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 Prof, **Offset is the angle at which the long axis of the cantilever intersects that of the tonearm. In the case of a curved arm, the divergent angle at which it would intersect a straight line drawn from the stylus to the pivot. I mean, really, a tonearm could be as crooked as the twisted coat hanger wire that held the muffler up (radiator too) in my old 1960 Austin Healey 106 but offset angle is still reckoned relative to a point A to point B description.**

Do you have one of those Austin Healeys? What size engine?

Regarding your AS post, the long axis of the cantilever does not intersect that of the arm. If you draw a straight line extending the cantilever it goes off to the side of the table somewhere. It doesn't matter how many curves and angles the arm has, the offset angle is whatever is necessary to achieve a given alignment. That's it in a nutshell and why linear arms don't require AS. Longer arms have a smaller offset angle but usually have similar AS requirements. Perhaps mass or inertia have something to do with that.
Regards,
Hello Acman3, you're welcome and I'm glad that you like it. In case you haven't yet run into the REG column about it--

http://www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html

I haven't heard any aftermarket styli in mine, but perhaps someone will chime in...

Jim
Hi Timeltel, You're saying that overhang causes skating and not offset? Which came first, chicken or egg? The physicists explain it as offset. The stylus subscribes an arc from a theoretical pivot point that differs from the actual point of (arm) movement. Overhang is part of the equation, but the egg came first. Some bird laid a mutated egg and a chicken appeared. Or did some bird mutate and start a new species?

Aceman, I have a Stanton 980 which takes a D81 stylus. I have a Jico shibata replacement and a Pickering 3001 elliptical. The Jico is bonded and it's pretty good but not great IMO. You can use any Pickering 3000 through 5000 or the 7500. With the current prices you might want to consider having a stylus made to order.
Regards,
Hello all going to post a link/pic to my universe it has appx 2700 hrs on it. I keep a log of every lp i play and use 40 minutes as a standard per side and thats how i arrived at 2700 hrs. I can tell yall that the stylus is very worn but worn evenly. Looking for the pic hoping to locate it.

Posted by a southern usa white man if you couldn't tell.
Laissez les bons temps rouler
Mike
Hi, Fleib: If you're going to have overhang, offset is required. Straight arms, no overhang, no offset, fat cantilever and a conical stylus the size of a 16d nail are popular down at da' club. Extend a line in the other direction (they have two ends ya know) until it intersects, that's your offset angle. Overhang came first. Offset was it's love child.

The Healy is in the last shed way down at the end of the driveway. Sliding plexiglass side curtains instead of cranks for the windows. If you wanted to hang an elbow out & look cool you had to take them off & put them behind the seats. Wore out the big straight six in 1971, painted it B. R. green & rolled and tucked the bucket seats, had some solid motor mounts welded up & dropped in a Ford 289 HO. Alu. pistons & chrome rings, solid lifters and 11 to 1 compression. Edelbrock hi-rise, Holley 780 & Mallory dual coil ignition. Needed a big three core radiator to keep it cool so coat hangers as required. A hair in the air screamer, spring loaded Hurst shifter on a big three speed tranny. Tore out few rear axles back in the day. Plymouth Valient/first gen. Barracuda axle was a bolt-in fit but they're somewhat scarce anymore. Some day I'll get it going again. Maybe.

Peace,
Thanks Fleib on the Jico input. Will skip that one. I was able to get a replacement D81 as it seems all the audiophiles were arguing alignment.
Hi Timeltel,

Wow, mighty big carb for that 289. I could only run a 650 double pumper on my 400 Pontiac! Impressive.
Regarding Stanton 881s. I was confused about mk II version
as well reg.the styli. According to my information the 'mkI' is better while D81 is the so called 'stereohedron' stylus.
Those are assumed to be rare but this is not(entirely) true. I bought a spare (NOS) on ebay.uk and have seen 2 or 3 on the German ebay. Some patience and search is all that
is needed to get one.

Regards,
Hello Prof, Your hot rod Healey sounds pretty cool. I'd replace that 3 speed with a 4 and get a 456 rear. Can you still get gas for that 11 to 1 bad boy? Easy for me to say, my hot rod days are long gone. Fastest car I ever drove (my friend's) was a '68 Z-28 trans America road racer. It was all aluminum drivetrain - 302 with a 4 speed/Hurst and a Holly 4-bbl that covered the entire top of the engine. It red lined @ 7000 RPM and did 60 mph in 1st gear. I drove it at 165 mph on the NJ turnpike late at night. Still had lots of pedal left. I doubt if someone could get away with that today.

