Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas
Hi Shane,
I lived with the Kebschull valve preamp with full valve phono stage......6 valves in total.......for 20 years.
I think I have a handle on valve beauty?
Measuring ruler flat is not necessarily a recipe for greatness?
I've heard cartridges, preamps, amps and speakers which....supposedly...measured that way and a toss-up between boredom and agony was the net result :^(
Henry, you are stretching a VERY long bow linking this thread to any release of high end phono stages. Most Phobos stages have always offered mm.

There are no phono stages outside of Accuphase that offer 100k loading that Raul likes.

The Vitus, ARC, Aesthetix, Ypsilon, Boulder and Allnic do not offer capacitance loading. The Pass XP-25, Burmester and Esoteric do.

Can't think of too many more recent high end phono's off the top of my head
Hi Henry

Yes, I believe the choice of electronics and speakers does provide the foundation over what sound you may be achieving. Do you think it does not?

Yes, the epc mk4 and at25 are neutral sounding cartridges. The epcmk4 measures ruler flat and sounds superb, so I may say you have never heard a great mm cart either :-). I always thought a tranducers job was to be neutral?

That you do not find neutral cartridges pleasing is interesting. I guess everyone is looking for their equipment to provide that emotionAl connection somewhere in the playback chain. You in musical cartridges?

You could save yourself sow time and try a nice tube phono stage and the balance may change, then again it may not but at least you would have tried. And you won't have to unplug and plug your different arm leads each time :-)

I agree, the phantom tone arm I could never get quiet with mm's let alone sound good. I use my P3 and Ortofon 12 inch arms for that. It is mc only.
I have noticed in the last two years or so.....that almost all the new high-end phono stages which have been introduced.....feature adjustable impedance and adjustable capacitance as well as MC and MM inputs?
And even some of the new mid-range phono stages come so equipped?

I don't believe this is a co-incidence but decidedly inspired by the influence of this long running thread?
And for this.....I congratulate Raul for his maverick courage and stubborn perseverance.....and all the contributors who have kept this thread alive and created a groundswell of change in the perception of the 'old' MM technology.
It was not so long ago that phono stages were being sold with 'MC only' inputs?
Viva Le Republic!
Hi Shane,
I would like to think that the choice of electronics was not the defining characteristic in extracting the worth of either cartridge technology.......but I'm not sure that it may be of some influence?

Having said that however.......I have never been a great fan of the EPC-100Mk3.....and I know Raul will say that it doesn't compare to the Mk4..... But having now completed a comprehensive study of many of my finest cartridges.....both MMs and LOMCs.......the Mk3 shows deficiencies in many areas not the least being the most important.........it lacks a soul.
There is precious little emotion emanating therefrom...and that to me.....condemns it?
I have no experience with the AT 25 but my experiences with the AT-22s was even more desultory than the Mk3.
It may be that you really haven't experienced the very best MMs that we regularly speak about here?
The Empires, the Astatic, the Signets (TK-3,5,7) and even the Virtuoso?
A phono stage which allows a loading of at least 60K Ohms and variable capacitance values is also important for MMs.
Finally the arm is very important for high-compliance MMs as I found out to my chagrin?
The famous Phantom II just about destroyed every MM I tried with it...so much so that I was forced to sell it.
And if you ever do obtain one of the great MMs........remember that switching from it to a LOMC will always sound initially impressive.
It's switching back the other way that the truth is revealed IMHO?
I have never really got my MM's to sound as good as some on this thread seem to get. Whenever I brought up all things being equal I believed MM's sound better with SS and mc's with tubes. Mm's always sounded a bit soft on tubes and mc's definately superior on tubes. To me there is o doubt about that. Always vigorous debate on this viewpoint.

I have been listening to the Pass XP-25 for the past few weeks and my Technics epc100mk4 and Audio Technica AT 25 have never sounded better! Much better than any tube mm stage I have heard.

I still overall prefer my MC's with tube phono stage, however I have no desire to take these two mm's off the table. They sound superb.

Perhaps a few of you may take a listen to a really nice tube phono stage and your views of mc's may also change.

