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
Hi Raul,

The title of this thread has MM and MC in it. The MM was 1st and we have throughly investigated its depths. Lets investigate the other half of your thread title! If this thread leads to cartridges (LOMC's) that can compete with our beloved MM's, lets hear about them. Perhaps eventually (for half the total price of a Virtuoso), you will review a SoundSmiths, Expert Stylus, or Alex's rebuilt Denons in the future,
Dear Raul:

I took the recent ribbings to be jokes, so carry on. I for one would like to read, as always, about your most recent findings.

Are you suggesting that the LOMC in question can be gotten for under $200 or that some LOMCs can be gotten for that price? I guess we'll see.
Dear Banquo363: That some LOMC cartridges can be gotten for that low price.

Thank's for your encourage as Griffithds too. I will post about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Regards, Raul/Frogman: My Acutex 420 arrived yesterday. It shows the example I already had (and thought well of) was worn. I believe among those who ordered one there are going to be some very pleased listeners. Dynamic without unpleasant exaggerations or failings in the extremes of it's very respectable range. After four hours of play, it already shows good clarity in the bass, notes are distinct and solid. Greater presence than the LPM 320-111 STR without resorting to objectional tonal colorations. Portrays space around insturments and manages microdetail with assurance. It's a really good little cart, the kind that leaves one wanting to not turn the music off. Pleasing enough that, Raul, it might leave you reconsidering the thought that the older versions are superior. (Thanks again, Danny, for bringing its' availability to our attention.)

The 412 shares most of these attributes but lacks that final touch of definition, sharpness in initial attack and crisply delivered transitions. One needs to listen attentivly to distinguish the differences, the 412 makes a positive statement in over-all performance. Timbre and tone is accurate and it demonstrates Acutex's typical attention-attracting presence. It is lacking in only that final polish that elevates a cart into the category of highest quality. IMO & etc.

BTW, on the 415. Grainy mids and much too edgy in the hf's, a completely different character from the rest of the LPM lineup. I've requested another of the 420's but as to the 415, for this one I won't look for a spare.

Peace,
Dear Professor,
I have still to receive my 420STR but I agree with you on the 315.
I really had to give up on mine. I DO think my sample might be faulty as the left channel dominates the right no matter what I do with balance or azimuth?
The 312 is a 'keeper' however :^)
Shootout is proceeding with the Clearaudio Virtuoso and the Signet TK-7LCa......interesting!
Hi Delamostre1,
Glad you're getting good results with the Sonus. Maybe you have the JVC by now? I think you'll enjoy the performance. Concerning the table; the performance can be improved by doing some work on the hollow base. It's prone to feedback and microphonics. Also the bottom panel needs to be damped.
Many people fill the insides with modeling clay (non hardening). I suggest bracing also. The arm is far superior to the stock 1200 arm. You can get lots of information at the turntable forum at Audio Circle. That's the source of these mods. I suggest opening a thread and asking for suggestions. The 55F is very similar to the top 66F. It is claimed that modified ones will outperform many new $2K to 3K tables. Congratulations.
Regards,
Delamostre1 - I am not familiar with the internals of the Y55F, but on the Y5F, I put as much Modelling Clay (plasticine) as I could fit in there, without blocking any air in/out or circulation - as the circuits still need to cool.

I also braced the bottom plate against the top of the plinth, by creating braces made of toilet roll cores (cardboard) cut to size and stuffed with more modelling clay... these are slightly taller than the space between plinth and baseboard (1 to 2 mm) - so when the baseboard is screwed down they are compressed.
Then I removed the original feet, and sat the TT on 4 feet, 3 in a trianle (2 front, 1 centre rear) and the fourth in the middle - so it helps with supporting, compressing and dampening the baseboard...
Also if you unscrew the subplatter molding, you may find cavities between the suplatter molding and the plinth - there were quite substantial ones on the Y5F... I filled them all with modelling clay - this added a further 250g above the plinth... and within the plinth I managed to put in about 2.7kg of plasticine.

