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
Hello guys!
I am searching a Nagatron 9600 cartridge.
There is one seller on e-bay that sell it nowadays, but I am wondering if the stylus of this cart is the original one as he says, or not.
The seller says that may be the stylus is from Nagaoka and it is original... Can anyone help me please?
Dear Nandric: As I told you one of the " best chased " cartridge, hard to find out.

I own that AT, recomemded even that that one has no stylus. If you win the auction then you will need a source for diamond cantilever/stylus because that kind of cantilever is the one in its design. I don't know any diamond cantilever source but maybe a sapphire one could works with that AT.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
I just located a NOS Stanton 981LZS, made a deal and purchased it.

In addition to several moving coil carts, I have the Shure V15VxMR with Jico S.A.S Super Analogue Stylus which I preferred to the original Shure.

I'm hoping the Stanton will be another pleasant surprise and enjoyable addition, the Shure is so good for the money I will probably never sell it.
Dear Delamostre1: Days ago that seller ask me if the stylus assembly was the original one in his 9600 cartridge and I can't help him because my 9600 came with a non original stylus assembly. I can't say either if was Nagaoka the cartridge builder under Nagatron design.

Now that you ask about I revise/reexamine between my audio brochures and things are that I have one for the 960 but non in color but b&w, here I can see that the 9600 came with a stylus assembly in clear plastic just like the one in the auction.

Now, even if that stylus assembly was not the original the cartridge motor is really good and a re-tip could help to make it even better than the original one.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Albert: That's very good performer and is very low output at the same level of LOMC cartridges with low output.

It benefit from an active high gain phono stage.

IMHO better performer than the V15VMR. In the Shure lines I prefer the M140HE but as you say the V15 for its price is very good too.

Try to find an Astatic MF-200 ( vintage. ) or buy a Clearaudio Virtuoso Wood ( current Clearaudio model. ) that in original shape is very good but with a new/retipped cantilever/stylus is a great one, here too IMHO better than your Shure/SAS.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: I forgot. I just bought from the same seller an Ortofon MC-3000MK2 that's a great LOMC contender.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul, thanks a lot for your useful advice!
Is the rettiping method better than the original needle?
The seller says in this description, that the needle is triangular like Nagaoka MP-50...
Nandric/Raul - Dynavector Nova 13D fyi

http://www.hifido.co.jp/KWdynavector+karat+nova/G1/E/0-50/C11-60830-14311-00/

My one is serial number 45, not sure how many made, but there was a "reissue" in the form of a Nova 17D with metal body a few years ago.
Dear Albert,
Based on previous exchanges with Raul, it seems I like the 980LZS much more than he does. In my system and IMO, it is much more than a "very good performer". If you are dissatisfied with yours in any way, I would be happy to take it off your hands. Also, don't laugh, I found the performance was improved by tightly wrapping it with a rubber band, so as to firm up the junction between stylus assembly and body and to dampen resonance. I run mine straight into the MP1 preamp, using either 1000R or 47K load. It does need gain to shine.
Lewm, your comments as well as others is why I purchased it. I have a step up that can provide enough gain so I expect it will do well.

The Stanton does not have to compete with my expensive MC carts, it only needs to be good and enjoyable for it to be a solid investment.

I loaned a friend my Shure V15VxMR while he's getting his (failed) MC cartridge serviced. After he had it hooked up he emailed me and said even though it was not up to his premium MC, it was still very good and killing his premium CD rig.

I guess that's all that needs to be claimed for this amount of money. It's like the old Lenco thread when you could (back then) score a Lenco on Ebay for $75.00, slap a cheap tonearm on it and grin all weekend at the music for value ratio.
Dear Dover: Great, that's the one I bougth it. Loooks really nice.

How do you compare it against other top LOMC cartridges?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Albertporter: With all respect till today I can't understand why any one invest big big dollars on LOMC cartridges only to degrade its quality performance through a SUT, any SUT at any price. I have to say that years ago I belongs to this LOMC owner's group.

Any top LOMC cartridge demands specific playback/set up " conditions " to performs at its best something that you can't achieve through a SUT. Same demands are asked by the Stanton.

Why invest in high price analog rig that surrounded a top LOMC cartridge only to add a full degradation to the cartridge signal through a SUT. ????? I think that we don't buy a Ferrari and instead to use/mount the Ferrari's tires is asking we mount it on cicle ones: makes sense to you?