Regarding overhang, the straight arm disco tables with no offset have tremendous amount of alignment error. Offset is required for all pivoting arms, regardless of overhang, to get a reasonable alignment. Offset angle is calculated from the stylus. One line follows the cantilever. The other goes to the pivot. The angle between those 2 lines is the offset angle. There is no other intersection of those lines.
The S and J shaped arms have similar offset angles as straight arms. They were developed to maximize structural rigidity for the headshell. They don't have the abrupt transition from line of pivot to offset like straight arms. Removable headshells for these arms allow the cart to be mounted straight in the shell and the arm is straight directly behind the headshell collar.
Regards,
Dear Lewm: +++++ " demonstrate to me/us that "perfect alignment", as opposed to "approximate alignment" (which is where you end up if you move the cartridge a mm or two in the headshell) makes no difference. " +++++

no, that's not my meaning but that that makes a " difference ". I know which ones but the " fun " is that you find out those differences and shares with us. Till you try it you can't learn and can't know about and go on argueing on the subjectc could be useless, Lewm please go an try it: not big deal.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Regards, Fleib: Just to clear this up, extend two lines, to infinity if necessary. They will intersect. In the given example, 22* is a ballpark number. Otherwise we're saying the same thing other than your comment about the "theoretical pivot point". The pivot is where it is and any arc described by the stylus is contingent to it. Altering offset does not move the pivot, not on any of my TAs anyway. Calculating offset from a hypothetical point is a different matter, it's entirely possible I'm reading too much into this comment.

The Healey, ran like a scalded dog in a straight line, understeer was life-threatening. Tore up the last ring gear in '74, busy trying to hoodwink my alma-mater into awarding a degree. As a typical broke college student, parked the Austin for a couple of years. Some scoundrel from "Midnight Auto Salvage" took the carb & hot Mallory dual point distributor & coils. The alu. doors & hood are worth $300 each so it still has value. Memories, too.

Last year was great, Axpona (Atlanta) and the spring SCCA meet at Dayton Int'l were in the same week. A black Lambo Superleggera and Aston Db9 in the lobby, room after room of audio gear for consideration. I bought a bottle of Last stylus cleaner :).

Finishing up on a new 12A wankel in the vintage or showroom stock class '80 RX-7 but have a distressing coolant leak at the exhaust manifold gasket, needs bushings for the rear sway bar, shocks/struts all around. Axpona, Jacksonville & Daytona are three weeks apart this year so it looks like one or the other. Old dude that I am, at either location I just get in everyone else's way. "Torn between two loves".

Probably best to get off the auto thing. Raul is teasing us about alignment (I've a suspicion about where he's going with this) & Danny is posting subtle hints.

Peace,
Prof, I would rather talk cars with you than skating force. I was once a Porsche guy, for 30 years, nothing newer than '65. Owned many Speedsters, owned 3 different Carrera GT Speedsters in fact. My zenith was a 550 Spyder, two serial numbers away from James Dean's car. (Dean's was #53 of about 90; mine was #55.) I restored it to perfection, probably the best most original one in the US. The great stupidity of my life is that I sold them all.

As I said above, the prime determinant of skating force is stylus friction in the groove. Without Ff, as we used to abbreviate friction in college, you cannot generate the skating force Fs. Then the lack of tangency of the stylus to the groove causes the skating force, offset angle notwithstanding. In a linear tracker properly set up, the stylus tip is always tangent to the groove; hence no skate force. So, if a pivoted tonearm has no headshell offset, then at a point where the tonearm/cartridge is perfectly perpendicular to the radius of the LP from the spindle out, there would also be no skating force. Headshell offset angle makes it a certainty that there is never a straight line from stylus tip through the pivot. Hence, there is always at least some skating force. This is my current way of thinking about it.

My model system is a child's toy wagon. Consider if you fix the handle of the wagon at an angle and then try to pull the wagon in a straight line behind you. The wagon will always be trying to turn slightly at an angle to your desired path whilst you try to pull it straight ahead on some slippery but still friction-generating surface and you will have to exert an extra force to keep it moving in the direction you wish to travel. That extra force, to me, is an analogue of the skate force. Anyway, the 3 of us agree that skating force is a reality with pivoted tonearms.

REG has always been a MM aficionado. I've got an NOS 881S MkII that I found right here in Rockville, MD. My 980LZS has a D98S stylus, which I think is the correct OEM one, not D81S. Am I wrong?
I like all the banter, so no subtle hints from me. There was none of the usual competition last night for the Stanton d81.

I think the technical aspect of alignment is not to be taken lightly. Why buy a great cartridge and have it sound less than what is possible for each table. I am just learning from the masters and have nothing to add.