These turntables are very much undervalued.... congratulations and enjoy!

bye for now

David
Hi, Henry: Your experience with the LPM 315 just isn't typical of the cart and it is such a unique performer you have cause to be disappointed. If the cantilever remains on-axis when engaged, perhaps there's a fault with the stylus. Channel balance for the 315 is given as w/i 0.75dbl at 1kHz, hope you look at it under magnification before giving it your world famous, err, never mind ;^)!

The American Civil War General Rob't E. Lee said: "It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it". A shoot-out between the TK7lca & CA Virt is much less likely to draw blood but should you wait until your Acutex 420 arrives and then introduce it into the fray, oh, what a melee!

Peace,
Dear Timeltel: I don't recive yet the 420, we will see then.

Right now I'm enjoying my LOMC one that I can't understand that passing for additional tortuous stages can outperform the best MM/MI cartridges.

Maybe the 420 can beat it?, I really don't know but for what you posted on it I think not. I need to hear it.

Btw, do you own the Virtuoso Wood? which experiences do you already had? No Virtuoso. Why not?

Halcro maybe is time to send our Virtuoso to Alex to mimic Nandric one.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul, At last you decided to make a joke on my account. So you are obviously not sure if your new MC favourite is better then MY VIRTUOSO? What Alex deed was a
kind of work of art which seems to be impossible to repeat. Such is the nature of art. So you are right that only to 'mimic Nandric one' may be possible. So I may be in the position to pronunce: 'ladys and gentleman I have a better cart than RAUL!'
To add to your missery I can also state that I just received (1x)Acutex 412 and (2x) Acutex 420 from Italy.
The luxure or the dilemma of the abundance?
My dilemma is that I enjoy my Virtuoso for 3 days now and would like to continue this for some more time. But all this time I can see the new Acutex carts ogle at me.

Regards,
Dear Nandric: I think that the line contact stylus in the Virtuoso could help to improve its performance but I really can't be sure.

I remember that I like it more the Ortofon 20ESuper than its brother FL with line contact stylus instead the elliptical one.
As J. Carr said it: it is the cantilever where we can have more differences than in the stylus change. Before I attep to send my Virtuoso to Alex I will try with the AT95 line contact models I have doing what Fleib " encourage " to you/me, then we will see.

Btw, taking in count what I posted about more stages where the LOMC signal must pass I think this cartridge is really a " devil " !.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul...fascinating thread. You have a huge level of experience w/ so many carts. To cut to the chase, MC's are still the best, correct, all things considered ?
Rockitman,
+++++To cut to the chase, MC's are still the best, correct, all things considered ?++++

To make that statement, you will have to place a qualifier with it like, MC's that cost more than 5 figures. Cartridges that are in the 4 fugure thousands, I'm afraid you would be mistaken.
But seriously, Raul, why are you withholding the identity of the LOMC cartridge that has you so fascinated? If you still don't want to reveal its identity, perhaps you can say why, at least.
10-19-11: Griffithds
Rockitman,
+++++To cut to the chase, MC's are still the best, correct, all things considered ?++++

To make that statement, you will have to place a qualifier with it like, MC's that cost more than 5 figures. Cartridges that are in the 4 fugure thousands, I'm afraid you would be mistaken.

more than five figures ? I don't think it's too tough to find MC carts in the $2,000 + range that will smoke the mm's...it all comes down to the resolution of the rest of the stuff in the sound pipe line. Lower rez, save your money and and buy an affordable mm cart.
Hi Griffithds, Thanks for your Congratulations. Alas I must
confess to have no idea what 'runeth over' means. My English dictionary is also ignorant in this regard.
I am still wondering about my own situation. I was searching for the Acutex 315 and 320 for two years and give up to keep my mind sane (if possible). Then in three weeks
time I got,thanks to Raul and Fleib, my 'extraordinary' Virtuoso with aluminum cantilever with pressure fited line contact stylus. Then ,thanks to Danny, I got Acutex 420
and 412 not only for cheap but, who would believe this, from Italy. I am at an respectful age but never bought anything in my life from or in Italy. And I even got this
packet with my carts via Italian Post. For some reasons there are sellers on ebay who are willing to post their items to Nord Korea but not to Italy. Their postmans got
probable and at last better wages.