I understand that you are happy with ( this is what it matters and not what I think. My post is only an opinion. ) and that that kind of distortions are not only the ones that you like but the ones that you have to accept amd I respect that.

Of course that if that was the only alternative to handle LOMC cartridge well we have to accept it but exist not only other alternatives but alternatives that fulfil exactly what any of those cartridges are asking for: craying for!

Maybe I'm wrong and I'm always willing to learn: am I missing something in this subject that I'm unaware other that: " this is what I like " answer?

I know that you as me and us are part of the AHEE and that's the " road " that the AHEE push to take it in favor of comercial targets$$$. They know are wrong but the subject is not what is wrong or what is right but: business$$$.

Fortunately some of us learned about and in this as other AHEE audio susbjects decided think " twice " before follow the AHEE advices.

Btw, the AHEE was the one that proscribe the MM/MI alternative diminished to our " eyes ".
I like many other persons today know the AHEE was and is wrong.

Anyway, enjoy the Stanton.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Not exactly. What I posted about is that the similar H output is IMHO a little better but I never said the LZS is not a good cartridge because it is.

Certainly IMHO there are better performers out there: vintage and today designs but these Stantons are good contenders.

How do you compare it against your Grace Ruby?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Delamostre1: My experiences with re-tipping vintage cartridges tell me that " always " we can have an improvement, not only because a newer cantilever and maybe a better stylus shape but because when the re-tipping fix works the retipper fine tunning the cartridge suspension that in vintage cartridges due to its time is already degraded.

I'm not saying that you have to send the 9600 to re-tip because I " know " that in its original shape the cartridge will performs very good, what I'm saying is that the re-tip could be a good alternative to improve an already good quality performance level.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Albert, Welcome to the right church and the true faith. The only one in the whole 'HI-FI world' which may be called 'profitable'. 'A solid investment' in the MC church looks like a (bad)joke but as you can see from Lew's proposal you can make profit even before you got any idea about your purchase. Compare this with the share market...
And than there is also the 981 HZS with the same perspective. I am sure that your beloved lady will be very,very suprised but you can easily proof your case with this thread (the Breuer/Red guy).

Regards,
Dear Raul, As if you can read my mind. The AT 1000 was indeed on ebay.uk . However I was reluctant to write to you and ask about this cart because I assume that you get such questions every day. So I had no idea about the 'real
value' and lost in the last seconds of the auction. I had
Axel with boron cantilever in mind btw.

Dear Dover, At last I am able to see this 'wonder' or ''the
object of Raul's desire''. But it is a kind of 'cruelty'
not to say anything about the sound of this cart. Exactly
the same as Raul's announcement of this mysterious MC cart
and then keep silent about the whole issue. All this time
I am speculating about the question: what can be better than Alearts MC 2 or Formula 1?

Regards,
Regards, Raul, Fleib: The Stanton 881S specs are 10-25k, output imped. of 900, inductance 455mH, here's another for comparison:

535 output imped., 400mH coil induct., 35 dbl. separation, 3.1 mV output. With an exotic profile stylus, these specs would lead one to presume the cart has the potential for very capable performance. What cart? Keep reading.

Meanwhile, concerning the "brotherly relationship" between Stanton/Pickering carts, an informative thread:

http://audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=405437&highlight=stanton+500&page=2

"Pickering XV-15 and Stanton 68x are the same thing outside of the plastic and the brush - which are functionally equivalent? They're completely interchangeable. Just buy the best thing available at the price you want to pay - which is probably going to be a "Stanton" replacement.

If anyone doesn't believe me, I'll be happy to stick a Stanton 681 stylus on my XV-15 and vice-versa, then record the results."

And a little more from the same thread:

"I know that the V-15 and 500 series are interchangeable, the XV-15 and 68x series are the same, and I think the XSV-3000 came out first, the 881s was a tweaked version of it, and then the XSV-3000 was brought up to matching specs."

And the un-named cart above? The "lowly" Stanton 500EE.

Peace,
Timeltel, regarding the Stanton 500, over time I've thoroughly enjoyed comparing different combinations of my grey body 500, two gold body 500 examples, and genuine as well as aftermarket Stanton d5100 stylus (blue), d5100e stylus (black grip, red box), and d5100ee stylus (black grip, metallic gold box).

Famous as the 'broadcast standard' cartridge for at least a couple of decades, the "regular" 500 with the blue stylus is one that has been both praised and cursed by audiophiles. In my experience it needs a high mass arm to sound its best. In any event I thoroughly enjoy each of my 500 variants from time to time but prefer my gold body examples to the grey one I have.

