 315/320. All three are on a titanium tube, the 312 & 315 a straight cantilever, the 320 is tapered. Compliance, tracing and ch. balance for the 312 is lower than either of its big bros.

To elevate performance into the LPM 320STR 111 range a total rebuild may be necessary. Have you looked into VdH options?

Lots of good reading here:

http://www.vandenhul.com/userfiles/docs/Phono_FAQ.pdf

AND a few opinions. ;-)

Peace,
Regards: IMHO Lew is on the right track, anyone tried something as simple as blue tack or self-adhesive drawer bumpers placed in strategic locations? Wood mount is an easily heard improvement.

Still seeking investors for headshell. Prefer unmarked U.S. $. Considered labeling it "Betty" or "Jughead", prefer the classier "Veronica".

Peace,
Regards, Raul: "In the mean time have fun." Yes, that's important. I hope none took my "project" seriously, it seemed there was more "heat" than "light" in recent communications here, & my foolishness served to "lighten" things up .

BTW, it should be mentioned that the Acutex 4XX carts are much improved through a mount fabricated of wood. Easier said than done, it is a convincing demonstration of the resonances contributed by the supplied mount. A Shure M75ED T2 is also residing in a cocobolo mount. Tonal balance remains and neutrality is improved. My listener involvement has, however, diminished. It's just not quite as engaging.

Excluding the superb Shure ML140 HE, it seems I'm one of Dgarretson's "long nose" listeners ---but then the ML140 DOES have a prominent proboscis---

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: Apologies for the prior & somewhat windy post, submitted & caught yr comment.

I've a ML140 HE. Rarely mount it up as my other carts are resentful of it. It and a spare NOS stylus can be found in a cushioned air-tight container, next to my pristine TK7LCa stylus.

And Henry, please do save a few of those ?s for the rest of us(?) ;)

Peace,
Regards, Dover: In the late 70s Grado dealers would include (for the asking) a pentagonal aluminum plate with three dimples, both tiptoes and isolation for one's cart. Purists scoffed, others said "well, it does something, use it if you like it". Haven't looked up the specific compliance of the Jico SAS, there is a universal recommendation from the maker to run it at 1.4gm VTF.

This is the difficulty with AM styli, with the better offerings "caveat emptor" is perhaps too stern, "close, possibly excellent but different" is the best one can hope for.

Interesting, your comments on headshells. The ADC magnesium models are light enough to permit accurate tracking with high compliance carts (arm dependent, of course), EXTREMELY rigid, but prone to ringing. Removing the washer at the union with the collet helps to evacuate resonances, an isolation "device" is helpful in reduction of ringing, especially apparent with a plastic mounted cart. Curiously, a thin sheet of malleable metal is effective in this capacity, the dissimilar materials curb boundary resonant energies while still providing an effective path for draining these energies through the tonearm.

And those made of wood-. Different densities, specific gravities, as I have read you've not only been a dealer in audio but also extensively in the implant industry as well as recently in timber, I'm sure theres little about the qualities of either material, metal or organic, that you're unaware of.

Energy is, however, transmitted through radiation (acoustic), reflection (boundary resonance), convection or conduction (transmission through a material). Insulation and isolation are closely related concerns, the most effective natural insulation is, perhaps surprisingly, trapped air.

Follow, please, comment as you wish. An old, tried and proven technique for reducing port "boof" in speakers is the introduction of drinking straws. The degree of damping is determined by the number used. Because they are hollow, internal volume of the speaker is largely undisturbed.

Now, wood. Wood is comprised of three structural identities. Growth rings, longitudinal cells and transverse rays. Growth rings contribute to rigidity along the length, transverse raying unifies the longitudinal straw-like cell structures, which in heart wood are vacant of anything other than air. This is especially evident in the end-grain of species such as oak, hickory, ash or pecan. These fall into the group of ring-porous woods.

So here one may observe attention to insulation, isolation, density and specific gravity. Wood is a traditional material in the construction of plinths and, certain carts such as Nikolas' Virtuoso, and speaker cabs, it's use as an isolation platform is not unheard of. Bamboo, actually a grass, in a laminated form is becoming more frequently utilized in this capacity. Other than cost & strength-to-weight, there must be good reason.