Regards,
Dear Lewm, maybe withholding because it is made by Isamu Ikeda .... ?? Just joking ...
There will be no solution to this naggish question if whatever MC cart is not directly compared with my exceptional Virtuoso (black) with pressure fitted line contact stylus in the special aluminum cantilever.
Raul what are you willing to offer to borrow my Virtuoso?

Regards,
Hi Nandric,

'Runeth over' is a play on words. What it means is that you have an over abundance of great treasures. Congratulations again on your great finds!

Regards,
Don Griffith
Rockitman,

Example #1) My MC Blue Oasis ($2500), will not outperform my $900 Virtuoso MM.
Example #2) My MC Micro Benz Ruby 3 ($3500), will not outperform my Virtuoso MM.
Shall I go on.
Example #3) Read Rauls review on the Virtuoso MM. He makes a comparison between it and the MC Goldfinger ($12000). It might just open your ears!
Dear Nandric: Stay with. You know me well: I'm always looking for the " ultimate " and even that the Virtuoso is near to there I have at least a better option to go for.

Nothing wrong with own the second beat, right?

The virtuoso is very good even in its stock status/condition.

I'm still waiting for the 420 and waiting for a in deep comparison against my 315 VdH, we will see.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: I'm just finishing the all around LOMC comparisons and I want to report along it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi Griffithds, It seems that your congratulations on my
'treasures' are not without your own interest. I just
discovered that you also own the Virtuoso as well as the Ruby 3 (S?). I also own the Ruby 3S but am not (yet) sure if the Virtuoso can outperform Ruby. You are not very clear with your statement. Ie it may mean that both are
equal in your valuation. Are you btw also waiting for the
Acutex 420? Then we both will be also equal qua carts.

Regards,
Hello Timeltel/Halco,

The Acutex 420 arrived today but currently listening to the Signet TK7lca. The 420s will have to wait their turn as I am really enjoying the distortions.(I must be in Raul's bottom 10%)

You are all welcome for the Acutex tip. I just stumbled across it. Really couldn't believe what I was seeing. Good to hear there good as I hoped.

Danny
Hi Nandric,

My Ruby is the 3. Not the new 3S. I am on my 3rd Virtuoso, 1st one bought in 2004. I have also owned all 3 of the Ruby's. The original, the 2 and the 3. I have never said nor do I believe that the Virtuoso (factory stock), performs better that the Ruby 3. After years of using both, I can not still to this day, from my sitting position, tell whether it's the Ruby playing or the Virtuoso. If I wanted to know, I have had to get up and walk over to see which cartridge/armwand was loaded on the table. They both just sound so similar. I have several other cartridges. All of which I can easly name correctly when they are loaded on the table and playing. Audio Technica AT20SS, Signet TK7SU, Empire 4000D3, a Blue Oasis and others. When the Ruby 3S came out, I concidered trading in the 3 for the 3S. It would have cost me a couple thousands $ in addition to sending them my 3. I would have at the most, got back a cartridge that was slightly better (what ever that is suppose to mean). Or I could send my Virtuoso Wood to SS for $150 and get back a cartridge that was also, slightly better. The Virtuoso that I'm talking about is the Red version. I got luckly and found on a Canadian site, a Black Virtuoso that had just been returned from SS (with the $150 upgrade), for sale ($400). It just happens to be the same one that Raul has on his turntable. I jumped on it and I now have 2 Virtuosos. 1 Red original, and 1 Black with the $150 SoundSmiths stylus/cantiliver replacement. I now have no problem determining whether the Ruby3 is loaded on the table or if it's the Virtuoso Black/SS stylus version. They now sound different from each other. If you want to know which one I prefer? It's the Virtuoso.
Nandric,