The top of the line 500ee that you refer to utilizes the hard to find d5100ee (.3X.7) stylus that tracks nicely at 2g. It's cantilever is hardly the tiny diameter of that on my 881s, but neither is it the "tree branch" of that on the standard blue stylus. Once in a great while a genuine d5100ee appears on that auction site. If there happens to be one available today I have no affiliation with the seller etc...

Jim


Raul

Dear Albertporter: With all respect till today I can't understand why any one invest big big dollars on LOMC cartridges only to degrade its quality performance through a SUT, any SUT at any price.

Many ways to skin a cat, LOMC cartridges have fewer windings and lower internal impedance. Some engineers and designers think this is more important than the high output alternative, preferring the "larger gain" be outside and apart from the tonearm.

Like all things high end audio, that's why both solutions are available and why people buy and listen to each.

As for ways to acheive that gain, there are transformers, tubes and solid state. As you know each brings thier own flavor to the music. No way to argue which is best as each ear must decide for themself.

I beleive the Shure (and the Stanton?) will not live up to my favorite LOMC but who cares? both of these inexpensive alternatives will provide good sound and no reason to not enjoy.

Anyway, enjoy the Stanton.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

That's the best advise.
Dear Timeltel Thank's to put some light in the Stanton/Pickering.

Btw, many people are " crazy " looking for Stanton/Pickering vintage original stylus replacement when IMHO could be better to retip it to today standards. What do you think in this subject?

Years/moths ago I was reluctant to change " nothing " in a vintage cartridge but through experiences about maybe I was wrong due that the cartridge motors on those vintage cartridges are so good that the improvement through retip to today standards put almost all those gems steps further a top its original " shape ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: Well, that opportunity was not for you this time.

Teh cartridge is very good performer and very low output (0.1mv ) and not easy to handle. I hope you can keep your hands on it in the near future.

In the mean time try to get the G800 by Goldring.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Albertporter: +++++ " Many ways to skin a cat, LOMC cartridges have fewer windings and lower internal impedance. Some engineers and designers think this is more important than the high output alternative, " +++++

problem is not with the cartridge designers

+++++ " No way to argue which is best as each ear must decide for themself. " +++++

subject is not what your ears decide or what you like but what is right or wrong.

Years ago I made my self these simple questions: what if what I'm listening that I like it is wrong? what if what I learned through the AHEE is wrong?

the answers to those questions along added other questions/answers were the big step on all my audio life.

For the first time I was aware and was " concious " of the reality and understanded this reality this true. From here I started to destroy to left behind almost all what I learned that were wrong and started to build a new " road " that till today I'm on the way.

I know is not easy for you speak against SUTs due that you promoted through the electronics you have on sale.

I want to put you two examples of two regarded/praised audio item designers whom I respect along one audiophile that I respect too.
One is R.Kartsen from Atmasphere whom know very well the damage that make SUTs, certainly he knows a lot about and that's why his phonolinepreamp is a non-SUT design and certainly not because " many ways to skin the cat ".
The other is J.Carr cartridge and electronics designer whom choosed ( for very good reasons. ) no SUT it his great phono stage design.
The audiophile/music lover is Dougdeacon that for some time was the best advocate to SUTs you could find out till he listened/tested a high gain active stage that he loves till today.

All these persons IMHO choosed what is right because they knew what was and is wrong.

M.Lavigne is another very good example. He owned or at least had on hand tubes electronics with inside SUTs and at the end when he decide to " download " his system choosed for no SUT in favor of active low noise high gain phono stage.

Do you want a reviewer?, well J.Atkinson.

As you I'm not alone and the " crew " are growing up in the same manner than the MM/MI " crew ". Btw, my today cartridge reference is a LOMC not a MM/MI type.

I hope that over time you can get one of the very top MM/MI performers where IMHO you could find MM/MI performers nearest to your beloved LOMC ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Albert, I would be very careful if using a SUT with the 980 to be sure that you don't end up with a load impedance that is too low for it to work properly. (I am now forgetting what Stanton recommends.) But I think these low output MMs present a kind of paradox; they like to see a high-ish load impedance but put out low voltage and therefore would be difficult to mate with a SUT. My Atma-sphere MP1 of course has more than enough gain for any MC or LOMM without using a SUT, so the issue does not arise for me, nor for Raul with his 3160.
Lew,

I'll check that out once I get it. Maybe if there is an issue with step up I can go into MM input and have enough gain.