We use computers in my work for laser alignment and balancing. Has anyone tried this with a turntable?
Prof, the intersection of the 2 lines is at the stylus. Any further extension gets into theoretical physics and I'm not qualified. I stand by my previous posts.

Lew, AS is caused because the line that determines offset angle is different from the stylus/pivot line that's actually moving the cart inward. It's this difference in angle that's the culprit, not lack of tangency. I think the Prof is right, further discussion on the cause of AS is probably counterproductive.

The D81S and the D98S are interchangeable. The other Pickering styli I listed will also fit. I don't know if there are any differences in stereohedrons. I also don't know about MKI vs MKII. Nandric says they're available from Germany. I never heard my 980 w/D98S. I was thinking of having a stylus made.

On another note, IMO the inexpensive ATN3472 series (P-mount) is superior to Jico ATN95 replacement styli for the Virtuoso. The cantilevers are thinner and response is faster. The AT-92E(CD) is also equivalent w/bonded .3 x .7 tip. You can buy the whole cart on ebay for $25. The 3472 variations are available with vivid line and orig ML styli from LpGear. You have to trim back the plastic wings and part of the bottom that hangs over. It will pop right in. VTF is 1.0 to 1.5g. I estimate ATN92E cu at 10 @100Hz.
Regards,
What causes skating forces is the fact that, with offset-angle tonearms, the LP groove pulls the stylus in two vectors at once. One vector is from the stylus to the tonearm pivot. The second vector is along the offset angle.

These two vectors synthesize to produce a third vector that pulls the stylus inwards, toward the platter bearing. It is this third, synthesized vector that we call "skating force" or "side force".

Since skating forces are comprised of the drag on the stylus from the LP groove, they vary depending on stylus profile and groove cutting levels, and from what I have seen, the skating forces also vary according to the instantaneous groove radius. (If you can find an Orsonic SG-1 "Tonearm Side Force Checker" it will allow you to plot the curves).

If I recall correctly, if you can manage to cancel out the groove amplitude-dependency component (by using a constant-amplitude test LP), the side force curve ends up looking fairly similar to the tracking error curve for the particular tonearm alignment that you have chosen.

hth, jonathan carr (cartridge designer)
Regards, Fleib: Just to clear this up, extend two lines, to infinity if necessary. They will intersect. In the given example, 22* is a ballpark number. Otherwise we're saying the same thing other than your comment about the "theoretical pivot point". The pivot is where it is and any arc described by the stylus is contingent to it. Altering offset does not move the pivot, not on any of my TAs anyway. Calculating offset from a hypothetical point is a different matter, it's entirely possible I'm reading too much into this comment.

The Healey, ran like a scalded dog in a straight line, understeer was life-threatening. Tore up the last ring gear in '74, busy trying to hoodwink my alma-mater into awarding a degree. As a typical broke college student, parked the Austin for a couple of years. Some scoundrel from "Midnight Auto Salvage" took the carb & hot Mallory dual point distributor & coils. The alu. doors & hood are worth $300 each so it still has value. Memories, too.

Last year was great, Axpona (Atlanta) and the spring SCCA meet at Dayton Int'l were in the same week. A black Lambo Superleggera and Aston Db9 in the lobby, room after room of audio gear for consideration. I bought a bottle of Last stylus cleaner :).

Finishing up on a new 12A wankel in the vintage or showroom stock class '80 RX-7 but have a distressing coolant leak at the exhaust manifold gasket, needs bushings for the rear sway bar, shocks/struts all around. Axpona, Jacksonville & Daytona are three weeks apart this year so it looks like one or the other. Old dude that I am, at either location I just get in everyone else's way. "Torn between two loves".

Probably best to get off the auto thing. Raul is teasing us about alignment (I've a suspicion about where he's going with this) & Danny is posting subtle hints.

Peace,
Regards, All: Sorry for the dbl. post, fired the Mac up, has a mind of it's own. Now I know to clear the page before shutting down.

Jcarr, your visits are always attended to, your description is elegant in its simplicity and illuminates the phenomena from the builders perspective. The interaction of opposing forces is best described in terminology appropriate to the medium.

The willful Apple (not Sir Isaac's) and it's behavior does give me the opportunity to say thanks.

Peace,
Hi all, some of you might be interested in a couple of cartridges I saw on Ebay. Audio Technica AT-20ss and Acutex LPM 320STR. The Acutex is new while the Audio Technica is in mint condition and comes with a headshell. Both look very good. I can't afford to bid on them now, but it would be nice to see someone in this forum get both or atleast one of them.
Regards, Lewm: "(T)he prime determinant of skating force is stylus friction in the groove. Without Ff, as we used to abbreviate friction in college, you cannot generate the skating force Fs."