Self resonance is variable with density. Boundary resonance is internally damped and as it is a material differing from most cart mounts, also serves to reduce the resonant interaction at that junction. Conduction is, it should be remembered, not always a good thing. Tonearms are subject to this too and as Raul recently mentioned can provide a path for mechanical or acoustic energies being transmitted back to the cart.

Please continue your lack of conviction that wood is appropriate for this usage, those who have actually explored their qualities promise tolerance. A precautionary "note" though---the typical matching requirements being met, those who anticipate bass bloom or "organic" mids may be surprised.

Anyway, the EPC-U25 continues to be an enigma. Haven't tried it on a graphite/plastic headshell yet. Current arm is a upper-mid mass carbon graphite pipe on a Pio. PL-70L-11. The Sumico/Jelco/Zupreme is a good model, two pins for lateral stability but at 12gm begins to boost eff. mass into a high mass area. As is, the cart sounds better at 47k ohms than 100k, just a little recessed in the hfs at 0 ohm. Running a 100pf shunt sounds about right.

So it's been a running battle with the thing for six months now. As a micro-line stylus has never been a first choice, and as boron is both lighter and more rigid, but also more resonant than beryllium I'll consider the stylus first. Perhaps a HE nude on aluminum?

Thanks for your response, it offered several points for consideration. And Don, for your generous offer.

A'gon contributors are typically informative and considerate, those who post here among the finest.

Perhaps the Arche/Orsonic debate is significant enough to deserve it's own thread (again)?

Peace,
And Henry--I left out a "gloat" in my previous address, it was I assure you wholly unintentional.

You will at some time treat us to one of your wonderfully entertaining reviews of the Shure? I'm looking forward to it with relish. Oh, yes!

Good listening, enjoy the ML140 HE. It's a treat.

Peace,
Regards, Dover: Damping or dumping, this is an instance where it is easy to agree with both theories but not nearly as much fun as arguing the point ad infinitum. It might be best to consider it on a case-by-case basis. Plastic mounts are not my first choice, sometimes we have to take what we're given and do what we can.

The EPC-U25 has real potential. It can be heard with the SAS but then there's that annoying 12k bump. If you've noticed the same exists at the 8k range with carts having more than (+-) 1200 ohm output inductance, at 22-2300 ohm every defect of your, no, my vinyl is magnified. A four coil generator with laminated plates to reduce eddy currents, the next higher evolution would be toroidal, the "air core" equivalent in MMs. Call it tweaking or tuning, coloration or whatever, the ability to finesse the character of these carts is, for me, much of the allure of MMs. They can be surprisingly rewarding. Aggravating too.

Your thoughts concerning an adjustable damping headshell are interesting. You might consider a development and design program, the Dover Dampster. You might anticipate some degree of controversy though.

Lew's audiophile grade rubber bands are still another option, I understand there are cheap copies everywhere---

Thanks for your continued interest.

Peace,
Regards, Raul: Thanks for the cart info. The U25 came on an NOS Astatic headshell, the much (and correctly) maligned waffle type. It was so inexpensive I thought it a good opportunity to investigate the qualities of each. An AT13Ea with a NOS clear diamond 0.2 x 0.7 nude on tapered aluminum is now strapped to the Astatic headshell, not up to "review" status but it is an entertaining cart with convincing bass and mids easier on the ear than expected from the sharp elliptical. The hfs are nicely extended but with a slight "tizzy" quality that can probably be laid on the doorstep of the AT headshell. An AT-MG10 headshell is in the drawer, I really should move the 13Ea to it and give it a more serious listen. The MG10 headshell is, btw, 4mm thick and seems to substantiate the reported resonance handling abilities of constructions of that dimension.

Correct, the U25 is in the EPC-250 family, as is the EPC-P23. With the available OEM boron cantilever and fine elliptical, the P23 was, in it's day, favorably commented on. The cart continues to stubbornly resist.

"Men all know the disposition by which we attain victory, but no one knows the configuration through which we control the victory. Thus a victorious battle is not repeated, the configurations of response are inexhaustible. One who is able to change and transform in accord with the enemy and wrest victory is termed spiritual". Sun-tzu.

Peace,
Regards, Danny/Dover/Geoch: "The General cannot engage in battle because of personal frustration. When it is advantageous, move; when not advantageous, stop. Anger can revert to happiness, annoyance can revert to joy, but the dead (cart) cannot be brought back to life. This is the Tao--" The Art Of War, Sun-tzu.