I forgot to mention that I have a cartridge, a MC that is out at Expert Stylus that just might become my #1 cartridge. It is due back at the end of November. It is the Denon 103fl. It was a limited production cartridge with gold plated 6N copper coil windings. They are putting on a ruby cantiliver with a paratrace stylus. Reported the be the best stylus you can buy! I have high hopes and will provide a update in Dec. after break-in
Acman3, are you in the states? Stltrains and I bought one each of the 420 and was looking for an idea when to expect. Thanks for bringing it to the groups attention.

Brad
Regards, Acman3: I too enjoy the TK7lca. The ATN155lc stylus is slightly more damped than the OEM stylus, this results in an almost imperceptably veiled performance without penalizing the very nice midrange response and also allows an appropriate blending in the bass and hf's. It's a rare recording that can induce any overshoot or running together of the notes. Leading edge transients are clean and details are also well defined without being distractingly analytic, I can play this combination for hours without listeners' fatigue. It's always somehow a relief when, after using another cart for a while, to put the TK7lca back into action. Lacking any excessive "wow" influences, it offers rather an accurate and uncolored portrayal of the recording and with a little additional volume can be quite exciting while still avoiding annoying brightness. Definitely the cart of choice if one just wants to enjoy music without the cartridge's "persona" intruding. There may be by various definitions any number of "better" cartridges but the TK7lca is good enough to earn a LOT of arm time.

Haven't had the time to do any serious listening to the Acutex 420 for the past two days, am looking forward to getting the Acutex effectively run in. Mine seems to like the Sumiko 12gm headshell/copper headshell leads, 50k/100pF shunted, 1.35gm VTF. It's doing a really good job of showcasing recorded harmonics and resonances while managing sibilants admirably

Dean Man Jim's positive comments (Hi, Jim O'.) concerning the Saturn V integrated headshell have also piqued my interest. There's one here with a used engine already stuck in it but overhang is wrong for the EPA-250 TA, will work perfectly on a stand-by Denon DP-60L deck. I have high regard for DMJ's opinion, the Denon needs to be warmed up for a couple of days anyway.

How will the 420 compare to Raul's MC wonder cart? The suspense thickens--

Peace,
Hi Griffithds, I also owned the Ruby 3 and loved the cart
but I had a Swiss visitor , an former technician and friend
of Lukatschek , so I got the 'S' version for a friend price. The 'S' has a shorter cantilever and 'S' probable refers to 'F.Geiger' stylus. You can check on your technical instruction card for 'GS' sign. While Lukatschek try to improve his carts with o.a. shorter cantilever Mr. Suchy by Clearaudio obviously prefer 'long cantilevers'.
Those are much more easy to adjust as I discovered with the
Virtuoso. One would think that both approches can't be both
right but logic seems not to work by carts (?).
With the Swiss we compared many Benz carts (he brought 6)
and we both prefered Ruby 3 and 'S' above the LP. I am not
sure btw that the 'S' is better than Ruby 3. This way I hope to save you some $$ ex post, so to speak.

Regards,
Thanks Danny theres a couple 420s coming to south La. Being of Italian heritage I gotta love this buy.
What was your delivery time? Mike
Hi Nandric,