Cheers
Yes, a tubular sapphire cantilever
Here's a url:
http://www.accuphase.com/cat/ac-2en.pdf
Another excellent post from Banquo.
How refreshing to hear qualitative descriptions which actually contain a modicum of sensibility?
Compare these subjective/objective analyses to the cliched, meaningless jargon usually proffered by the erstwhile audio press?
"...instruments I had never heard before..."
"...as if Quasimodo was actually standing between my speakers...."

I, similarly tend to focus on the 'lack of distortion' in particular passages, as an indication of the quality/worth of a individual cartridges...and apart from 'timing'....there is a 'je ne sais quoi' about a really great cartridge which usually defies description.....at least for me?

Although having had a rather differing experience with the AT 20ss to Banquo.....his lucid and enthusiastic commentary on the Astatic.....is enticing me to return to EBay?

Well done.
Henry
Hi Raul, I never owned an Accuphase cart so I'm not positive, but pretty sure the cantilever was boron. The AC-3 that came after had hollow boron w/beryllium rod for strength, rigidity. The generator specs for the Accuphase and Monster are virtually identical. All the LOMC are 4 ohms. I think beryllium would be a good choice. It's slightly heavier than boron, perhaps more rigid. It's more brittle though. My impression of the AC-2 was a little more relaxed and musical, maybe slightly less accurate than than the Genesis 1000.
Regards,
Hi Nandric, I hope Axel is able to cope with the Genesis body & cantilever. I think VdH, Gyger S might be a better choice if you want to replicate the sound of a Microridge? which is virtually identical to AT Microline. The shape is supposed to replicate the cutterhead and wear evenly for no record damage. Hard to separate fact from hype, although it's one that might last 1 - 2K hrs. I think diamond quality/polish comes into play, clear gem-like vs industrial dk grey. When I say micro I'm referring to those types in general. The Optimised Contour Contact Line is Soundsmith top diamond and costs $450 on existing cantilever. Perhaps Axel can advise better.
Regards,
Banquo363, I think you have eloquently described the MF-200 as I have experienced it as well.

Your comments about musical nuance, lack of distortion, and rhythm are central to my perception of it, and in my little note about the cartridge on my 'system page' here I write that its unusual strength is with dynamically delicate chamber music. I often track mine similarly to you (1.75g vta, slight tails up) but also enjoy it at 1.85g and parallel to the platter). I enjoy it thoroughly in my Micro Seiki MA-505s arm, in a ten-gram AT headshell.

When you reinstall the cartridge I'd be very interested to hear if you have fiddled with different headshell leads.

Regards,
Jim
Dear Raul,

Yes, I've owned the Astatic for about 3 months now but I used it for only a month--because it was too good. Let me explain.

When I get a new cart I usually spend a week or so dialing it in, and because I've been well advised by this thread I've enjoyed every cart I've tried. So far the AT 20ss has been the standard by which I compare others. After dialing in the Astatic I couldn't believe my ears, it was too good to be true. I don't have the descriptive vocabulary to accurately convey what I heard, let alone try to explain it, but suffice it to say that I liked what I heard--a lot. So much so that I put back some other carts to reassure myself of the accuracy of my memory. When I verified this, I got protective of my new jewel and it never went back on the arm. I'm now like Nandric with his unused prized FR 64s arm. I'm only half joking.

Three characteristics stand out most of all for me: tracking, tone and timing (I'm not sure of the term here). I have a great recording of Janacek's second String Quartet that I often use to 'test' new carts. There is a lot of 'screeching and wailing' near the end that taxes a cart's ability to stay in the groove. The Astatic is the first cart to play through it without distortion all the while conveying in full detail the drama of the musical climax. The instruments retain their tone throughout these difficult passages. The 20ss can play without any obvious distortion as well but also without the fullness and presence of the Astatic. Another track I often use is Aretha's Bridge over Troubled Waters, Live at the Fillmore where she is virtually screaming in her inimitable way through certain phrases. Again, the 20ss can track it without obvious distortion but the Astatic does it while revealing (or not concealing) the character of her voice and showing nuances in the phrasing. I can listen to such passages without tensing up.