Always pleased to exchange info. on my favorite thread, the Moving Maginot one. Put your headshells on, the blitzkrieg resumes!

Armistice,
Regards, Fleib: Would like to lay that one on dang auto correct but my bad, a very early morning post. Output impedance. The most immediate illustration would be the AT-20 @ 500 ohm compared to the 440MLa, 3200 ohm. Ever hear the AT-20 referred to as an "ear biter"?

A few others: Shure V15-111, @ 1350, V15-xMR, 650
ADC XLM (varies), 360 to 760, the PSX 10 through 40, 3600 ohm.

Not many of the higher impedance carts are discussed here, the (borderline) Grace F9-E is one, 1700 ohm. "Back in the day", it was considered by some to have a response tilted in the hfs, IIRC Martin Colloms was one. The higher output (mv) F9-L was on his "Recommended" list for 1977, the F9-E, not. An illustration that there are other factors (loading, stylus/cantilever, yada, yada) involved in voicing a cart but if one cares to do a listening comparison it's there (IMHO) to be heard.

If you're curious, measuring device is an ancient Pio. SG-9500 equalizer. A remnant from the days when people still recorded to cassette. Switched out of the equally ancient rig except for doing the Fletcher-Munsen smiley face thing at rare low level listening, it's useful for identifying the range of suspected anomalies.

Lesson learned, not to post before second cup of coffee. Thanks for catching that.

Peace,
Regards, Dover: Fleib made, earlier, the suggestion that it might be interesting to share notes concerning the characteristics of carts found to be of noteworthy performance. I'd suggest that most with an output of 3.5mv or less (there are, IMHO, exceptions) are capable of nimble transient response. In spite of it's 2.5mv output, resonance in the 12k hz region continues with the Technics EPC-U25/ML stylus and is NOT one to recommend to friends. I give up on it, perceiving a response more brittle than a poorly rendered Joni Mitchell CD. Bass however is quite good.

Your comment on "ginormous" distortions due to higher output is one that may result in shedding additional light on general qualities to be aware of in selecting an unreferenced, or even referenced cart. If would you be so kind, give an opinion of the level at which output derived distortions are observed?

Determined to conquer the U25, I followed up on your suggestion to examine the offerings of Peter Belt & found several fairly recent references in Stereophile, revived some memories:

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/

As to the U25, the designation seems somehow submarine-like & there are several ponds on the property---

Peace,
Regards, Harald-n-t-b: Suggest you look at the download of Grace "Stereo Pickups" in the Vinyl Engine Library, draw your own conclusions.

I've both the F9E & F9L. Being a midrange junkie, the F-9L is among my ten or so favorites. Outvoted by those who have had the opportunity to compare the "L" to the "E" & Ruby. The F9F (blue stylus ass'ly) is usually considered the premier edition.

Peace,
Regards, Raul: Thanks. I'm familiar with the Orto, about five grades above the MC20 I'll occasionally drag out. The Spectral, unheard.

Thanks again,

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: Masochist? Did someone whisper in your ear, the cursed EPC-U25 was given another chance to prove itself listenable?

Although flagellation is, in certain circles, an acceptable practice under no circumstance is this particular torment to the ear justifiable. In contradiction to it's (from memory) low impedance/low inductance, both in the 500mH & ohm range & a "should be ideal" 2.5mv output, there is a peculiar resonance in the 12k range due (I suspect) to the combination of boron cantilever, SAS/ML stylus and the dreaded plastic mount. It makes the Acutex LPM 415 sound warm (quite an accomplishment) and it's available, CHEAP!

Congratulations on the TK7LCa, the OEM line contact styli are of exceptional quality and quite difficult to source. As to the LPM 420, the cart continues to justify it's chameleon genes. When things get slow with the MM thread a mention of "Acutex" is sure to inspire comment.

While the TK7LCa remains my "go to" cart, the Shure ML140 HE, Acutex LPM 320STR or Empire 4000D-111 might be selected for an evening of good listening. Not much mention of Nagatron or Nagaoka? The Nagaoka MP500, boron cantilever/LC stylus & 3mv output looks interesting.