Isaac Newton in his "Principia" states: "A centripetal force is that by which bodies are drawn or impelled, or any way tend, towards a point as to a center."

Gravity acts as the centripetal force holding a satellite in orbit, the opposing influence is centrifugal force. Although it may encounter a stray particle or two, entropy rather than friction is the greater concern. Please note that this is not intended to contradict what you wrote, neither should the introduction of the effects of friction invalidate the above observation. There is no paradox here, just a matter of which aspect one wishes to focus one's attention on, the observable phenomena or splitting hairs over the factors that modify it.

Our irrefutable resource person, Jcarr, refers to these forces as vectors, terminology that is significantly more contemporary than that of the eminent Mr. Newton. I don't perceive any argument here, just an opportunity to look at how the phenomena effects our passion for the medium. And maybe split a few hairs while we're at it.

Porches of any vintage are great machines. I've looked twice at a Cayman "R" (inspired by the German R Gruppe Porsche junkies) with longing. I hope that the dealer sells it soon.

Peace,
Hello all i took Raul up on the non perfect cartridge setup. Yes now i know why i go thru so much time strained eyes hurt back and frustration. Because right on setup is mandatory if you want musical bliss.

Now having micro sheiki ma 505 in operation with its vta vtf and anti skate on the fly it was easy for me to revisit AS. And just like years ago adding AS squashs dynamics. A wide open sound stage reduced to much less im afraid. Im thinking until a better way of applying AS is discovered reduced musical presentation is the trade off.

No luck as of yet with the picture of my universe we used Erics micro camera it clearly shows a worn evenly on both sides stylus.
Mike
Dear Prof,
Force in all Newtonian mechanics IS a vector quantity, by definition. JCarr's use of the term is not casual; it is correct. Newton's Laws of Motion require that a force has a direction; that's the definition of a vector quantity. The force of friction as a stylus traverses a groove has a vector 180 degrees opposite to the force exerted on the groove by the rotation of the platter. And I will say yet again, without friction there is no skating force, however else you want to define it. I also have no idea why you quoted Newton's definition of a centripetal force here. Yes, the skating force is centripetal, but we are discussing its genesis. Also, there is no such thing as "centrifugal force"; what holds a planet in orbit is purely the force of gravity between it and the sun; the planet "wants" to shoot off in a straight line tangent to its orbit, but gravity prevents that. Gravity has a vector along the radius of the planetary orbit.

As JCarr stated, the centripetal direction of the skating force vector is the result of the VECTOR summing of all the other forces acting on the stylus. I am not sure that any of us is disagreeing with any others of us as regards how offset does that; we are just using different words to say the same thing. The only issue for me is the role or lack of same of the lack of tangency to the groove per se as a cause of skating force. That is, would a straight but pivoted tonearm with zero headshell offset still generate skating force? I think yes, for any point where the stylus is not tangent to the groove walls. But could be wrong. I guess JCarr thinks I'm wrong.
Lew, **What causes skating forces is the fact that, with offset-angle tonearms, the LP groove pulls the stylus in two vectors at once. One vector is from the stylus to the tonearm pivot. The second vector is along the offset angle.**

Those vectors (skating) are still present at the null points, the points tangent to the groove. It is friction or stylus drag which is in line with the pivot and the offset angle at the same time, that causes skating. Linear arms have no skating, not because they're tangent to the groove, they have no skating because there is no offset. A straight pivoting arm with no offset will have no skating. Good luck trying to listen to it.
Regards,
Found the pic of stltrains ZYX.

http://s61.photobucket.com/albums/h69/ecir38/Mike/?action=view¤t=DSC01175.jpg

This was taken with a Shure SEK-2 Microscope not long before the 2700 hr mark. Pic was taken with a digital microscope camera which I was new too so we didn't get a great snap but it can be seen to have even wear. It was clearly visable using your eyes instead of the camera.

I don't describe to how skating theoretically should work but can it be explained how a 2700 hr cart without any skating through its whole lifetime have even wear with the canteliver still being straight as an arrow.

Not trying to provide proof that antiskating isn't needed but as most know that whats theoretically right doesn't always work out that way. Me I usually set my skating by watching the cart track in a runout groove and set it by a speed I have gotten used too.

Link to the shure microscope to those that are not familiar to it. The manual shows a few descriptions of wear on a styus.

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/shure/sek-2.shtml

The only carts that I have inspected that showed uneven wear are the ones that have been purchasd used. I suspect it was more from being out of allignment moreso than not having skating set properly just from my experience of using a microscope.
Regards, Lew(m), I believe we are essentially in agreement concerning skating and its relation to the somewhat intuitive but verifiable principles of Newtonian physics and yes, thank you both Lew & Jcarr, the ability to communicate using reference terms in common is important.