Regarding timing, it is difficult for me to describe this elusive property and I'm not even sure I have the right term. Jazz ensembles are playing together seemingly for the first time in my system. Each succession of notes emerges as one would expect and hope, with the right impact and at the right time. It's like what the Greeks said about Athena, that she sprang forth from her father's head fully armored and ready to go. I don't know if that makes any sense but the Astatic keeps time as if it was live music, my other carts seeming a touch slow, less cohesive and dull by comparison.

At any rate, to be sure the Astatic will go back on the arm once I get my new table (I'm following Halcro's lead). And there it will stay until I run it into the ground. I guess I'm not like Nandric after all.

I'm running it on my epa 100 mk2 arm at 1.74g VTF, just a hair tail up. It likes my lighter 9gr headshell better than my 12g one. It's relatively easy to set up, unlike the 20ss which, after a year, I'm still fiddling with.
Dear Dlaloum: Axel handle exotic materials but in rod shape. I asked him about tube cantilevers because my XL-44L came with and I wanted to have the same kind of cantilever but he told me he can't do it: no suppliers.

Fleib, only to confirm that the cantilever on the AC-2 is boron.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Fleib: Very good information from your last post, thank's.

I, mainly, started my interest in the Genesis 1000 when I read one of your posts about, then I made some search on the net and decided to buy one and " see " what happen.
With your post you confirmed all what I read it on the net.

In the other side, I was unaware that my Accuphase AC-2 designed by the same Genesis designer.
I know very well the AC-2 and as you say " is very nice too ".

I'm thinking to " re-build " my AC-2 with berylium cantilever, I want to try something different on what I'm accustom with that cartridge, my take here is that this cartridge motror is worth to try in that " direction " we will see.

The cartridges are in the " road " to Axel and I don't know what could be his advice on the Genesis 1000, I have to wait.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Fleib, I was able to see that the cantilever is a boron tube (the most are solid) but not if the stylus was broken of togheter with a piece of the cantilever. Alas
Axel is still not able to provide microridge styli. I made much effort to contact Ogura for this purpose but despite the help from J. Carr and Thuchan (speaks Japanese)
I was no able to get some address on which Axel could order those styli as well as 'diamond coated boron cantilevers'. My quess is that Axel will retip my Gensis with super elliptical stylus because those are as small as the microridge. On my Vertuoso with the boron cantilever I can hardly see the stylus even with my (hand) microscope
(50 x). BTW very interesting to know that the same person also designed the AC2.

Kind regards,
A question for our erudite fraternity....

Is anyone out there still making exotic tube cantilevers?

The Genesis1000 is described by fleib as having a diamond coated boron tube cantilever, The Talisman S had a Saphire tube cantilever, and the top Technics carts had Boron tubes.

All the info I read out there nowadays seems to be talking about rod cantilevers rather than tubes. Tubes have both rigidity and mass advantages... but are obviously a lot harder (more expensive!) to make...

So is anyone out there still making exotic tube cantilevers?

I certainly have not heard of any of the retippers having such cantilevers available either...

bye for now

David
Hi Nandric, Raul,
Re Genesis 1000: yes one of my favorite carts. It's fast, detailed, accurate and extended with near flat fr response. It's not romantic or interpretive - seems neutral (to me). A MKII version came out around '88 which was even more extended, something like >80K. I couldn't hear the difference. The cart has a diamond coated boron tube cantilever and Microridge. Mine was re-tipped by Soundsmith with his Optimum Contact micro-type tip on the original cantilever. It sounds very much like the original.

There was a model 2000 - Sigma Gamma or something like that. It has gold coils and is smoother than the 1000, but not as fast. Classical music fans might prefer the 2000. I mostly listen to jazz and like the 1000. If the cantilever is broken there might be a problem. The cart is very small and light. It's made out of some kind of low resonance resin and looks like there's no way to open it. I imagine the cantilever would be difficult to work on. I'm not a re-tipper. Transplanting an AT stylus/cantilever is a very different proposition.