Just curious, anyone have information on the configuration of the 4000D-111's stylus? On the packaging my example was supplied with it's described as "4 Dimensional". The Empire, previously somewhat turgid in the bass, moved to a Yamamoto boxwood headshell and with particular attention to alignment the cart has gained in clarity, tonal balance and a quite welcome reduction in unwanted resonance. Should a "recommended cart list" ever be compiled from the favorites mentioned in this thread, the 4000D-111 might find a mention?

Peace,
Regards, Raul, In_Shore: Thanks for the stylus info, it raised my curiosity and here's what I found. First, a little support for a personal preference, a J. Carr quote: "Too large of a major radius makes azimuth adjustment more critical than most users (and many tonearms) want to deal with, and too small of a minor radius tends to create edges on the stylus that are sharp enough to chew up the groove. Based on my own experiences and observations, I like the maximum major radius to be in the 70~80um range, and the minor radius to be in the 2.5~3um range". It might be conjectured that with a less than perfectly flat LP, an extreme major radius would suffer from vertical "scrubbing", essentially a greater likelihood of introducing VTA error, bridging groove modulations and affecting slew rate/transient attack negatively. So it would seem to me.

In_Shore, here's what I found concerning the Empire "Gold" 4000D3. A crude but practical means of converting mils to microns is to multiply by a factor of 2.5. Your given profile of .25 x 2.5 then compares to a 6uM x 62uM minor/major radii, a moderately "fat but tall" line contact. For comparison, a .2 x .7 elliptical is .6 x .18um major/minor. This is where it gets interesting. Popular Mechanics, Apr. 1975 reviews a number of 4-channel carts, the stylus dimensions are as supplied by Raul, the "4 Dinensional" stylus at .1mil, which would be (approx.) a 2.5uM minor radius, well within Shibata dimensions. Further, the PM (yeah, I know) article states B&O's Pramanik, Stantering's Quadrahedral and Empire's 4-Dimensional styli are Shibata variants.

More! Empire Scientific patented the "paralinear" designation in 1983, the Gold D3 is interchangeable with the Empire 5000LAC, or "Large Area Contact", stylus. This might be an interesting cart, with a given inductance of 270mH, one might keep an eye open as to its availability. With the (presumably) original silver D3 stylus, it could be a winner.

Some more esoteric info. here: http://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?topic=3351.15.

It appears the original stylus is Shibata, the later (1983-) a line contact, both Empire's variants, a minor variation to avoid patent infringements of Shibata's original design.

In_Shore, I'd also like to comment on the boxwood headshell, it seems to do a good job of controlling spurious bass resonance, concentrating the mids while still maintaining hf extension. I find it to be a neutralizing influence, on the right arm & matched to the cart it's good headshell. "You can tune a cart but you can't tunafish"- was that Joe Walsh or Mott The Hoople? :)

Any corrections to the above are welcome but I think I've got it right---.

Peace,
Regards: Decimal points gone wild there. Make that multiply by 25, not 2.5. Advice is to proof read for errors in late night posts.

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: There was some discussion of the ML140 HE in this thread several years ago, tone arm compatibility is a definite factor in extracting the potential of this cart. A HE stylus on a beryllium thin wall tube, transient response is excellent.

Perhaps of general interest (since Thuchan has brought up Shure carts), Some cut/paste from the cart designer, Les Watts:

"The V15 III was an excellent cartridge. I ran one for years. I personally preferred it over the IV, but that's just me. It was designed by my predesesor.
About the Beryllium...let me explain. The holy grail with things like carts and speakers is the transverse speed of sound of the material. It's a measure of
specific stiffness. In the III and the IV in order to get a low mass the cantilever first non rigid body resonance had to be in the audio range.
In the III that made for a small sag and peak. In the IV it made for a lesser sag and two peaks. They were all well controlled. But Beryllium... with it's speed of sound between two and three times higher than aluminum allowed us to get that cantelever resonance well out of the audio range without compromising mass. A high moving mass will just rip apart record groove modulation.
Another part is the geometry of the cantelever. Materials like boron and diamond have a speed of sound similar to Beryllium, but it's not so easy
to make a geometry like the microwall tube so you can take advantage of the properties. An airplane could be made of the very best high strength
aerospace alloys, but if it were a solid piece it would never get off the ground. That's the problem with many boron and ruby carts.