I think there is a higher output version of this Stanton, worse case I could search for one of those.
Dear Dover: Well, the one in your link has the 143 on serial number. I can see through that link that the price on the Karat Nova 13D had fluctations on the 25%: 40,000 yens against a second sample ( the same year. ) for 49,800 yens.

Now, seems to me a little weird that Dynavector choosed an elliptical stylus shape for its top of the line cartridge against other down models where choosed line contact ( 23R or 17D. ).

In that same link appears the Karat Nova 17D ( wood body. ) and in this one the stylus shape was line contact with a longer cantilever: 1.7mm against 1.3mm on the 13D.

Could you share the specs on the 13D and specs to make the cartridge set-up along your opinion on its performance level?, thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Albert, I did a search to find the specs of the 980LZS. Apparently the internal resistance is only 3 ohms, which makes it suitable to drive even a 100R load resistor, and in fact I may have tried that with good results, now I think about it. (My 980LZS is sitting idle at the moment because I am re-wiring the tonearm on which it usually mounts.) The low output (0.3 mV) and the low internal resistance both suggest that the inductance will be more like that of an MC cartridge than that of a typical MM cartridge, so I am guessing you would actually be OK using a SUT, notwithstanding arguments for and against using SUTs. I have never even owned a SUT, so my opinion on that score is meaningless.
By the way, Raul, what on earth prevents you from revealing the identity of the LOMC that has you so excited? Do you think naming it would cause a stock market crash? We are mature enough to deal with the information without serious consequences to our mental health.
I thought it was common knowledge that Stanton and Pickering were sister companies. They shared the same technology and stylus substitutions are prevalent between model lines. Some time ago I posted that I'm using a Pickering D3001 stylus on my 980, which also takes the Stanton D81 (881) stylus. Any Pickering D3000 through 7500 can be substituted for a D81. Indeed, the 980 LZX cart is identical to the Pickering 7500 - not just in stylus, everything. However, this is not the case in most stylus substitutions. It's like AT. I can put any number of different styli on my Virtuoso, like a 3400, 95, 92ECD, 3472 and variants etc, but the carts themselves (bodies/generators) are different. BTW, I'm still using the P-mount styli on my Virtuoso and getting better results than the 95 variants. The cantilevers are thinner so lower tip mass. VTF is 1.25 to 1.5g. I'm using low mass arm - Sonus Formula 4 and Unitrac.

Who would have thought that buying from eBay would be safer than buying from Rauliruegas!

"Updates to the eBay Buyer Protection Policy

Dear griffithds,

I'm writing to let you know about important updates to the eBay Buyer Protection Policy that will go into effect on June 19, 2012: •A provision has been added that in some cases we may refund part of the cost of the item to the buyer and receive reimbursement from the seller to cover differences between the item described and the item actually received, such as small parts missing or minor repairs needed. In these cases, we will not require the buyer to return the item to the seller.


•A clarification has been included that delivery signature confirmation for items $250 or more is only required in order to protect sellers from losing a case where such service is offered by at least one shipping company. Similarly, when we ask a buyer to return a $250 or more item to the seller, delivery signature confirmation is required if it is offered by at least one shipping company.


•A clarification has been made that items purchased from the Businesses & Websites for Sale category will not be covered by eBay Buyer Protection.


•A provision has been added regarding the relationship between eBay Buyer Protection and the new managed return process. If a buyer uses the process to return to an item purchased from an eligible transaction under that process, and the seller fails to provide a timely refund in accordance with the new process, the buyer may file a case under eBay Buyer Protection. If we resolve the case in the buyer's favor, we'll refund the buyer, the amount of which will depend on the terms and conditions of the process.


•As with earlier updates, other changes have been made to keep the eBay Buyer Protection Policy up-to-date with our product and service offerings.
Thanks,

Heraldo Botelho
eBay Buyer Protection Policy
eBay Inc. "
Dear Fleib, I am not going to say you are categorically "wrong" in some of what you wrote above, but just to say that my set of facts about the 980LZS are different from yours. First, my 980LZS came with an OEM D98S stylus, which is much more of a rare bird than a D81S stylus. The latter I can find on my Stanton 880 cartridge, I think. But on the other hand, my information agrees with you on the subject of identity with the Pickering XSV7500. I was told by someone knowledgeable here (maybe even you) that the styli on the 980LZS and on the XSV7500 were identical, which was what led me to buy the latter stylus when I earlier got the chance to do that, since an OEM and NOS D98S stylus is pretty much unobtainium. (Now 3 people will say they have one lying around.) What say you to that? Thx.