Continue the discussion if you wish, one of us is actually enjoying it. With any arm, when overhang is introduced, offset angle is required for proper cartridge alignment. If we can get this far, then see how this feels: Friction exists regardless of the direction a cartridge is pointed or how far to the left or right of the apparent center line of the arm it is located, although it does seem logical that in a best case scenario the stylus would ultimately be positioned at the effective center line of the arm. Not to put words in Jcarr's mouth but as it is their nature these forces (vectors) are directional, perhaps from an infinite number of points of origin but on the small scale of our concerns these vectors are never curved, I've yet to encounter a black hole in the vicinity of my TT (although from a monetary perspective it sometimes seems so).

So then, consider the proposition that a tonearm could be 4mm around or 40mm wide, or of any configuration imaginable. As long as it functions it remains a point A to B concern, or from pivot to stylus, and that in increasing overhang, skating force as well as the required offset angle must also increase. Linear tracking vs. pivoted is a different topic and one I'll observe from the sidelines.

If we can continue to agree that it's best to have the cartridge positioned so that the stylus is properly oriented to the groove, then perhaps Raul will tell us what he has in mind concerning alignment, and hopefully do so more quickly than he has in revealing the identity of his mysterious reference MC cartridge.

Peace,
Regards, Ecir38/Stltrains: Please don't think you're being disregarded, your contributions are appreciated in view of the topic. Do you mind if I reply?

Peace,
Hello timeltel please do reply on this and other threads your thoughts are most appreciated thank you.

Eric glad you manage your files better than me. I had no luck finding the pics on my end.

Throw me something mister

mike
Hi Ecir, Mike, I looked at the photo of the microridge tip and it appears that the front and back surfaces are illuminated, rather than the sides. What is that ridge perpendicular to the lighted surfaces? The ridge should run side to side above the lighted surfaces. If those were the sides, the tip would be totally worn out, evenly. Tips don't wear in a rectangular pattern like that, and not perfectly even, at least not the scores of them I inspected. I looked at the photo a few times, even enlarged it with my browser. There's really no other way I can see it.

IMO The Shure stylus inspection microscopes are inadequate for proper inspection of a miniaturized tip like a microridge. They were designed for big conicals and ellipticals. Try 500X with an oil filled objective lens like an AT scope. Even 300 or 400X makes it much easier to see what's going on.
Regards,
Fleib, Someday I will sit down and really think this through with pencil and paper in order to develop a higher level of conviction, but I take your point for now. You might like to know that I was once dressed down by someone either here on Audiogon Analogue or on VA, who told me in no uncertain terms that skating force was due to lack of tangency to the groove. I never did the work to determine for myself whether I agree, as I hope I indicated. I just wanted to put it out there. Just to be more sure that I am communicating the idea properly, when I say "tangent to the groove", I mean that a line drawn from the pivot to the stylus tip is tangent to the groove. Any deviation from that would produce undesired force vectors at the stylus tip, in this hypothesis. (Think about it; it will be on the test.) Also, in one site known for erudition I have read that a pivoted tonearm with zero headshell offset does not generate a skating force; in another equally erudite place I have read that it does (by virtue of the tangency hypothesis stated above). (By the way, Nottingham tonearm has zero offset headshell, and some do like it.) So, the internet is full of misinformation of one kind or another on this subject, and perhaps I should not argue further until I feel really convinced that I know what I am talking about. The simple point that friction is at the heart of the matter will suffice for now, and of course headshell offset is the major factor if not the only factor in the genesis of the skating force from the force of friction. The big thing is that no pivoted tonearm, no matter how costly and beautifully made is exempt from skating force.

I was thinking about the RS Labs RS-A1 tonearm, which is lacking both a headshell offset angle AND the factor of stylus overhang (underhang by 21mm is recommended). Too bad the inventor's English is so poor that I cannot understand his rationale, but he claims that his design cancels all these undesired forces. I've got one, and it sounds great.
Here is a nice explanation involving the tangency hypothesis that I found on DIYAudio. In this thought experiment, tangency and headshell offset angle are one and the same. But it seems to me that even if the headshell offset angle was set to zero, the stylus tip cannot be perfectly tangent to the groove walls at all points on the playing surface of an LP, because the stylus tip is describing an arc that is at an angle to the arc of the groove. Hence I invoke lack of tangency per se as the cause of SF.