(A)nd about 80% of a cartridges sound is determined by the stylus.
the IV had beryllium in it too....in the form of a short rod filling the hollow aluminum stepped shank right at the magnet. A Microwall Be cantilever will be a dark steel brown/gray color. The only ratshack I recall with one is the v-15rs. It had the cantilever of my ml140HE, but an older type magnetic structure. It was as good as a V. BTW the IV shank was I think the most complicated and expensive one we ever did."

The ML140HE:

"All I can say is that I tried to make the ML series the best i could. I wanted to make it the best ever. I was pretty new there, and was assigned to do a second tier beryllium line. I sure didn't get to tell the marketing people what to do. They came up with stuff like "parafold biflux" and such.
There are things they would not let me do, but I wasn't ordered to design to a specific performance level...just a specific cost level. I was free to get as much performance as I could, but restricted to half the cost.I was also ordered to have a very different look, and told to get in the industrial design artists in on it early. I personally wanted lower sprung mass, so no metal body parts other than shielding, core , winding, and pins. I made the magnetic circuit lighter, and everything smaller. I made a new bearing system, which was 90% of the work.
If there was any real compromise I had to make, i guess it was the HE stone.
I was happy with the tip geometry but not the mass. So I tried to dump (moving) mass elsewhere.

There's one thing we wanted to do that was deemed impractical. We used x-ray window material for the cantilevers. It came in two thicknesses: 0.5 mil and 0.3 mil. ---We used the 0.5 mil for all production---, but made 0.3 mil MLs and 5s in the lab. I took the 0.3 stuff and mounted a stone with the clylindrical shank portion carefully cut off, using the diamond cleaving technique jewellers use. The tiny bit left was butt glued onto the cantilever. You could hardly even see it.
It was so fragile as to be almost impossible to put on a record by hand. The slightest dust fiber would render it unuseable, since the stone only protruded a few thousands below the cantilever paddle. A smaller magnet was used too. So output was low. It had a crazy high resonance frequency.

But if the record was perfectly flat and clean, it could track pretty much any commercial pressing at 0.1g , not including dynamic stabilizer force.

But I agree it was impractical. I used these on my personal home system at a higher tracking force though.

I suppose I come off as being biased. I guess. I generally like my stuff. I'll agree to one thing...ML is the worlds ugliest cartridge."

Les
L M Watts Technology

Rare, Henry? The styli can be still be found, priced from anywhere between $50 (from someone who doesn't know what they have) to $499. Finding the generator is the thing. In comparison the TK7LCa is a common cart and I've never seen one of the Signets with a four-digit serial number.

About the ML140 HE stylus- there is also a ML120 HE, the original was also equipped with a be. cantilever but with a less well polished stylus. The cost/performance ratio was so heavily weighed in favor of the 120 that savvy buyers purchased the 120 rather than the more expensive MASCAR polished 140. Marketing noticed the sales disparity and production was directed to change the 120 cantilever to aluminum. I've both, the 120 (with a red, rather than white dot on the grip), although a nice assembly does not compare well to the 140/be stylus.

Long post, excuse one last observation: The ML140/Ultra 300/Ultra 400 cantilevers are reputed to be interchangeable, have never (Thuchan) read a disparaging comment on any of the above.

Henry: read your comments on the Glanz thread & laughed, I suspect it was your wish that the lucky owners of the carts would have their (umm) "Glanz" fall off that finds you now in the position of meeting the Greek's recommendation of "In moderation, everything".

Peace,
Regards, Nandric: For the relatively unrecognized Pio. cart mentioned above, there are about ten styli available, a mix & match of conical, elliptical & Shibata on al., titanium and beryllium. Pick just about any AT or Signet, options abound. Mainstream Shure carts like the V-15 series? Again, stereo or mono, 33.3 or 78 rpm, conical, ellipt., HE, ML & cantilever builds are yet another elective. ADC? Covered. Pfansteil, Goldring, EVG, JICO, Nagaoaka, Ortofon, even Radio Shack is expanding their catalog.

I think the point might be made that with MM/MI (etc) carts, that even though the original styli are becoming both more scarce and costly, the options are available. Peter Lederman will provide a respectable line contact on ruby for a nom. $250, nude ellipt. on al for less.

An entirely different case with MC carts. With these the owner is indeed at the tender mercy (?) of the retipper.