I think the 'S' is for short cantilever. The reason I don't think it has anything to do with the 'F.Geiger stylus is because of something that happened to my cartridge several years ago. My current Ruby 3 is the 2nd Ruby 3 that I have owned. While changing cartridges, I had a bunch of stylus screws/nuts spread out on the table and 1 of the nuts got sucked up into the inside/back of the Ruby 3. I had a pair of tweezers and tried to get the nut out but accidently broke the tiny wire inside my Ruby 3. I called Musicalsurroundings where I buy my cartridges and was told to send it in for repair. A week later I got a e/mail from Musicalsurroundings stateing that instead of repairing my Ruby 3, they were going to send my a new Ruby 3 with the new 'Geiger' stylus. Now remember, this was several years ago. The 'Geiger stylus in not new, but the shorter cantilever with the 'Geiger' stylus I believe is new. Therefor the 'S' version.
You asked me earlier and I forgot to answer if I also was waiting for the Acutex. Sorry, but the answer is no. I am one of those people who is NOT looking for what could be called the best cartridge. I have many amazing cartridges and enjoy them all. I feel that once you obtain a certain level in cartridge performance, you buy different cartridges and just bounce around that level. It doesn't get better, just different. Some things the new cartridge does might be better but some other things that it does is not as good as what you have. You just bounce around where you are at in cartridge performance. You stated that you are having trouble deciding if the Ruby 3S is better than the Ruby 3. Maybe you to are just bouncing around at this extremely high level of performance?
Hi Timeltel,

++++There may be by various definitions any number of "better" cartridges but the TK7lca is good enough to earn a LOT of arm time.++++

Very well said.

I have several cartridges that I feel exactly the same about. We have reached a level where there is no better, just different.
The Italian seller must have a load of the 420s, 9 sold since yesterday and he just relisted 10.
Dear Rockitman: +++++ " MC's are still the best, correct, all things considered .... " +++++

IMHO a little " history " for my part is in order here:

I start this thread four years ago after one year " touching " vintage MM/MI cartridges, today five years understanding the whole MM/MI alternative.
Three years ago ( maybe more ) even that I always treated the MM/MI as an alternative I posted that IMHO the best MM/MI(s) that I heard till that moment outperform overall the LOMC cartridges I own/owned or heard it ( I already heard 40+ of the best LOMC ever. ).

Along these years my audio system improved several times by my own up-grades and trough this time the comparison situation does not change severily: I still prefer the MM/MI alternative.

+++++ " it all comes down to the resolution of the rest of the stuff in the sound pipe line. " +++++++

this is absolutely right but for other reasons. IMHO high resolution audio system ( like the one you own: I owned the 380 and the 380S. I heard in my system the 25 PS and the XA monoblock from Pass, I owned what for me was the best Pass amplifier design: S500e, stupid of me when let it goes: ignorance. and I heard several times different Wilson speakers including yours.) will favored not only LOMC cartridges but MM/MI ones too.
My Phonolinepreamp self design has two PS one for LOMC and one for MM ones. Each PS is a dedicated stage to fulfil each one alternative specific needs, example: the LOMC gain stages use bipolar transistors when the MM stage use FETS. Both stages are different. I consider my system as a high resolution one even with some improvement against yours.

Now, I don't know if you already tested/listen to some MM/MI cartridges but according with what you posted seems to me that you did not or maybe you did it but with out fulfil the cartridge needs. This is an important subject because the MM/MI cartridge ask and wait that you " treat " it with the same love that you give to your LOMC ones.

Normaly the MM/MI cartridges are in clear disadvantage against the LOMC ones, let me to explain: 99.5% of the top PS were designed to fulfil the LOMC cartridges. These designers not even thinked on the MM existence or that their customers could think to hear a MM/MI cartridge. Even this fact the MM/MI alternative is IMHO worth to experience it.

+++++ " I don't think it's too tough to find MC carts in the $2,000 + range that will smoke the mm's.." +++++

could be but I can tell you that through several experiences about of people in this thread and out of this thread that was not what happened but the other way around.

Over all these years the main system improvements were as an audio system and the main up-grades on PS were for the MM one till 3-4 months ago that I touched the MC stages.

I'm finishing an all around LOMC comparison and I found out at least one LOMC cartridge that clearly outperform the best MM/MI ones.

Can this experiences tell us that " MC's are still the best " ?. IMHO not with certain but tell me that as with the MM/MI alternative in the LOMC " land " there is still " cloth/fabric to cut ".

