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
Dear Thuchan: Wrong and wrong.

What are in the today market are very good tonearms and what could be in the future could be very good ones but I don't care too much in what the others made it or make in the future but mainly in what I can do to fulfil my targets on tonearm design. When these targets already done then I can say safety that I'm done.

Btw, as better tonearm designs as better opportunities for the customers and of course a better challenge for every designer.

In the other side I'm not a marketing guy I even do not have a premium MKT manager as you but " things " could change: who knows.

Btw, next time you travel near México please let me know and we will try to give you a private/confidential primacy show on that tonearm design " jumping " in my audio system.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi folks,

Fleib - could not agree more about cantilever impact on the frequency response...
My remote testing of Shure V15VMR-SAS (on Empirelvr's system) vs my own N97xE-SAS shows that the same cantilever structure and proportions can be tuned differently in the suspension and tensioning to result in completely different results.
I finally bit the bullet and ordered a V15V SAS - which is what I really wanted when I ordered a N97xE-SAS about a year back. - So I will test both in my own setup and see the difference.
Interchanging between an original Shure V15HRP stylus (beryllium HE) and the N97xE-SAS - again they are very different styli, and require completely different loading parameters.
The N97xE-SAS works best in a high capacitance configuration - I am currently listening to Madam Butterfly on the Revox - with the N97xE-SAS mounting in a V15HRP catridge, C=490pf R=47k - this provides an almost completely flat f-r to 15k and then a very steep drop off.
Any attempt to extend the f-r beyond 15kHz can only be achieved at the cost of a rise at 10k-16kHz (cantilever resonance area), and a drop at 6k to 10kHz (cantilever skew/twist loss zone).

On another topic - compating my Revox Linatrack arm to the JVC QL-Y5F... the high frequency response is pretty much the same, resonance frequency range (5Hz to 25Hz) reflects the expected mass and damping differences.

The JVC However shows a noticeably larger boost centered on roughly 300Hz and extending 1 octave each way (150Hz to 600Hz) - the exact magnitude and extension of the boost zone tends to vary a bit with cartridge (and perhaps headshell?) in use at the time, but is fairly consistent.

The Revox also shows a touch of boost in the same area, but whereas the Revox tends to boost by around 1db, the JVC boosts by around 2db.

I believe these are tonearm resonances.... is this consistent with other people's experiences?
What can be done about this? - Are there tweaks/adjustments that can effectively control this? (without wholesale arm exchange that is!)

I previously thought it might be an anomaly on the test records - but it has been consistent across a range of differing test records.
I have put a dab of plasticine (modelling clay) on the JVC arm in an attempt to damp vibrations - but if it is having an impact, it is clearly not on this frequency range!

bye for now

David
Hi David,
This is interesting. One tidbit I didn't see in the Audio Circle post, was this: **On another topic - compating my Revox Linatrack arm to the JVC QL-Y5F... the high frequency response is pretty much the same, resonance frequency range (5Hz to 25Hz) reflects the expected mass and damping differences.**

Was 25Hz with the Shure? Do you notice any anomalies in the bass/lower midrange with it or other med cu carts with the Revox arm? Many carts have rising response in that region. The low mass arm might minimize it and the high mass arm maximize. I'd guess the rise would be greater with the M97. I'd also guess that the rise is greater w/aluminum cantilever. You need a med mass arm on your next acquisition.
Regards,
Dear Unoear: I think nothing really important or maybe I misunderstood Thuchan post because I don't consider my self as a marketing man. I'm only a man with deep love for the music and that's all.