No association & no personal experience but getting good feedback:

http://www.phonocartridgeretipping.com/index.html

Any "color"you want, any color at all!

Peace,
Regards, In_Shore: A pencil eraser is both abrasive and gentle enough to remove oxidation from headshell contacts, cartridge out-pins & etc without damaging plating.

Peace,
Regards, Thuchan: One wishing to assess Shure carts has their work cut out for them, VTA and Loading are "all over the map". A Gramophone review, June 1984 of the ML140HE:

"Overall sound quality had a transparent brightness which immediately lifted this cartridge into the upper hi=fi bracket. ---"The effect was of smoothness in the middle register with bass clearly extending down to the audible limits.---"With a capacitance loading of around 150pF, the response is of ruler flatness, sloping very gently by a mere 1dB @ 20kHz--- (T)his smoothness extends to well above 30kHz."

Also noted was a "Sharp rise time, absence of unwanted resonance".

Shures' recommended ML140 HE Cap. is 250pF. An experienced reviewer (John Borwick) with the gear to accurately measure response found differently. Possibly an input from their marketing people, intended to make the cart more attractive to "home stereo" owners who either didn't care to, or have the facilities to make loading adjustments?

The V15 gained its moniker from an early recognition of the advantages of standardization of cantilever tracking angle. In this instance 15* from which the V15 series gained its identification.

As RF interference is eliminated at loading above 400pF, your V15-111 was designed for suggested loading at 400-600pF. A slightly tail-down VTA should be tried. An early offering of carts with laminated plates, the mounting shroud was extended in depth as a measure of controlling resonance. The HE stylus response is rich in the mids. Solid bass & nicely resolving in the hfs, avoiding the somewhat forwardness of the upper range some observe with either the elliptical or ML styli. The al cantilever effects a midrange warmth and lively bass. Legendary tracker, listening to "Gaucho" with mine now, you may suspect I enjoy the V15-111/HE?

The M75, M91, M95 & M97 progressed with the V15 carts, configured from flat to pentagonal casings. "Junior" V15's, styli are frequently interchangeable within the "family", sometimes requiring a consideration of "plastic surgery". The M97xE to V15xMR is an example.

The V15-IV, a love-hate cart, a possibly "un-Shure" first step into "neutrality", let us know your impression?

The V15-V, IIRC there were thirteen options, styli, damper brush & P-mount. Well regarded cart, the 300/400 Ultra, ML120/140HE & M97E/ML/HE were siblings.

Running out of ink, early Shures are moderately capacitance insensitive. Bumped up into the 400-600pF range in the mid/late 70s & back into the 200-300pF range in the '80s. VTA needs attention. US mfg. styli are of good quality, some later imports are of suspected QC deficiencies.

There is also a M24H, hyperbolic nude, 20-50kHz response. Shure's only (AFAIK) cart specifically designated for CD-4 play, an attractive 3.0mv output & 510 ohm output impedance . One offered now, someone reading this really needs this cart. ;)

Here: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Genuine-Shure-M24H-Wide-Range-Dynetic-Cartridge-Stylus-New-Sealed-in-Box-NOS-/321029684535?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item4abedc3d37
NOS styli also available, same search. No association with either.

Am casually looking for an Ultra 500, reports from owners are of the "from my cold, dead hands" category.

Peace,
Regards, Raul: Distortion is most often understood to mean IGD, OGD, FIM, TIM, sometimes even PMS. Music is generally considered an art and the elements constituting "good" art, it's tone, texture and structural elements have yet to be empirically defined. The consensus among the cognoscenti is that the agreement of informed persons is sufficient. It seems there are a number of respondents in this thread who meet that criteria.

Concern as to wether electrons in a fuse are bumping into each other from right to left or left to right, for some, just may be a distraction from the hypothetical core of our pursuit, which rightfully should be the reproduction of music in a manner the listener deems pleasurable?

The purists' perspective is unassailable and entirely respectable. However, & since we're not all of the same mold, using the example of an audiophile whose hearing acuity above, say 12kHz, was diminished would it be considered unacceptable if he were to turn up the treble just a teensy bit, or would it be better to say-

Regards & enjoy the music?