Dear Don, It would be OK, as far as I am concerned, to bring us up to date on the outcome of your dispute, when you feel it's time. Your recent silence on the subject led me to hope that all finally went well.
Lewm,

Raul has the money. Raul has the cartridge. Update accomplished. No refund. No cartridge.

Regards,
Don
Nandric/Raul, re Dynavector Nova 13D
This cartridge was initially purchased/used many yrs ago, the sytem was at the time Final Audio Parthenon turntable/Dynavector 501/NYAL NCP II preamp with HTMPS tube regulated power supply and NYAL OTL1 monoblocks/Stax electrostatic full range speakers/Onkyo SL1 infinite baffle subwoofers ( very low base only ). Initial listening with a normal system was very transparent, but slightly lean and light bottom end. When the cartridge was auditioned in Dynavectors reference system in Japan which had flat response down to 15hz, then you realized the cartridge is dead neutral, it requires a true full range system to realise its potential. It is not a cartridge to impress with either lush midrange or fat bottom end, but if you have an extremely good system it will reveal nuances such as recording venues etc that other cartridges mask with colourations. I last used the Nova 13D in a Naim Aro and this was a very good combination, unleashing a bit more fluidity to the sound compared to the Dynavector arm. My own personal favourite MC though is still the Ikeda canterleverless MC. This is faster and less phasey than any MC I have heard but as stated in other posts requires a very good arm such as the FR64/66 and plenty of gain - output 0.15.
Raul - fyi the boys at Dynavector recommended the vintage Denon AU103 transformer over any headamp or transformer they made themselves for the Nova 13. With the NYAL it had enough gain straight in. Latterly I used Klyne 7 phono ( ok soundwise but not as good as my Marantz 7) and Blue Audio System's head amp/Marantz 7 (modded)(preferred combo).
Nandric - I would be wary at this stage as to whether it is as good as the best today. Unfortunately here in New Zealand I have cannot audition cartridges such as the Allaerts/Air Tight/top Lyra's etc. I have heard the van den hul grasshoppers, the Dynavector is very similar but again the Ikeda blitzes the Van den hul in my view.
Dear Dover: Now after reading your last post my expectation with the 13D grow up. Tomorrow I will have on hand but my system still down.
I will post my experiences with the Karat Nova 13D.

Another curios " subject " is that according the information I have the elliptical stylus in the 13D is not the normal 0.3x0.7 or 0.2x0.7 but 0.25x.0.7. Certainly Dynavector had reasons to choose a non-orthodox elliptical stylus shape.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Raul - the cartridge in the picture may be a Dynavector Nova 17D, not the 13D. I dug out my correspondence with Dynavector. The cartridges look identical. If the serial number is in the format X### then it is a 17D. My 13D is ##, ie 45.
Now the specs from Dynavector are as follows :
Nova 13D/Nova 17D2
Output 0.12/0.20 (1kHz/cm/sec )
Frequency response 20-40khz/20-30khz +-1db
Channel separation 25db for both
Compliance 18/15
Impedance R=10ohms/R=32ohms
Inductance L=52microH/90microH
Stylus PA Line Contact/Microridge
Cantilever 1.3mm/1.7mm

Dear Dover, I was not sure if my expression 'cruel' was 'offensive' but we got a very interesting report about the Karat Nova 13D . Thanks! However your enthusiasm about
the cantileverless Ikeda added to complexity (of choice) instead of enligthtement. There are also 'frightening reports' about this cart in addition to their diversity.
I got the impression from Dertonarm, Syntax, Raul and some others that only the 'professionals' among us are capable to deal with this cart(s). So after some info from Dertonarm I give up this 'road to Nirvana' despite the fact that I own a nice specimen of the FR-64S. There is no such thing as modest- questions or request in our forum
so would you be so kind to add to your previous post:
more about 17D (in comp.with 13D) as well about Ikeda(s)?

Kind regards,
Dear Professor, While searching for the Karat 13D or 17 D
on (what else) the Geman ebay I was very suprised to see
that despite 62 cart pages there was no single Dynavector
to find. So I was 'forced' to inspect ebay.com with the
same result regarding the Dynas. But, to my suprise, I discovered your 'lowly' Stanton 500EE(NOS) and bought the precious 'lightning fast' for $50. I own two 881S so the
'precious' can borrow the exclusive 'footwere' from them
and enter the 'high society' of the cart classes?