Btw, great audio " toys " in your audio system, congratulations.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Fleib, Re your last post. I forgot to say that I load my 980LZS at 1000 ohms, typically. Also, you may know that the correct original stylus assembly is the Stanton D98, which is a stereohedron. The Pickering equivalent is the D7500S. So when you say you feel you are not getting max out of the cartridge, possibly you could upgrade with a higher level Pickering stylus assembly. The D98 has become unobtainium, but one can find the Pickering D4500S (which is also good and works with 980) and the D7500S, on the odd occasion and for big bucks (on the "buck" scale applicable to vintage MMs, cheap on the modern MC scale of spending). My D98 is of uncertain age but still sounds great. However, because I was so fond of the cartridge, I took the opportunities to purchase both a D4500 and a D7500, as well, both NOS. They are "around".
I'm sure I've also tried 100R and 47K with the 980, and I don't recall hearing much difference, but I could be wrong.
Hi Lew,
When I first got the 980 I took it up to 2.4K. It was all midrange at first. After some hrs I kept reducing it until somewhere around 250 ohms sounds right. The stylus is problematic. Most of those Pickering stereohedron have disappeared. A couple of vendors that used to have them sold out. I found a 4500Q at TurntableNeedles for almost $300. I had a bad experience with them before, and I'm hesitant. I also want to get a new stylus for my Virtuoso and I haven't decided what to do with either one. Lately I've been listening to a Monster Genesis 1000 - an old friend.

I think I'm going to experiment a little with high cu styli and low mass arms with the Virtuoso. I'll let you know.
Regards,
Hi Fleib, I just posted my Virtuoso (black) to Alex in Germany for a retip. J.Carr's comment on aluminum cantilever in mind I asked for a 'pressure fited' stylus
in the aluminum cantilever (aka without glue). As soon as
I know more I will post about.

Regards,
Hi All,
I'm on my 2nd read of this thread. I'm trying to do a much slower read this time and taking notes. There is so much information to gleen from this. What has prompted this responce is something I have just reread pertaining to the Azden YM-P50VL. A few months ago I bought one of these from a fellow Audiogoner. Absolutely amazing cartridge, but because of this reread, I have discovered an improvement to this an all "P" mount type cartridges that I had overlooked from the 1st read. Bypassing the "P" mount pins and connecting the tone arm wires directly to the cartridge pins raised this cartridge to another level in my system. I have 2 of the Azdens but only made the change to one of them. I mounted both onto their own Graham 2.2 arm wands to make quick comparisions. I am hearing a more focused/dynamic presentation of the soundstage with the altered "P" mount cartridge. A belated thank you Raul, for bringing this to our attention.
Hi Nandric,
I guess your cart will be very similar to Rauls. You didn't mention what kind of tip you ordered. Your Virtuoso, like any other AT MM, can exchange styli. You can have different styli mounted on separate plugs, and compare. I hope you didn't order a micro stylus on an aluminum cantilever. That tends to be an overly aggressive combination on ATs.
Regards,
Griffithds:

How did you accomplish this? I've read about this before and in fact the guy I bought my azden cart from cut off the pins from the p-mount adapter and said he attached his leads through the hole and directly onto the cartridge pins. For the life of me, I couldn't get any leads I had to make it through the holes. Are you just crimping them on the very short length of cartridge pin that sticks out beyond the hole in the adapter? If so, you are getting a sufficiently tight connection this way? To get them to go tightly around the thin cartridge pins, there's no going back for the leads since the ends are now unusable for any other cart (too small). Right?

Or is there some other way I'm not imagining?
Banquo363,
After you have removed the nut/screw that holds the cartridge to the mount, set the cartridge aside. I used a pair of plyers to pull out the 4 pins in the mount. The remaining holes were far to small to insert the arm leads into so I used a small drill and enlarged the 4 holes big enough the get the leads thru. If I was to do it again, I would just (using a xacto knife), cut out a square out of the back of the mount. I would then have easy access to the cartridge pins. I bought some wire that was the same size as the cartridge pins and slid the wire into the leads. Using a strong set of tweezers, I then crimped down the leads to fit tightly onto the wire. I felt that when the time comes to open the leads back up to a larger diameter, I would just shove a round toothpick into the leads forcing them to open up again. I have done this toothpick trick before and it works. What you don't want to do is crimp down the leads without having anything inside to prevent them from colapsing.
Hi Fleib, Yes you are right. I even told Alex Raul's considerations and wanted,
to put it simply, 'the same'.
But I deed not mention any particular stylus. Alex will
consult me and make his own suggestions. I am however not
sure what you mean with: 'you can have different styli
mounted on separate plugs'. I got the impression that the stylus is not removable . But I deed not inspect the Virtuoso careful. I bought the cart on the German ebay with the broken stylus and thought : Bingo!
Would you be so kind to elaborate on stylus and styli?