The AC2 was also designed by Nakatsuka san. A friend had one - nice. It had a Line Contact and I believe, a boron cantilever.
Alpha Genesis 1000 - output 0.2mV, cu 15, separation > 30dB, impedance 4 ohms, VTF 1.5 - 2g. Good luck.
Regards,
Dear banquo363: I understand you own the Astatic MF-200 but I can't remember if you posted your experiences with this cartridge.

I think that could be interesting for many of us to add/share those MF-200 experinces here. Could you?: thank's.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lew, it would be very presumptious for me to say anything about English grammar. But I assume that punctuation is ,say, universal.Now why should fetish be
allowed and ,say, some punctuation preference condemned?
I have more things in common with Henry then our Slavic
roots. I myself am very fond about the 'quotation marks'. I use them , so to speak, everywhere. It may be the case that the reason is that I am lawyer? Ie. I can always state that I was quoting somebody else. But if I was an architect I would prefer exclamation marks instead of question marks. From a philosophical point of view (aka
phylosophy of science) questions in general are praiseworthy of course. But consider a customer who ordered his new home by an architect and got his first drawings, calculations and descriptions with all those question marks...

Regards,
Dear Raul, You are as usual well informed. I posted to Axel among other (AT 180; Astatic MF 200: bent cantilever) the Genesis 1000 without stylus. Never heard about this one till Fleibs 'euphoria' reg. this cart. I got the Genesis from 'my' Italian source together with Krell MC 100 (akaMiyabi standard) and Sony XL 88. From the same Italian I also got an NOS Lustre GST 801 for $450. I asked Axel for advice reg. the Genesis. He should received those carts already but I heard nothing from him yet. As soon as I know more I will inform you.

Regards,
Dear nandric: I read that you own an Alpha Genesis 1000 by Monster Cable and I can't remember if your sample is already with Axel for re-tip. Could you confirm about?

I just send to him my sample along my Accuphase AC-2 for re-tip ( cantilever/stylus. ) but I don't decide yet with kind of re-tip. Which do you choosed?

Thank you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
And yet it appears that in Australia there is yet no law limiting the use of question marks. (We kid, because we love.)
Lew,
I believe one can obtain a legal prescription if glaucoma is your complaint?
I suspect Peter Tosh was instrumental in this amendment to the Laws of the State?
Henry, Let's smoke a peace pipe, but please do put something illegal into it. (Maybe in Australia that "something" is not so illegal.) When it comes to my actual listening, I am very much a nihilist. Arguing about theory is sort of a separate kind of "fun".
Nandri, didn't imply that you have a problem. Just thought the video pertained to some of the discission here and a hint of a way to test resonsance.

Try a direct link this time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zwZbsFBBXO8
Dear Ecir 38, Neat for HIM. One is usually glad when solving some problem. Your source however refuses to even try to solve my because your reference is not available. Besides If you think that I have only one problem you overrate my situation.

Regards,
Dover
Where did the resonances come from. Of course you could argue that the resonances landed on the arm via Virgin Airways, or some flooby dust dropping from the heavens was upsetting the arm, but I think the balance of probability is that some came from nether the cartridge and dare I say it the tip of that nasty LOMC they used.

Halcro
And it is not 'spurious' energy which excites this resonance nor is it the cartridge itself.
It is indeed the very energy of the stylus doing its job of tracking the groove and extracting the information.

Conclusion - :|
Hi Lew,
As Fleib and I have called a truce....I won't go on with it...except to address your last point.
I have never said resonance doesn't exist. It exists in all materials and I would expect to see a resonant 'hump' at the junction between a FIXED headshell of a differing material to the armtube as well as where there is a detachable headshell.
Resonance per se is not bad....it is something we need to control. The resonant frequency of the stylus cantilever is dependent on its compliance.
Because the tonearm is a 'propped cantilever' structurally....its effective mass will excite the stylus cantilever into resonance. The frequency at which that occurs is determined by the formulae (more or less).
And it is not 'spurious' energy which excites this resonance nor is it the cartridge itself.
It is indeed the very energy of the stylus doing its job of tracking the groove and extracting the information.