Regards,
Since recent thread comments have touched on MC options I thought this was as good a time as any to weigh in on my MM vs MC experiences. In a 3-23-2012 thread above Nandric wrote: "No wonder than that the most of us own even more than two specimens of this kind ( modesty is a virtue). But the Nirvana for cheap seems to be very difficult to achive so even those who already own 'the best of the best' (like Lew) still buy some more."

I wish to focus on his comment “Nirvana for cheap” as this was the reason for my pursuit of the MM alternative. To come straight to the point, I have not been able to acquire Nirvana for cheap with any of the MM cartridges I own. This is not to say there are not very good performers among the MM’s but not one of them has been able to meet let alone exceed my Allnic Puritas LOMC cartridge. And believe me I have tried hard to beat it and would have been ecstatically delighted to have a cartridge perform as well at a fraction of the price. The idea a finding my reference cartridge and simply replacing the stylus when it wore out for a couple hundred dollars or less could not have been more welcomed.

I have owned the following MM carts: Ortofon FL20 Super & ME. Azden YM-P50VL, Sumiko Andante P-76, Audio Technica AT7V, Empire 4000 DIII, Audio Technica AT20 w/AT20SS stylus, Acutex 420 STR. The top performer of them all in my system is the Audio Technica AT20 w/AT20SS nos stylus on a Triplanar arm. Second place would be the Empire 4000 DIII on a Reed 2A arm.

There are several things the Puritas does exceptionally well that none of the MM’s I own has been able to achieve in my system. Please note that none of these qualities are absent from the best of my MM cartridges but with my LOMC Puritas there is a clear level of performance of a higher caliber that is easy to hear and sets it apart from the others.

Micro detail retrieval: The ability to reveal a clear sense of speed and pressure of a string players bow on violin, viola or cello. Example, Cecil McBee’s , Chico Freeman intro on the song The Search on The Outside Within lp, India Navigation. Janos Starker’s cello on Bach Suites. Mercury Living Presence. My AT20 does very good on outer detail retrieval, but does not capture the full gruffness and scratchiness of bow to string that is fully apparent on my Puritas. On the excellent reissue Sounds Unheard Of, Shelly Manne uses some exotic percussion instruments with unusual setups. For instance on the track Poinciana rice is used on the bass drum head so that when it is struck you not only hear the reverberation of the drum but also the crackling of the rice as it rises and falls from the impact of the mallet. The MM captures the full impact quite well but falls short cleanly rendering how the rice falls back on the drum head. If not clearly rendered you can mistake the effect of rice on the drumhead as distortion or driver stress due to the impact. Does this minute detail take away from the enjoyment of the record? No! But once you have heard passages like this rendered cleanly you notice when these details are muted or smeared. BTW can your cartridge distinguish which brand of rice is being used! Just kidding ;-)

Ambience retrieval: the sense of air and space around performers exposing dynamic shifts and shadings for example in Schubert’s Trout Quintet was greatly enhanced with my Puritas. This made for a more exciting listener involved experience.

Female vocals are rendered quite beautifully with both the Audio Technica and the Empire. Two of my favorites among many are Helen Humes lp “Songs I love to Sing” Contemporary Records and Ella Fitzgerald’s “Let no man write my Epitaph.” What the Puritas does is it digs a little deeper in revealing those ever so slight vocal inflections that reveal the emotional intent of the singer. With Ella this is highly important for she is exceptional in using her voice to bend and shape lyrics to tell a story. With the Puritas you can hear ever so clearly the parting of the slips the swallowing and taking of a breath before singing the next line. This is the kind of stuff I believe we go through so much time and expense in setting up our audio systems to reveal.
If I did not own a top quality Moving Coil cartridge and had heard only my Audio Technica or Empire in my system I believe I could live happily live with either of them and not be in such avid pursuit of additional cartridges. Once you know that there’s still more gold in them grooves to be excavated it’s hard to go back to a diminished presentation. The MM experience has allowed me to enjoy vinyl playback while sparing my Puritas from everyday use and hopefully extending its life.

Last year I damaged the stylus of my Puritas and was nearly in tears knowing I did not have the money to replace it and it would not be covered under warranty due to my clumsiness. However the Allnic folks were wonderful and replaced my cartridge only charging me shipping to make an exchange. This totally blew my mind as I would have had a difficult time explaining to my wife why I needed to raid our savings account to buy a replacement for a “simple little needle.” During several weeks of waiting for a replacement from Allnic I listened exclusively to the Empire DIII/Reed & Triplanar/AT20 combo. I was able to fully dial in both cartridges to perform their best. They were both quite satisfying. Until.....