Kind regarda,
Hi Nandric,
If you look at the underside of the CA, you'll see the cantilever exit the body from a rectangular piece of black plastic. That plastic is actually part of an AT stylus assembly. If you pry it up you'll see what we call the plug - this plastic piece holds the cantilever, magnets, etc. The rest of a usual AT plastic stylus, we call the wings. The wings can be cut off any plastic AT stylus and and you can insert it in the respective body to make it like a CA assembly (sans wings). However, not all plugs are the same and you are limited in what you can substitute.

The plug style for the CA carts is the same as an AT-95, K9, AT-3400 series and all the P-mounts with the unusual wings that are tall and angular like the AT-92ECD. The only upscale styli in this group is a couple of P mounts and they might be bonded. But, if you get extra plugs from a cheap replacement stylus, you could use them for extra styli. I just put a 92E stylus (P mount) on my Virtuoso and I'm going to try it on a low mass arm. This is a bonded .3 x .7 elliptical/aluminum.

You can use any of the Jico styli made for the AT-95, just cut off the wings. These would include an LC (Vivid Line) and a shibata. They are high quality, but bonded on a straight alum cantilever.
Regards,
Dear Fleib, If I understand you well I can do the 'surgery' myself with many available 'donors'? But if this can be done so easely why deed Raul not try this,uh,
surgery? Considering the 'level' he already occupy on his own learning curve this looks very strange to me. So I may surpass the master by cutting of some plastic parts of the
donors? I intend to buy all kinds of surgical razor sharp knifes. Should I ask Axel to put the cheapest version of his offerings on my Virtuoso? I will need the money to buy
as many donors as I can.

Kind regards and thanks,
Thank you Griffithds! Done. I tried your xacto knife idea and while I couldn't cut off the square (that plastic is very hard), I thinned it out enough to make drilling the 4 holes an easy proposition. I've listened to only one side of a record after the surgery (it was late) but I got a much more natural and relaxed sound than I've ever gotten with this cart. It's giving the AT 20ss a serious run for its money.
Hello All, I just came across some Acutex 4xx cartridges on Classico Ebay. I think it is Italian. I am not sure of the details as the translation was rough on my end.
Dear friends: This is a rare bargain, very good performer at very nice price:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Audio-Technica-AT24-cartridge-/180735437158?pt=Vintage_Electronics_R2&hash=item2a14abe966#ht_724wt_1265

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Griffithds: I own several P-mount type cartridges and all of them performs way better by-passing those " terrible " adaptor connector pins.

Every single stage that we can " by-pass " on this early stage where the cartridge signal pass always is worth to try it and always give us good rewards.

Btw, the Azden is great cartridge and compete at the very top as Banquo363 and you already experienced.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Assuming that the P-mount itself is of decent quality, e.g., the one that comes with the Azden or with the B&O cartridges, you can just solder the tonearm wires directly to the P mount pins, and then use the P mount in the conventional manner. Same result: the elimination of one set of connectors in the pathway. This is what I did with the Azden. But I never fell in love with that cartridge, as many of you apparently did.

And if one is really obsessive about connectors, what about those additional connectors at the rear of the typical removable headshell? If you use a Pmount with a removable headshell, you typically have connectors: (1) cartridge body to Pmount, (2)Pmount to headshell wires, (3)headshell wires to rear of headshell, (4)rear of headshell to contacts at end of the tonearm wand, not to mention (5)DIN plug if you use removable tonearm ICs, and (6) RCA jacks. It's a real wonder that any decent sound gets through all that crap.
Dear friends: This is an interesting post for the Virtuoso owners that are " nervous "/ready to change the Virtuoso Wood CA's voicing:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1317406408&openflup&61&4#61

Nandric, this is one of the reasons I prefer stay with the designer's targets. Even that, the good Fleib's advise is that you always can return to the original.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul, I told Alex your whole story about the Virtuoso
to give him some idea reg. what I want. I was not sure about the stylus so I wrote 'something better' than the original. I am stil waiting for his e-mail. And of course
I am 'nervous'; I never deed any surgery in my life. If
I injure myself Fleib will get the bill (grin).