As the good Professor is want to say...
Peace?
Thanks Fleib,
I'm happy to call a truce :-)
I always enjoy your posts. Informative and interesting.
Kind Regards
Henry
In MY system, the Grado Sonata was fuzzy, brown in color, and altogether not very good. A real surprise that didn't require a pre/pre is the Benz LP high output. In some ways I like it better than the LP. I know its expensive, but there is no need for a head amp.
Nandric may find it hard to believe but God has already solved the problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zwZbsFBBXO8
Regards, Halcro: My good friend Henry, I have to agree with your thoughts that if mechanical resonance is transferred from cart to arm or vice versa, something's awry. Your insistence on perfection is inspiring. As to mechanical resonance, like Custer, who probably thought things didn't work out perfectly at the Little Big Horn you're surrounded, in this case by members of the Itexists tribe.

The 1000 Z/EX, too long a time since last listen, thanks for reminding me.

Peace,
Thanks to all with the Empire 4000Dlll stylus information. I have been listening this morning to the two (or three) different styli. The Gold is smoother and has a more full soundstage presentation with less pinpoint instrument imaging (although still good) than the older dark stylus. As usual I like both.

The main reason I was wondering if the 4000d Lac used the same stylus as the regular 4000d is I have an Empire Ltd 750 which uses a LAC stylus. Mine is a sorry conical replacement with a bent stylus and I may stick a 4000d stylus on it just for kicks,rather than trace down a LAC stylus.

One last question. Has anyone tried the Empire D4000l and ll stylus on a D4000lll cartridge as they seem much easier to find and are less expensive?
Why would I want to prove there is no Santa Clause, when I have evidence there is? He's all over the place every year in December. Santa Clause exists as a concept, if not as a individual person. On the other hand, you misrepresent my position. **Perhaps we should just listen to the armtube and forget the cartridge?
There's precious little information left there according to you?**
I never said or implied that.
Your post on the Empire 1000ZE/X was interesting, informative and well written. In keeping with the topic of this thread, I won't continue this discussion of vibration.
Regards,
Henry, Your retorts are ridiculous, but I love you for your persistence. Once you get a bad idea, you hold onto it for dear life. Since we are each separated from one another by thousands of miles, it is not practical to devise a real world experiment to prove (my/our) point, but if and when I think of one, perhaps I will make a video and put it on Youtube. However, theoretical physicists accept thought experiments within their discipline. Those are usually accompanied by mathematical proofs. How about this: if what you say were true, then we would not be fussing around with dozens of combinations of tonearms, headshells, armboards, platter mats, etc, and we would not be arguing about whether mounting an arm outboard of the turntable on a pod is a good or a bad idea. All these vagaries of LP reproduction are in some way or another related to the fact that spurious forces are generated whilst the stylus traverses the groove. By "spurious" I refer to forces that are extraneous to the reproduction of the music signal that lies therein. It's not so much that signal is lost by this phenomenon as it is that spurious information may be added to what was really recorded, altho I am sure that in extreme situations, music signal is both lost and distorted. It is the job of a good tonearm/headshell/mount/platter mat to dissipate this energy as harmlessly as possible. Does that score any points with you?