"Imagine a flowing river. Now hang a paddle into it. Angle different to flow direction. The river's flowing water will exert friction and stream forces on the paddle. AS the flowing direction is not aligned parallel with the paddle's blade, stream force exert a momentum trying to rotate the paddle until its blade is aligned with the flowing direction. Then the momentum becomes zero and the only forces remaining are the friction forces trying to pull the paddle out of your hand.

So: the skating force's origin (in fact the SF is a momentum referenced to tonearm pivot) is exactly the same of the momentum caused by stream forces described above. "Flowing direction" is the groove tangent thru the stylus tip. As the tonearm has a headshell with an offset angle to minimize lateral tracking error and as the phono cartridge is aligned to that heasdshell, the groove tangent has a distance to the tonearm pivot. So a momentum develops turning the tonearm towards the spindle. Like the paddle in the river.
Fleib, Like I said the pic wasn't the best. The highlited area on the sides are indeed the wear which does show 2700 hrs of it, illimination was from the sides.

Like you said 200x isn't really enough for this kind of stylus, would like to upgrade in the future. Even at 200x looking with the eyes instead of the camera a generalization of the wear could be seen.

Timeltel, your comments are always welcomed.
Regards, Lew(m): And every other interested person:

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/sony/pua-237.shtml.

Two items related to the discussion, go to this link and click on "owners manual", the geometry of the tonearm is pictured on the last two pages and also gives two offset angles, one for the 12" and one for the 16" Sony arm. Hopefully it can be seen that the importance of offset is a matter of alignment and not the "offset" appearance of the headshell. That a headshell appears to be out of congurence with the center-line of the arm and is largely the cause of skating needs to be dismissed. Picture is worth a 1,000 words.

Then bring up the "bias compensator" page. Those searching for mathematic proof will be delighted.

Thanks to a certain sly Balkan for offering the suggestion that the Sony PUA-237 would be a good place to look, apparently our friend is about thirty years ahead of the rest of us.

And Lew, did the author of the "paddle" allusion consider the outcome if a conical paddle were to be used? (Sorry, I couldn't help asking) ;-).

Peace,
Dear Lew, I owned a kind of 'rotative headshell' which was
probable made as a copy of your RS Labs headshell? I never
used the thing (scary) but the intention seems to me to be obvious : a cheap linear tracer in front of an pivoted arm. To my big suprise I made some profit by selling the
thing.

Regards,
Dear Stltrains: IMHO independent on AS is almost imposible to have a stylus tip wear even both sides because grooves at each side are different and friction level is different.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " then perhaps Raul will tell us what he has in mind concerning alignment, and hopefully do so more quickly than he has in revealing the identity of his mysterious reference MC cartridge. " +++++

please test it making those f/r cartridge movements and you will have the answer: a better answer that what I can give you. Any one can have answers when test it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi Ecir, Sorry, I just can't see it. Take a gander at this pic of a microline. It looks the same as a microridge.
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/audio-technica/cartridge-guide.shtml

You're looking at the front of the stylus. In the pic you linked to, the ridge runs perpendicular to the lighted areas. How can that be?

If this is some kind of optical delusion, I apologize for giving you grief. I really can't see how it could be anything other than what I'm saying. The thinner parts of this stylus are the sides, which look like the top and bottom in the pic.

When a stylus is new, the light reflected off the side is like a point of light. As the tip wears, that point of light spreads into a circular or oval shape (not rectangular) and keeps spreading. With the light reflected here at 2700 hrs, the entire facet is lit up. It would have been impossible to play a record at 2600 hrs without severely damaging the record. The sides of that lit rectangle would be like razor edges. Even the most perfectly aligned carts don't display wear patterns like that. I can't accept this photo as proof of anything.
Regards,
Flieb, do you not see the end of the cantilever is at the top of the pic. Here is another pic of a F9L stylus that is worn, again notice the direction of the canteliver.

http://s61.photobucket.com/albums/h69/ecir38/Mike/?action=view¤t=9Lbad.jpg

On a unused (new) sylus there would be no light reflected. I think you know this that the light should be set to illuminate the side so you can see the reflections from the wear on the sides of the cartridge.
Ecir, the new pic looks like a normal stylus inspection view. Varying wear is easily seen, which is normal. The camera has nice resolution. With more magnification it would be a little easier for me to judge the amount of wear. With the AT scope they supplied pics of different types of styli and a guide to judge wear. They were all at either 300 or 500X. Good pic.