Regards,
Hi Nandric, **So I may surpass the master by cutting of some plastic parts of the donors?**
That is yet to be determined. Raul ordered a nude .3 x .7 elliptical on a tapered aluminum cantilever. AFAIK, there is no nude tip available for any of the appropriate replacements. Most also have straight aluminum cantilevers. I think tapered would have less tip mass and straight might be more rigid. This is guess-work on my part as tapered is usually considered better. If Raul owns the AT-95SA that he wrote about, that stylus could be substituted for his elliptical. I don't believe removing the plastic is necessary. There would be an empty space in the front, but it should work. The comparison would be for a bonded shibata on a straight cantilever vs the SSmith nude/tapered elliptical. From my experience with these, the nude elliptical is more detailed and the bonded shibata is sweeter, or could be considered more "musical".
BTW, if you're cutting off plastic wings it might be easier with a small wire cutter. You have to be careful not to get near the magnets or cantilever.

Raul, thanks for that link to the post about the SSmith ruby/LC. I'm not surprised. I've also heard of others liking it or the ruby/micro option. Yes, it changes the character of the sound and that can be a matter of taste. As I posted before, the aluminum colorations are often preferred. Usually with more mid-bass and midrange dynamics as opposed to more detailed and less forgiving sound, people often prefer aluminum. I don't think this is anything but one persons experience, but might be indicative of what to expect. I'd like to remind you that the Maestro has the same generator and a boron/micro stylus. You said it seemed overdamped? I'm not trying to make a case for a ruby cantilever, I'm really trying to figure this out myself, before I spend more money. I've already broken about $600 worth of styli experimenting with transplanting. Boron and beryllium cantilevers don't take well to bending. No doubt the SSmith alum or transplanting a nude stylus w/aluminum to a Jico plug, is the most cost effective option and might be the best.
Regards,
Hi Raul,
+++++ I own several P-mount type cartridges and all of them performs way better by-passing those " terrible " adaptor connector pins.++++

My only TT that I have ever owned that had a removal headshell was a TT I had back in Collidge. We're talking 40+ years ago and even it wasn't a "P" mount type. My tone arms have always been one piece. Therefor this Azden has been my 1st experience with a "P" mount version.

++++This is an interesting post for the Virtuoso owners that are " nervous "/ready to change the Virtuoso Wood CA's voicing.++++

I spent a full day swapping 2 Graham arm wands each one loaded with 1, a stock Red Virtuoso, and 2, the Black Virtuoso. The Voiceing of the 2 are very, very close to each other. Only the going back and forth, back and forth, can I even comment that their might be any difference at all. Now there is deffinetly more air around the instruments, and more sparkle at the top end, but if we only talk about voicing, then I am extremely happy that SS stayed with the Alum. cantiliver on ours. As you know, this is my 3rd Virutoso. I like how "IT" is voiced and do not want it changed!
And if one is really obsessive about connectors, what about those additional connectors at the rear of the typical removable headshell? If you use a Pmount with a removable headshell, you typically have connectors: (1) cartridge body to Pmount, (2)Pmount to headshell wires, (3)headshell wires to rear of headshell, (4)rear of headshell to contacts at end of the tonearm wand, not to mention (5)DIN plug if you use removable tonearm ICs, and (6) RCA jacks. It's a real wonder that any decent sound gets through all that crap.
It's a valid point Lew and one I have agonized over.
However as an old friend of mine said recently....."I've been young and I've been old.....and young is better".
Having had multiple modern arms with point to point uninterrupted wiring and many vintage arms with removable headshells and din plugs......I can report that some vintage tonearms (despite the added contacts)..... sound better than the modern ones.
Now tell us about the phono stage you use and the connections back to the Pre-amp? :^)
Hi Griffithds,

"I spent a full day swapping 2 Graham arm wands each one loaded with 1, a stock Red Virtuoso, and 2, the Black Virtuoso. The Voiceing of the 2 are very, very close to each other. Only the going back and forth, back and forth, can I even comment that their might be any difference at all. "

This is really helpful and goes some way towards answering the question that I had posed on Raul's Vituoso review.

Thanks

As always...
Hi Nandric,

I have real faith in Alex (at least regarding rebuilding Technics EPC 100Mk4's). It would be great to hear how he does with your Clearaudio and I think you're right in leaving it to his own judgement.