OK, here's another idea. Would you concede the validity of the math that is used to calculate tonearm/cartridge resonance, which is based on the compliance of the cartridge and the effective mass of the tonearm? (I know you seem to be able to combine any of your high compliance cartridges with your FR66S and get great results, but for the rest of us, "it's the law".) The premise of that equation is that there IS unwanted resonance. For this resonance to occur, there must be a source of spurious energy. Where else can it come from if not.... the cartridge?
If vibrations can be detected in a tonearm, and they certainly have, then they come from one of two directions. Either they are going down the armtube from the cartridge or the other direction being transmitted from the base of the arm.
There you go again......positing nonsense under the guise of authority?
No information.....no evidence....no proof.....no referral to any studies?
Perhaps we should just listen to the armtube and forget the cartridge?
There's precious little information left there according to you?
But boy....that armtube has a two way street of information that would put the new Atlas to shame.
Yes there is a Santa Claus. Prove there isn't?
Sometimes we can be captivated so profoundly with the beauty of analogue that it feels like young love?
Even after 35 years?
11pm on a soggy Saturday night.........and I'm playing Tom Waits-Foreign Affairs on the TT-101 with the Empire 1000ZE/X on the FR-64s.
This was the first Empire cartridge I ever heard and it was the beginning of a love affair that still continues.
Not having quite the refinement or accuracy of the 4000D/III Gold, the 1000ZE/X has a character and warmth that is addictive.
Liking a loading of 60K Ohms and a fair bit of Capacitance......it provides a connection to the music which simply eludes most modern LOMCs.
As I sit here mesmerised......I wonder if most audiophiles addicted to the shining etch of their MCs would actually recognise this presentation....let alone appreciate it?
This is a much under-appreciated cartridge....able to be picked up for a pittance.
Professor........I believe you would really dig the midrange gravitas of this shining beauty?
**Maybe not quite 100%.....but pretty close?
What's your exact figure?**

Close to 100%, is that a joke?
If vibrations can be detected in a tonearm, and they certainly have, then they come from one of two directions. Either they are going down the armtube from the cartridge or the other direction being transmitted from the base of the arm. Vibration has acceleration, velocity and displacement. Other characteristics are amplitude and frequency. Direction can be determined by observation of the vibration(s). Although analysis can be complex, direction and nature of the vibrations is proof of their existence.

There can be no one figure that represents the efficiency of different phono carts. Lewm had it right in the first place. It's not our job to prove the world is round. Prove that it's flat.
Regards,
So there is NO loss in the cantilever of any competent modern phono cartridge? In that case there really shouldn't be much difference in the performance of different cantilever materials should there?
Performance?.......since when did that question raise its ugly head?
'Information' is what I thought we were discussing?
Are you suggesting that differing cantilever materials provide more or less 'information'?
Regards
A phono cartridge is a transducer. It converts energy from one form to another. In this case it converts mechanical energy to electrical energy. In order for there to be no excess mechanical energy, this conversion would have to be 100% efficient, or all the excess energy converted to another form of energy. That is not the case here.
Maybe not quite 100%.....but pretty close?
What's your exact figure?
Regards
So you're saying that there is NO transmission??? So that the elastomer suspension does a PERFECT job of isolating the cartridge body from the vibrating cantilever???
Errr......yes. Why, do you have other information?
You're not nasty Lespier. I also enjoy the discussions.
We can all imagine various scenarios and models of the analogue playback system.......but from what I've read here and elsewhere.....there is very little science behind these models?
With the nature of the Internet.......all these printed 'models' become dangerously accepted by some who propogate them into 'fact'.
Enough is enough. Back up your models or please keep them to yourselves.
I think that's fair enough?

Regards
A phono cartridge is a transducer. It converts energy from one form to another. In this case it converts mechanical energy to electrical energy. In order for there to be no excess mechanical energy, this conversion would have to be 100% efficient, or all the excess energy converted to another form of energy. That is not the case here.

**And ‘heat’ is the first indication of energy dissipation and is easily measurable.**
No - heat is a likely indication or byproduct of energy conversion. A light bulb gets hot because the energy conversion is inefficient and heat is the byproduct. A florescent light is a more efficient conversion and still gets hot, but less so. It is likely that a small amount of heat is produced by a phono cartridge generator but most of the excess energy remains as mechanical energy. Dissipation is the channeling of that energy or vibration. Vibration is measured with a stroboscope, reed vibrometer, seismic-mass transducer, displacement pickups, velocity pickup, and acceleration pickups (accelerometer). It is verifiable.
Regards,
"If there is ANY transmission of these movements into the cartridge body instead of between the magnets/pole pieces"

So you're saying that there is NO transmission??? So that the elastomer suspension does a PERFECT job of isolating the cartridge body from the vibrating cantilever???
If I had access to this PERFECT isolating elastomer why would I bother making piddly little phono cartridges that I sell for $10k...I'd licence it to Rolls-Royce or Mercedes-Benz for use in luxury car suspensions in which you never feel ANY road bumps whatsoever. I'd then retire to the Bahamas and actually be able to afford to spend $10k on a phono cartridge.