The first shot is still a puzzle. The rectangular patches of light look flat, like they're not even reflected off the tip. Is the cart still around, maybe you could shoot it again.
Regards,
Regards, Ecir38,Stltrains: There are fewer reports of concern for AS from those who implement MC carts, it becomes more a concern for those who use high compliance pickups. Downforce is an additional vector and it seem reasonable to suggest that, as groove walls are arranged at a 45* angle, and as MC carts TYPICALLY track at one to two grams heavier than a high compliance cartridge, vertical forces become proportionally equalized with increased VTF and lateral disturbances less prominent. Two examples off the top of my head: Applying more pressure to a screwdriver to keep it from marring the slot of a screw's head, or the classic example of taping a coin to the end of a tonearm.
Not terribly scientific but perhaps a good "jumping off place?"

Raul reminded me about the AKG P8E/ES three weeks ago and it has been in use since then. Listener's expectations have been acclimatized and it will be interesting to return to my go-to Signet TK7lc. So that we can compare apples to apples, I've a copy of the Moody Blues "Threshold". Enjoyed them in concert twice, can't recall the program on the first occasion although I do remember having a really good time. Can we dismiss the failure to recall specifics as due to the passage of time? Second concert was in mid '90s at Deer Park (outdoors) in Indy, lots of "oldies", both from the band and also those in attendance.

The LP is Deram DES 18025, Decca London. Stamper is ZAL 0027-A1 and side two, B1, I've had it for quite a while. Side one, track three, "Dear Diary". Flute, cymbal and vocals should be center stage. If you reduce AS to zero, you may hear these off to the side, on my recording it's to the right. Increase AS to max., these parts will shift to the left of stage. Return AS to 1/2 VTF, increase it gradually until cymbal & flute are centered, vocals will be wider but balanced. Listen in particular for distortion from the flute.

"Voices In The Sky", first track , side two of "Lost Chord" is another that will tell you a lot about your alignment. There should be no break-up or edge to the flute.

Take the time to enjoy your P8ES, it may sound somewhat distant at first but it's a very nice cart. It took me an embarrassingly long time to realize that sometimes "air" or "wide soundstage" were alignment or phasing errors. When set up accurately the P8E/S doesn't offer an excess of either but the bass is extended and extremely tight, coloration or linearity anomalies are not a concern. You'll tell us about the even more highly recommended P-100?

Peace, Love & Bobby Sherman,
Lew, these forums are full of misinformation, but it seems like they're getting better. My understanding of AS was inaccurate until a tonearm designer and a couple of engineering types explained it. I like the story about the paddle and the river.

Prof, LOL a conical paddle. Who else would come up with that? What do you call that, reducere ad absurdis? Offset has always been about optimising alignment. I can't think of another reason to employ it. You probably can though. Any other earthshaking revelations in the Sony stuff?
Regards,
Dear Timeltel: As good as is that P8Es or that Signet you need to find out an Astatic MF-200 that IMHO beats not only those ones but the Grace Ruby that Lewm is listening.

This Astatic is a must to have.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hello timeltel yes your skating comparison between mc and mm due to vtf does make sense. Hoping to give the Moody's a spin tonight and listen for your descriptions. My problem with my triplaner and micro neather offer a scaled AS only a guess method of the amount applied. Will try some different settings and listen to the changes.

My wife loves the Moody's and we've seen the live a number of times. For myself first time was 71 at the Pete Maravich assy ct Baton Rouge Louisiana I've been a follower and lover of there music sense.

I mounted p100 yesterday on my triplaner spent a good part of the day with adjustments. This cartridges body rides very close to the lp surface. I have no manual so i had to figure the VTA adjustments the previous owner had the setting all the way positive. I backed that down to mid position and with 7x mag have a slight positive position. Early impression is quite natural solid bass and very romantic.

Many thanks for your help with AS and more.

Rock and Roll is here to stay
Mike
Fleib, that cart is gone, wish we still had it to take another look.

Just curious do you have a link to what you use to evaluate a stlus? Might be something to look out for. I know shure had a later version one which was a NIKON SMZ-1 that was binocular. Thinking my next scope will be binocular that has additional single eyepiece to mount a camera so it could be used both ways.
Hello fleib your statement above on not acepting as proof is fine with me all i can state is the facts. And the facts are as i said why do you think i took the cartridge out if service, lack of musical enjoyment of course.

Not only do i mark time played i also mark the date. My collection of lps are all playable in a first class way. And let me say this none of them has been destroyed by using my former universe.

My appologys for bringing so much skepticism to this thread from posters who attempt to out smart the other with highly educated posts that could make scientific magazine. Yes the intangibles with analog vinyl playback are large with variables galore. For my ears time spent listening and equipment bought i would not consider any other but vinyl as my front end. Because vinyl delivers all of the music.