I look forward to hearing and good luck

As always
Hi Raul,

Thanks very much for raising awareness around the Clearaudio and for posting Jwglista's comments:

"In the end, I chose to drop back to the standard aluminum cantilever with elliptical stylus... Upon remounting the new rebuild, I immediately heard the original romantic sound of the Viruoso Wood. It's hard for me to say if Peter's rebuild sounded better than stock because it had been so long since I first heard it."

Following this and Griffithds's (and the manufacturer and retailers) comments, it seems that you cannot go far wrong with any Virtuoso wood bearing its aluminium cantilever and elliptical stylus. I am therefore nearing a position where I feel safe to buy - assuming I find time to audition my still untested cartridges and to be in one place long enough to begin seeking a good deal.

Thanks again

As always...
Hi Fleib, You are very explicit in mentioning the way by which the stylus is fastended to the cantilever (bonded shibata,etc). Now J.Carr wrote in this thread (09-14-11)
that the advantage of aluminum in comparison with the so called 'exotic cantilevers' is the possibility to 'pressure fit' the stylus. This way there is a direct contact between
the stylus and the cantilever (no glue inbetween). I am wondering why there are so many aluminum cantilevers with bonded styli. Ie why the producers of those cantilever/stylus combos omit to use this advantage?
I was as explicit in my e-mail to Alex by asking for a 'pressure fited' stylus in 'my' aluminum cantilever.
If I understand you correctly I can save $600 by avoiding exotic cantilevers? Then I can save some more by not using surgery instruments . Ie that an small wire cutter is even better. Thanks again and again...

Regards,
Dear Lewm: Yes, yours is other good alternative but I prefer to by-pass the adaptor pin connectors that solder the wires in there.
IMHO all the P-mount adaptors pin connectors ( but the Ortofon ones that came with the Empire 1080LT. ) are of really bad/low quality and for me the best we can do here is to by-pass it: the pin connectors in the headshell wires are a lot better.

Agree with you: solder the headshell wires to the headshell pin connectors. In my Virtuoso review I posted that that is the way the Audiocraft headshell was " wired ": is the only commercial headshell that I know came with the wires soldered to it.

Now, even that's a little risky the best connection is to hardwire/solder to the cartridge pin connectors. I made it with several cartridges in the past ( Koetsu Onyx Gold, Supex 900, Ikeda 9, etc, etc. ) and I was lucky enough never damage the coils. This is a very " delicate " task but worth worth to try it.
As afact this is what some cartridge manufacturers did by design: Audio Note or Linn, of course that they did it with out any single risk.

Now, the B&O even that came with a dedicate adaptor is not a true P-mount cartridge. The B&O adaptor IMHO came with better pin connectors.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Banquo363: I think you asking for silver headshell wires, well these ones are very good and can help you:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Ikeda-S50-silver-leads-which-made-Japan-/370322573059?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5638f20703#ht_900wt_1265

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: WoW!, the AT-24 goes on ebay for only 130.00!

The cartridge is a top tier and the one that bought it already had his " years's bargain ", good.

Obviously that the seller been not aware of what he had on " hand ".

Regards
Regards, Raul: Acman3 (Hi, Danny) has identified a vendor offering the Acutex LPM 420 at a very reasonable price. I ordered one last night. He has just put ten more up, BIN. Even though already in possesion of a 420, the cart is good enough (IMHO) to justify a replacement, esp. as it is NOS.

I did recognize your kind invitation (on another thread) to discuss the Acutex 415 and think it quite a considence that you would be trying the 415 at the same time. My example is not yet run in, there's a sibilance still in evidence. Excellent soundstageing and layering, definition is superb at this time and it demonstrates the wonderful bass I've come to associate with Acutex carts. And saxaphone, it's a you are there experience. However, accurate impressions can't be made until the cart has a few more hours on it. Currently running VTF at 1.4gm, 50K Ohm/150pF (+-) total. Suggestions?

I've styli for the 310, 312, 315, 320, 412, 415 as well as the previously used 420. Pleased with them all, I will make the suggestion, esp. at the offered price, that IMHO the LPM 420 is worth investigating.