The MM/MI cartridges opened a new window to me, openeded a new alternative to enjoy music, an alternative that was denyed for several years by we customers due that what we learned through the AHEE was that the only way was the LOMC " road ". Well, now some of us have options and the MM/MI alternative could be IMHO a good option for you too. Both alternatives can " live " together. The MM/MI one can't do harm in any way.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Griffithds: +++++ " We have reached a level where there is no better, just different. " +++++

well, IMHO yes and no: there are different quality level performance cartridges that between the level/step each one belongs all these cartridges ( in that level ) are not better in between but just different.

In my case if I was thinking as you I left my " hunt " several years ago and never discovered better cartridge samples. What move me is the " hope " to find out something better not different but better.

My Virtuoso is not just different than the 20SS or 4000D3 or Accutex 315 : it is different and better. Could be that a cartridge can be different but not better than the Virtuoso like the 100CMK4 or the AKG P100LE.

Now, each one of us need to have some parameters/factors/characteristics that could tell us if one cartridge is better or not to other one. I have very clear those parameters to " measure " cartridge quality performance, that's why I know for sure that this LOMC cartridge ( I'm evaluating other great ones. ) outperforms my Virtuoso Wood.

Now, that I found out a " better /best " cartridge does not means that I sotp/stopped to follow enjoying the outperformed cartridges, for different reasons including that I own all them.

Yes, seems to me that maybe makes no sense to hear other " lesser " cartridges when you have the best: why not stay with instead still hearing the lesser ones?, well at some time this is what I will do it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul, Empathy means the capability to see 'things'
true the eye of the other and the mind of the other. We
see regualary that some persons like to project their own
subjective feelings to the other. This imply: you should
do what I do. We do not always agree but I know that we
all profit from your inquisitive mind and as result of
this from your post.I am totally different person but I
understand your drive and your search for perfection. This
is called 'passion' and there is no question in my mind that this emotion has different gradations in different persons. It may be the case that those with less passion
have less suferings but also less joy in life than those with more passion.
Althought I am 'loaded' with carts I can't wait to see your post about this mysterious MC.

Regards,
Hi Raul,

+++++Now, each one of us need to have some parameters/factors/characteristics that could tell us if one cartridge is better or not to other one. I have very clear those parameters to " measure " cartridge quality performance, that's why I know for sure that this LOMC cartridge ( I'm evaluating other great ones. ) outperforms my Virtuoso Wood.++++

Raul, If I was to place in front of you, 2 cheese burgers, and ask you to taste each one and tell me which one you liked better, you could do this small task after just 1 bite. If after days, and days of comparing 2 cartridges, you finally decide that cartridge B is better than cartridge A, just how important are those differences in the grand scheme of things. If their performance is so similiar that it takes 20 hrs. of listening to quantify that one is (better?) than the other, then in my estimation, I would place them in the same level of performance/enjoyment. This (enjoyment),is what we are in this hobby for isn't it?
Don't miss understand me Raul. I have been on the never ending quest for the Holy Grail of Cartridges, for 50 years. The cartridges that we have reviewed in this thread has proven 1 thing Raul. That cartridges have not in the last 30+ years actually gotten better! We're just bouncing around that same plateau.
Raul,

I should of had a qualifier in the statement I made about cartridges not getting better over the last 30+ years. I should have stated unless you have very, very, deep pockets of money!
Yes, I live in the US unless Mr. Perry acted on his threat to make us a Republic again while I was at work.

It took about 10 days for the Acutex to arrive.
Hi Raul,
**Now, each one of us need to have some parameters/factors/characteristics that could tell us if one cartridge is better or not to other one. I have very clear those parameters to " measure " cartridge quality performance, that's why I know for sure that this LOMC cartridge ( I'm evaluating other great ones. ) outperforms my Virtuoso Wood.**

Yes, it outperforms according to your parameters, on your stereo, using your ears and whatever objective measurements. The fault of your argument as "best" is assuming that your results are somehow universally definitive. You don't allow for system differences or the possibility of superior resolution in other systems. Why should anyone else assume that your phono stage(s) or amp/speakers for that matter, define the best? Why should you assume that your priorities are the same as others?