Peace,
Regards, Raul: Although agreeing that the pursuit of the ideal is a worthy goal, the assertion that there is a single solution for all applications is itself questionable. “Beware the man of a single book.” ― St. Thomas Aquinas

Having spent twelve years playing clarinet (b-flat, B-flat bass & E-flat contra bass) as a student, amateur and unpaid semi-professional until economic realities intruded, and having participated in symphonic, woodwind and operatic ensembles the evidence is adequate to satisfy myself that no two examples of the same instrument, nor the tone, texture and technique of the performer will be the same. Experiences as a poor musician, cabinetmaker and educator leave me quite content to remain a simple enthusiast in audio. Consequently I think it best to avoid unsupported conclusions concerning the awareness or priorities of others.

Speakers are Paradigm Signature series, the S4. A 2 1/2 way design, response is 35-45k, +- 2db. Midrange runs full range, beryllium tweeters are surprisingly non-intrusive. Four speakers, each bolted on an Atacama stand, lead shot/kitty litter filled & anchored to a 12 x 12 x 2" walnut block.

At the foot of each is a comparably voiced Paradigm 12" DSP active sub, front ported and integrated in (according to my HT oriented friends) a perhaps overly conservative manner. Front speakers are eight feet apart, three feet from the front (long) wall, rears are more towards the corners and toed to face the fronts. All four arrayed an equal distance from the primary listening position. Ambience, soundstage and imaging is satisfactory. Fronts are powered straight from the amp, rears and subs through a Niles selector with volume control. Rears are run -3db. The "media" room is 18 x 22 x 10'6, large oriental carpet & leather furniture.

Patch cords. "The Wasatch cables possess a kind of presence factor, or rather a coherence thing that I find alluring as well as musically engaging. The impression remained with everything I threw at them." (Clement Perry, Stereo Times, 1/11/2001). Wasatch Cable Works, before they became ZU.

Amplification is gratifyingly absent of anomalous contributions, old-but-maintained Pioneer SX-1980 (a RECEIVER oh, the shame). Offers distortion response of 0.03% @ 135 watts/1 hour, TIM 0.01%. Dual coffee can sized tororidal transformers and four 22,000uF capacitors, two per channel. Clarity & balance is not a concern. Not the ultimate, but as far as neutrality, power reserve & resolution it serves it's purpose in an uncolored workman like fashion. Take it as you will, there is no one thing that stands out about it.

I must confess, your's & Dgarretson's comments concerning "Fuses that matter" are intriguing. Response & integration of the subs is satisfactory, even at the low gain implemented there are times when I've an impression they're lagging.

Current TT is a Pio. Exclusive PL 70L-11. Order would be P3. P-10, then PL-70, a stable hanging rotor drive & resonance free performer.

There are days when it all works together in a superlative manner, others when I wonder what went wrong. Soundsmith notified me yesterday that the ruby/optimized LC rebuild of a ceramic bodied ML150 OCC I sent in Sept. is finished, anticipating it'll provide a few more days of the superlative type. Hope it gets here before the Apocalypse, Dec. 21. I'll consider fuses for the subs, but no movement there until the 22nd. ;)

Now, back to fuse directionality?

Peace,
Regards, Raul: Thanks for your comments. As mentioned, there are days when my modest rig exceeds expectations and occasionally keeps me captivated into the early hours. There are other sessions when the components seem to not want to have anything to do with each other.

Although not exactly given away with a purchase of ten gallons of gas and even though the subwoofers are nicely timbre matched to the speakers, in comparison with the alacrity in transient behavior and definition the mains are capable of, and if specific attention is given, the DSP 3200's simply fail to keep pace. This is heard as overshoot. Not of the Signature series, Paradigm appears to have given more attention to rise time and range (23hz, extension to 18hz) than to quieting excursion at termination of signal.

If opportunity to audition the Velodynes is presented it should be interesting. The figures you give for distortion are, for a subwoofer, very impressive.

Looking forward to your impressions of the Precept, IIRC the 440 is ML/beryllium?

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: Condolences, Henry. Having given it considerable thought, there is a suspicion of meteorological impact. Living in the "sticks" is a dubious advantage, have my own personal transformer & the old rig is on a dedicated twenty amp line, voltage swing and noise in the line are not excessive.