Peace,
Dear Professor, Thanks to Danny (Acman 3)I visited the Italian ebay for the first time in my life. I discovered that 'testina' is their word for the 'cart' and was able to
buy both carts: LPM 420 and 412. I was searching for the LPM 315 and 320 for two years and give up in frustration.
While I have no idea reg. the question what LPM 420 and
412 are in comparison to LPM 320 and 315 I had no doubts at all: buy fast and test later. So while I am waiting for my new Acutex carts I am impatient to see your comment on
both carts. We already discussed the inscrutable nomenclature of Acutex carts but those are much more concrete objects.

Regards,
Hello Timeltel,

I am currently listening to the Acutex 412 while waiting on the 420(less than 10 hrs). The 412 seems to be more analytical than its 312 cousin and is not missing any high frequency's . Does this trait hold true in the 4xxx vs the 3xxx series. If so I am wondering if the 415 and 420 might be a little bright or are they clearly a step up on the 412 like the 315/320 are to the 312.

Hope that makes sense to you.

I am trying to decide whether to get another Acutex 412 in case the 415/420 are to MC like(detailed) for me.

Thanks,
Danny
Hi Timeltel,

The following quote is an old one of yours (dated 8/30/10). I'm in the process of rereading this entire thread and taking notes this time.

+++++Some Empires in this range have the cartridge designation printed on an adhesive film label. Perhaps your example came with similar identification but it has fallen off?+++++

What a relief it was to me to have read that. I have a Empire 4000D III. Actually I have 3 of them but 1 has this sticker/adhesive film label you mention. The others are stenciled on. It was a e/bay purchase (no stylus), and I have always felt perhaps it was a fake. It sounded fine but I always had that gut feeling. A belated thank you for that information!
Hi Fleib,

just realised I had not answered your note...
My talk of 5 to 25Hz was simply stating the frequency range involved with the cantilever/arm resonance...

The frequencies I noted using the N97xE-SAS were 8.8Hz on the mid mass JVC, and 10.8Hz with the low mass Revox.

I also need to do further testing with the Revox to identify resonances - apparently the higher LF level on the Revox may be due to an arm resonance at 30Hz.... reported years ago by Empire who created and marketed a heavily modded version of the Revox - this was during Empire's Benz period - and they turned the ULM arm of the Revox into a somewhat heavier arm which suited the Benz mid compliance cartridges much better than the ULM Revox original.

bye for now

David
Since the LPM320STR III is one of my favorite cartridges, I hopped right over to Italian eBay and bought a 420. However, I am a little apprehensive since all they show is the box. Does anyone know whether "puntina" = cartridge? The word would seem to mean "small point", i.e., a stylus. If so, I bought a 420 stylus for 69 Euros, which is still OK because I have an LPM412. I can stick the 420 stylus on the 412 body. But can someone tell me the English translation of "puntina"? Thx
Hello Lewn,
If I remember correctly, if you keep scrolling down the page they show pictures of the cartridge in it's case.

Can't help with the Italian.
Regards, Acman3: Not to worry. The well used LPM 420STR I found several mos. ago has impressive resolving abilities without seeming overly analytical, the sense of presence is noteworthy and like the LPM 320STR-111, tonally accurate. The Acutex do seem to have a distressingly long break-in period, IIRC it helped the 315's 20 yr. old suspension loosen up when a toothpick coated sensibly with Armor-all was touched to it (do so at your own risk). As previously commented, the 4xx carts offer a slight degree more definition in exchange for the "warmth" of the 3xx's. Both the flat-response 320 and 420 I have impress as a step-up from the 312/412, graphs show a rise in the hf's for both x12's. The 315 remains unique and the 415 I have is not yet broken in: Having gone in six hours from terrible to "just" somewhat sibilant, comment on either is inappropriate at this time. The beat-up 420 here is excellent but required some care in set-up, the cart does seem to like the 8.5gm Yama. boxwood headshell and 1.35-1.4gm VTF. Henry, I think, settled on a wooden HS too, the ebony version and after various other trials reported a positive impression of the LPM 312STR-111 on it.

Nicola, I'm makeing some notes as I listen while waiting for the 415 to run in and at this time have to agree with Danny, the hf's are definitely noticable with the NOS 415 cart but tonal balance is steadily improveing. Where'd I put that Armor-all---? The Acutex LPM carts are all interesting, exc. possibly the ellipticals, which are not quite as inspired. As always, somewhat reluctant to "recommend" a cart but if asked (IMHO, YYYM, & etc.), this is one worth investigating. You sound somewhat pleased with your aquisition and for that I'm pleased for you. Thanks from me too, Danny.