Peace
Mike
Ecir, In the '80s I was the turntable guy at a busy high end shop. Sometime in the late '70s or early '80s, the owner purchased an Audio Technica stylus scope. This was sometime after the microline was introduced, I'm not exactly sure. It was an expensive piece, well over $1K back then. It was sold to dealers only and they're rare. The scope had a deck that could accommodate a cartridge and high intensity side lamps on goosenecks. The stylus type/wear chart that came with, taught me how to evaluate wear patterns. It can be a little tricky when there are obvious signs of wear and the customer is skeptical. So I would focus the scope and let them see for themselves, then show them the chart.

You really don't need a stereo scope. There are plenty of scopes with three objectives that go up to 400X. Above 400X the lenses get expensive or the field's edges get fuzzy. 400X is fine, you just have to get decent quality and a stage that goes down far enough. We used a hunk of modelling clay to hold the cart or stylus in place. You can get high intensity lamps externally. It looks like you already have that. The last pic of the Grace(?) was excellent and the wear is obvious. I'd send it to the retipper for a ruby/LC or micro. Now that I think about it, the AT scope might have been one of those with a black background. It didn't seem as lit up as your pics, but you don't need anything more than what you have now plus a little more magnification.

I tried net searches to find the AT instructions or chart, with no luck. The stereo shop is long out of biz. The Shure guide should be fine and it seems that you already have a good grasp of what's going on. One of the trickiest things about it is focusing on that tip at high power. The lens is right up next to the stylus. Once I saw someone trying to focus and crush a stylus. After you do a few of them you get a feel for where the lens is and it won't be a problem. Go around to the front and physically center the tip right on the lens and focus by backing off. That way you're safe, even if you have to do that a few times. You really don't need to invest a lot of money in a fancy scope, not for this. Most of it is knowledge. Use low power to look at color and polish. Look for cracks or gouges. High grade diamonds are clear. Industrial diamonds are black. You've already got it, you just have to refine it a smidge.
Regards,
Regards, Fleib: Heh, conical paddle. Laughter is good for the soul, so "they" say. It appears that all that needs to be said about AS has been, there appears to be a remarkable state of agreement in the ranks thanks to those who offered to share their knowledge.

In the best traditions of this thread I learned some appropriate terminology, found that much of what I thought to be true confirmed, another example in which I needed to correct myself and in one instance, found that a pivoted arm with no overhang was not subject to skating. I was surprised by this. I'm pleased that you found the provided links to the Sony specs "a bombshell". I thought them relevant to the topic and the diagrams useful illustrations. Thanks for the comment but it really wasn't necessary, I do recognize in it the spirit in which it was intended.

I'm sure your next contributions here will be of an equally positive nature and when you do visit again I know you'll honor us further with your personal insights and opinions, your unique disposition and a sense of humor rarely seen.

Peace,
Flieb, I wonder if ya'll had the NIKON SMZ-1 with Signets name on it. It is allot nicer than the sek-2 I have which is a cheaper swift microscope. The nice thing about the one I have is the bed has x y adjustments to find the stylus which like you said can be tricky to find.

Looking at the the sek-2 manaul a little while ago on page 7 there are some examples of what to look for and noticed in figure 7c it shows a hyperbolic stylus that has rectangular wear, check it out.

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/shure/sek-2.shtml

Dear Mike, There is of course this notion of 'education
permanante' but more important for me is to be able to
participate in this forum. So I enrolled electronics, mechanical engineering and musical academy. If everything develops according to my plan my first high level contribution should be in about 5 years from now.

Regards,
Hi Mike, I completely believe everything you say. Obviously your fastidious and very into records and I didn't mean to discourage. It was only that picture as evidence of AS or wear, I took issue with. Most of us here are a bunch of guys outside of our area of expertise. The exception is playing records. Luckily, J Carr comes around once in a while and explains things. There are mechanical and electronic aspects that most of us don't understand completely, or at all. Sometimes humor or sarcasm doesn't get through or isn't understood as such, in these posts. There are no smiley or frowning face thingies here to alert. But there's much to be learned. Raul has tried carts that I never heard of before I started reading, and I was in the biz when they were being made.

You must have really liked the Universe. Close to 2700 hrs is pretty damn good. My Monster Genesis 1000 is one of my all time favorites. It was also designed by Nakatsuka. I prefer it to the 2000 which had gold coils. The 2000 is more lush, but the 1000 is faster and more real sounding to me. Have you found a cart that competes or you like better than the Universe?
Regards,
The headshell I corrupted as 'rotative' in my post addressing Lew (02-18-12) is a legitimate bearer of the name 'rotary headshell' (Google). My specimen was not the RS kind but an moded , hand made one, like the one which can be seen by Stefano Bertoncelly in a nice wooden box. Look and wonder!
No AS needed + linear joy for cheap. If I understand the thing that is.

Regards,