One final thing of interest is that when I received the replacement Puritas without any hours on it, it fell below the performance of my AT20/Triplanar. Even after 100 hours on the Puritas it was only comparable to the AT20 and I was worried that the new Puritas was inferior to the one I damaged. It was not until 150 hours that the new Puritas came into its own and began to reveal what I described above. It needed to be fully run-in to show its best. I say this to indicate that the best MM’s are no slouch in many areas of performance I have delineated, but in my experience up until now they do not have the speed, transparency and low level detail retrieval of the finer Moving Coils. So IMHO we do still need LOMC’s.

Regards,
Montepilot,
What phono stage are you using with the MMs and the MC cartridge?
I have found that many of the 'modern' phono stages include a MM capability as an afterthought.......if it is included at all?
The quality of the phono stage for a MM/MI cartridge is just as important as for a LOMC.....in fact MMs are far more sensitive to loading and capacitance than most MCs in my experience.
Dear Montepilot,
Thanks for your careful description of your experience. To continue in Halcro's line of thinking, what linestage (if any), what amplifiers, and what speakers? For that matter, what turntable? But I guess the point is that if you can hear the differences you describe among cartridges, the downstream equipment is not getting in the way of your perceptions. I heard the Puritas at the 2010 RMAF, in Steve Dobbins' room, and it was clear to me that it is very fine, indeed, in a Reed tonearm on his Beat turntable. Another that interested me, and still does, is the Soundsmith Sussuro. Also, Miyajima stereo and mono.
What a dilemma for me: Montepilot looks like my twin brother ( I also own the Triplanar and the Red 2A) while Henry is my Slavic brother. Now I mentioned somewhere that
'pretending' is an important social capability but I must
honestly agree with both of my brothers. Henry is right regarding the phono-pre(S). I own the most recent Basis Exclusive with the 'innumerable' possibilities to adjust the
MC carts but hardly any for the MM kind. The so called 'gold version' from 2009 which I also owned had no MM inputs at all to my (big) suprise. My Triplanar has probable an more 'modest mate' than the one by my twin brother but the Benz Ruby 3 S got two Absolute Sound awards btw. With the Phase Tech P 3G 'in' my Red 2A those are still my best carts. Among my MM carts the ordering is:
1. Virtuoso (black) boron / hyper elliptical;
2. Virtuoso (black) aluminum/ nude line;
3. AT 180;
4. signet 9 cl;
5. Stanton 881 S.

This however is a provisional ordering because i have no idea what an adequate MM phono-pre can do.

Regards,
Regards, Nandric: I was offered the opportunity to audition a gold body 500 by one of our highly regarded contributors. The generous offer was declined, the gentleman sent a wonderful recording consisting of trumpet concertos, sonatas and rondeau from Albioni, Purcell and Holst as a "consolation prize". Although this not-to-be-named fine gentleman (BTW, Hi, Jim!) is an accomplished musician and I have enjoyed his gift immensely, after investing a little time searching specs for the various Pickering/Stanton carts I regret declining his initial offer.

Intuition, not experience, leads me to presume the 500EE-11 is the "cream of the 500 crop". Unknown eddy currents or microphonics aside, the *specs* for the earlier 500s are among the best, later versions show increased impedance and output voltage. For the 500EE-11, 35db. separation is as good as the medium permits, the inductance/impedance (400 mH/535 Ohm, 3.1 mV output) specs are in the neighborhood of some fairly highly regarded carts, the AT20SS at (IIRC) 370mH/500 ohm, 2.7 mV for comparison. For further consideration, the AT22-25 is 550 Ohm, the AT440MLa with its frequently commented on hf emphasis at 490mH/3200 Ohm.

With the correct loading and a high-quality stylus assembly (aftermarket Shibata, HE, vivid line or NOS stereohedon and quad "Q" profiles are available, as well as several well thought of OEM ellipticals at .75-1.25gm VTF), one might anticipate the "lowly" 500 capable of excellent (and a hypothetically uncolored) performance. For those considering sampling the Pickering/Stanton family of carts, adequate research is an absolute necessity. There are wide body, narrow body, MM and MI versions and styli nomenclature relating to compatible options between the two manufacturers is practically indecipherable and as output can differ between the same cart with different styli, there is reason to think magnet strength differs too. Don't bet the farm on it but the rectangular and "J" shaped stylus assemblies are, within their respective group, reportedly interchangeable.