Peace,
Dear Raul,

understand your position but we are waiting since a long time for the new tonearms. Now Dertonearm has officially declared he will show up with a new turntable this winter. Will we see a Mexican Table as well?

Nothing is wrong with Marketing if it does not dominate all other efforts. So you got me pretty right. Nevertheless we are very curious. I have no Marketing Manager as well. Would like to come to Mexico again but I do need to have some certainty that I will be facing not a prototype only...

best @ fun only
Dear Lew, The Italian use two expressions for the carts:
'testina' and 'putina'. I was so excited when acman 3 told
me about Acutex LPM 412 on Italian ebay that I passed through every page (60?) with both :testina and putina.
Even thought to buy them all and at last earn some money with my hobby. However the compliance of LPM 420 looks precarious to me. I hate those 'fragile' tonearms but hope
that my Sumiko 800 will do.

Regards,
Banquo,
I actually bought those silver headshell leads from 2Juki believing them to be genuine but unfortunately three of the clips 'separated' quite easily from their soldered connections when I attempted to fit them to the cartridge pins.
I returned them to 2Juki accusing him of selling me 'fakes' to which he replied....."please don't accuse me of that"......and thankfully refunded my payment.
I don't seem to have a lot of luck with some vendors in Hong Kong?
Tommy of Topclass is always reliable.......thanks Thuchan :^)
Greetings Professor,
The Acutex do seem to have a distressingly long break-in period,
You're not just whistling Dixie here :^)
The 315 is only now beginning to blossom after more than 18 hours!!
And it's not a pleasant 'break-in'......it could almost be described as torture?
In desperation.......I used your old trick and left it sitting on a record overnight at 2.5 Gm.
It is now drawing me in and rewarding me for my patience.
This could be a contender?

Thanks also to Danny (Acman) for the Italian Connection for the STR 320LPM.
I ordered one which should be on the way shortly?
Dear Henry, You say you ordered silver leads from 2juki. The leads were poorly soldered to their cartridge pins. So you do have a legit complaint. But how does this make them "fake"? Fake would be a fair adjective, if the leads were made of something other than silver wire. Was that the case? If not, it is no wonder 2juki was offended.
Thanks Acman3/Timeltel for the heads-up. I just purchased the last (I think) of the 420 STR's from eBay/ Italy.

Timeltel, as a followup to our previous exchange on a different thread, I was forced to return the previously purchased 412 STR (eBay/USA), as it arrived with a misaligned cantilever. It was canted to one side enough to make me uncomfortable. The vendor was accommodating. I will post my impressions of the 420 after I have a chance to run it in.
Regards, Nandric: I think the compliance rating for the Acutex carts is a myth, this cart seems to like a upper-mid mass TA. Tried the LPM 415 on a stand-by Denon DP-60L w/5.5gm eff. mass arm, it was a disaster. Too bad as the Denon is a very "airy"/clean sounding deck.

For comparison, a coincidental email from Mark Huffman (33audio.com) arrived last night, he had thought to inform me of the availability of the LPM 412STR and mentioned he was running his LPM 320STR-111 (40+ cu's) at some relatively high VTF's in the 2gm range. I believe he still maintains the Acutex 1980 catalog and other Acutex info. on his "hobby" websight. No association.

Henry: Patience is rewarded, and the 315 does require some listeners' acclimation. It's good to hear it's working out for you. Have you tried it at 300pF (+-)? Should you try one of the 400 series carts, the NOS 415 is finally starting to run in. It was beneficial to go over VTA again. Still a little brighter than I think it should be but the bass is starting to assert itself & the sibilance is gone. Almost. There are some experienced listeners who think the 315 is rewarding enough to settle down with. Packing up for three days on a favored Appalacian trout stream in the Dan'l Boone Nat'l Forest, native brookies and lovely German browns. Ya'll enjoy the music!

(Putina- isn't that Italian for "empty box"?)

Peace,
Regards, Frogman: Closing things down here & just caught your post. These went like "hotcakes" after Danny's thoughtful anouncement of availablility, hope the 420 meets your expectations. It will be a pleasure to compare notes.

Peace,