"I maintain that there is no information lost from this stylus movement in any competent modern cartridge"

So there is NO loss in the cantilever of any competent modern phono cartridge? In that case there really shouldn't be much difference in the performance of different cantilever materials should there?

Anyway, an experiment would be to put a stethoscope to the base of the tonearm while a record is playing (with amps not powered up)and see if you can hear the music. If you had a removable headshell you could experiment with cartridges of varying compliance to see if there are differences. Unfortunately I don't have a stethoscope but surely someone here does (Lew?).

Maybe Jonathan Carr can chime in on this topic.

Halcro, I hope I'm not coming across as being nasty... just trying to debate here. I really enjoy your posts, especially those in the speed accuracy thread.
Calm down gentlemen.
I think you're all confusing several phenomena without addressing the issue I've raised?

The tonearm is....in structural terms....a propped cantilever.
It comes in different shapes and sizes and is constructed of varying materials.
As a propped cantilever, it is subjected to known stresses all of which can be quantified. Every material has its own 'resonant' frequency depending on shape, material, Moment of Inertia etc and that resonant frequency is modified by the stresses induced.
The tonearm is 'led' by the stylus/cantilever in tracking the vinyl disc and the compliance of the cantilever as it 'moves' the arm forms a relationship with the resonant frequency of the tonearm.

This has little to do with the micro side to side and up and down information retrieval movements of the stylus/magnet/coil interface.
If there is ANY transmission of these movements into the cartridge body instead of between the magnets/pole pieces......it is information which is not sent to the phono stage and is lost forever.

I maintain that there is no information lost from this stylus movement in any competent modern cartridge. If information was lost in the way you are claiming, vinyl playback as it has existed for 70 years would be impossible?
If you believe that there is information lost......please provide the evidence?
In this world of Google and the Internet......this information should be readily available?
But please do not flail and muddle about with seemingly related phenomena.......because it simply reveals the lack of relevant education and qualifications in a field which requires precisely that!

You are all creating a model which I believe has no basis in fact,
In other words....you have created a myth and your 'faith' requires a defence of this myth.
I am easily destroyed.
Supply the evidence?
OK have a read of the Audio Feb 1987 review of ET2 on Vinyl Asylum.
Tests show cancellations of signal at 40hz and 150hz, their view was there were resonances in the arm cancelling the signal at these frequencies.
However they also state the air bearing is a barrier, but I recall clearly, since I owned one, that in Martin Colloms testing of the ET2 in Hifi News in the 80's he actually measured the resonances in the arm before and after the air bearing in order to analyze the energy transfer of the air bearing. He concluded that the resonance profile before and after the air bearing was negligible.
Where did the resonances come from. Of course you could argue that the resonances landed on the arm via Virgin Airways, or some flooby dust dropping from the heavens was upsetting the arm, but I think the balance of probability is that some came from nether the cartridge and dare I say it the tip of that nasty LOMC they used.
Halcro
What about needle talk?
There's definitely some acoustical energy given off by the needle in the groove...wouldn't there be mechanical energy as well?
Where do you think the term 'tone'arm originated?
Don't forget the earliest gramophones were mechanical devices and the needle had very low if any compliance. The energy from those tiny little grooves was transmitted to the 'tone'arm, then acoustically coupled by the horn to the outside air and could produce some fairly loud sounds.
I'm with Lew in that I find it inconceivable that no energy travels down the arm tube.
The argument about the spider on the bridge sounds a lot like the one denying that a tiny little needle could slow down a spinning 10kg platter.
Actually I just tried that and it was not as effective as I thought. I just tried resting the hex wrench for cartridge screws lightly on the tonearm and that worked well for feeling some vibration. Of course you will want to mute the system so you don't get air bourne vibs as well.

Sean