I'm not saying you're unable to recognise very good carts. I'm saying that someone can disagree about this "best" business and be right, especially as far as they are concerned. Now that you're venturing into more conventional criteria (LOMC) for declaring the best, it better be good.
Regards,
The Acutex 420 looks alot like the Azden I own. Do any of the Acutex 420 buyers out there also own the AzdenYM-P50VL? Curious minds want to know.
Regards, Griffithds: Both, IIRC, made by Piezo, Japan. As were, again IIRC, several Empires, some of which shared styli with the Azdens.

One of our philosophically inclined contributors suggested belonging to the group identified as "American Rationalist" was almost acceptable. This group uses the scientific method of identifying, hypothesizing, and testing until a satisfactory conclusion was reached. Having listened to a number of cartridges, there are positive qualities to be heard from all but two, which I don't care to hear again. The ancient Norsemen had a saying: "A man should be moderately wise, but not overwise, lest he know his fate in advance." Although there are some carts that for one reason or another are prefered, the "best" is yet to come. I like that thought.

I nominate Raul as our "South American Rationalist". He is doing extensive exploration and sharing his experience, his energy and enthusiasm must be appreciated. There are various levels of interest in evidence with those involved in this hobby and those who are indeed "passionate" about it may express themselves more vigorously than others. Even though the manner in which they express themselves is not always appreciated by everyone and they have been taken to task over it repeatedly, their sincerity is unquestionable.

So when Raul (Raul, please pardon the third-party usage) indicates a cartridge is improved over others it is something to pay attention to. One good thing about being a rationalist; agreement is not mandatory.

Peace,
Timeltel,

I 2nd that nomination of Raul as our "South American Rationalist". Who else amoung us has done so much to the betterment of all. HAIL THE KING!
Dear Griffithds: I'm not saying something different from you and I agree that if you take it 20+ hours to decide between one or the other both are in the same league. That's not my case when I decide this is better than the other.

In the other side Rockitman has reason when talked about resolution: as higher resolution your system has as more easy to discern on cartridge differences, as better and higher resolution/lower distortions a system has as lower " land to hide " for cartridge deficiences.

I agree that we are not advanced to much on cartridge quality performance level over the years and maybe that's because is not an easy task and because a cartridge quality performance depends of what's surrounded it.

I'm sure that the best is coming.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Fleib: I agree and not agree with you. The concept of " best " for me is inherenty a necessity to grow-up: how can we grow-up with out knowing what is the best to approach it?, the " best " is a target a target that exist.

It is not easy to understand that concept in a " discipline " like audio that's " charged " with weighty subjectivity. As we are more experienced and as we try to " see " audio subjects in more objective manner and understand all those distortions that " suffocate " our hobby as better understand the true existence and the necessity of that existence for the " best ".

Today my target is not to beat the Virtuoso but a better one LOMC that today is the " best ", all that's around will be judge for me against the " best " and not against the second one: I don't care for the second one I care for the " best " in any audio area.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Griffithds: Seems to me that about Azden/Accutex you do not read yet my Accutex LPM-315 review.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Raul,

It has absolutely amazed me at how great these old MM/MI cartirdges actually were. I vividly remember a lot of them. Owned many of them, sold, traded and/or discarded a few of them. It's the improvement in the associated equipment that brings all this to light. I agree with you completely. I feel because of Phono Stages like yours (and others), amps, preamps etc. have improved so much, it has opens the window for better and better designs and or materials for cartridge manufacture. Vinl is back. The MM thanks to you is back. There is absolutely no doubt about the possiblity of a better cartridge comming to a web site near you soon for us to purchase. I just hope I'm still around when it happens.
One last thing, Raul. I just broke down and ordered one of the Acutex 420's from the Italian site. Promised myself that I was done, but for 69 euro's, I just couldn't help myself. I quess I'm just beyoud help.