Observed is a limbering-up period of a half hour and the expectation that a cart that has laid idle for a while will need some run-in. Listener's (re)acclimation may contribute. For those who enjoy speculation, as a cartridge is an electrical generator, some degree of Joule heating is another potential candidate. The correct perspective is that resistance also depends on temperature, usually increasing as the temperature increases. For reasonably small changes in temperature, the change in resistivity, and therefore the change in resistance, is proportional to the temperature change.

In the U.S., voltage at its peak hits about +170 V, decreases through 0 to -170 V, and then rises back through 0 to +170 V again. 120 volts is actually a kind of average voltage, the peak really is about 170 V. It's not difficult for an armchair theoretician to anticipate severe spikes in voltage frying a resistor, hopefully your repair will be an easy fix.

In 2009, the U.S. midwest experienced a severe ice storm, service was interrupted to tens of thousands of customers. Here, it was necessary to rely on a generator for eleven days before power was restored, consideration was given to surges as service was reconnected. Did a little research & obtained a power conditioner with battery backup, a Furman F1000-UPS Uninterruptible Back-up Power Supply unit with non sacrificial surge protection and 120v regulation within 5%, protection rather than regeneration was the concern.

Will proceed to compile data on barometer, humidity, ambient temperature, planetary alignment & regular consultation of the crystal ball.

Hope you get your rig up & running quickly, otherwise, still listening to the Virtuoso?

Season's best &
Peace,
Regards, Griffithds: Following your saga of the TL4S with interest. As reports drift in, looks like the TL series may be a winner. It's interesting that the PickeringUK site identifies it as "line contact", can you confirm the "S" designation refers to "Stereohedron"?

Peace,

Regards Griffithds: The Stanton/Pickering carts have me puzzled. Vinyl Engine Data Base is often incorrect, glad to have a Stantering Guru on board. That would be you, Don.

Thanks for keeping us informed.

Peace,
Regards, Griffithds: Thanks again. A reminder, the painted white, gray, then silver and gold XV-15 motors are of increasingly tighter spec., calibrated 681 bodies (this also implies a lab-matched stylus) will be engraved with a registration #. Twin sons from different fathers, both are four coil generators.

Peace,
Regards, Lew: Apologies for not having qualified that figure, leaving you in the position of an informed audio enthusiast deliberating the merits of a Soundesign "1,000 watt Peak Power" boom box at the supermarket.

Peace,
Regards, Griffithds: Thanks Don. Glad to hear Andy is taking a proactive interest.

Peace,
Regards, Lew: Not sure of the exact date, CE 1977/78? Claims for output, "bigger is better" became so outrageous that truth in advertising laws were invoked. Ratings were tied to continuous maximum output for one hour without clipping and statement of distortion of all species were required to be lab validated.

Sometime in the late '80s, televised ads were supplied to broadcast stations with elevated bias. There was an FCC edict that this would cease. In the hey-day of loudness wars, compression was substituted for volume.

Last week this was reaffirmed. How quickly we forget.

Crystal ball says 64* F & a chance of rain in the Sydney NSW area. Clean power for the next several days. I understand Aussies have four seasons; street paving, elec. service repair, typhoon & fire up the barbie.

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: FYI, my crystal ball is calibrated to two nines. You slept through some great weather. :)

The Virtuoso is holding your interest?

Peace,
Regards, Griffithds: TK5Ea:

Freq. Response: 10-30,000Hz
Tracking Forces: 3/4 - 1-3/4 grams
Channel Balance 1.0 dB
Channel seperation: at 1kHz 29dB, at 10kHz 20dB
Output at 5cm/sec: 4.2mV
Stylus tip: 0.2 x 0.7 mil nude square shank elliptical
Stylus cantilever: Tapered tube
Magnetic system: Dual Magnet
Vertical tracking angle: 20 degrees
Load impedance: 47,000 ohms
Cartridge Inductance: 1,000mH
DC Resistance: 1,200 ohms
Cartridge weight: 6.8 grams

The TK3Ea is 470 mH, 780 Ohm, .3 x .7 mil nude ellipt, the TK1Ea with a .4 x .7 bonded ellipt. The plastic mount of the 1Ea tends to be susceptible to microphonic influence.

I think you'll find the 5Ea slightly more capable in detail retrieval, the 3Ea less aggressive in the mids. The TK1Ea is entry level of this series, IMHO would do better with the AT7V.

Apologies for the short response (Lew, too), am still short on time.

Peace,