Nikola, I've no hands-on knowledge of this particular cart but I must confess the speculative aspect is intriguing and I hope to procure one soon. The above specs with a line contact stylus on boron, 20-25cu? Hmm. Keep us informed.

Peace,
My equipment:

Turntable is Garrard 301 in a customized plinth. The 301 has upgraded bearings and was completely gone over by Loricraft in the UK with additional fine tuning by my plinth designer. It is powered by a Loricraft 301 AR power supply. The table is wall mounted with additional vibration devices incorporated. This is the platform for both the Reed 2A and Triplanar tonearms.

Phonostage #1: Allnic L1500 SE. This is tubed base design to accommodate both MC & MM cartridges
Phonostage #2: Ray Samuels F-115 Solid State. I had this customized by Ray Samuels especially for MM. He provided a 100K setting for me. It has adjustable gain. Do not be fooled by its diminutive size.

Power amp: Lectron JH-50 modified by Nick Doshi on occasion will swap in Yamaha B2 100watt SS Class AB amp.

Speakers: Coincident Extreme Monitor II

Power cables: Telwire & Nordost Brahma

Interconnect: always in flux
Peter Bogdanovich once interviewed Orson Welles and asked a question about his great, and greatly ignored, film "Chimes at Midnight". IIRC, Bogdanovich pointed out an anomalous artifact occurring at the corner of the screen in one of the scenes and wondered about Welles' intention in 'framing' the scene that way. Welles just laughed and remarked that if the audience is concentrating on the corner of the screen while watching his movies then all is lost.

Mutatis mutandis, one could argue the same about a cartridges' ability to highlight recording artifacts, such as those that Montepilot nicely described. Whether that capacity is a virtue depends on one's targets (a term I borrow from Raul). If one's aim is to excavate and highlight each and every thing that's in the grooves, then MC presumably has the advantage. However, IMO, that kind of detail retrieval distracts and detracts from the larger picture and from the overall musical coherence. I've never left a concert (the target of live music) remarking on the number of breaths a singer took between phrases, let alone on the sound her parting lips make. Same can be said about that other alleged audiophile virtue: the pinpoint soundstage. I just don't take those things to be an important, let alone essential, part of the musical experience. Montepilot disagrees, I take it, since he argues that such detail leads to a more involving musical experience (which we all want).

I've never heard a cartridge do both, but since I've never heard the Allnic (or for that matter, any top flight MC in my system) I'm in no way denying the possibility. But to me it's like watching the corner of a movie screen and saying that that's where the director's artistic ambition resides.

A question: is there a sub $3k MM only phonostage that meets the requirements that this design has? What should I be looking at/for? LCR equalization? Loading options? Dual mono? MM only since I have no intention to try the MC route.
Dear Montepilot: I really appreciated your time to share here your fine audio analog experiences through MM/MI and LOMC cartridges.

I agree that the 20SS is a tiny step a top the 4000D3.

I read again your Reed2A tonearm review ( as a fact I posted tehre in the past. ) to " figure " about what surrounded all the cartridges you own.

Halcro question was critical and I assume for the same reasons I read about your system and agree with him that the MM/MI cartridges are really demandant/ask for the best set up we can make for it can shows at its best, same for the LOMC ones.

I heard the Allnic electronics and the Veito ( in my system. ) but not the Puritas. Allnic cartridge is no surprise: a good one but nothing exceptional. Well only a few cartridges out there are exceptionals.

I had and have deep and long experiences with SUTs ( external and internal to phono stages like Allnic. ), in some times I was convinced that nothing could be better than LOMC through a SUTs, that was what I learned till I grow up.

My position about SUTs are not a new one but older. Here two posts on that subject by me:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1130451054&openflup&29&4#29

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1138829438&openflup&41&4#41

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1138829438&openflup&20&4#20

IMHO your electronics can't do justice to any LOMC cartridge including your Puritas, but this is only my opinion.

I believe what you hear through your system with LOMC cartridge whaT i CAN'T BE SURE IS IF WHAT YOU HEARD IS WHAT IS IN THE RECORDING OR ONLY A KIND OF " INTERPRETATION " by your self due to the own electronics high distortions. TYhose Allnics are far from be accurate and certainly this makes huge differences for cartridge comparisons.

In the other side, good that your SS phono stage can handle 100k impedance that IMHO with many MM/MI cartridge is a must along the right capacitance loading.

I know, as Fremer " posted " that the Samuels is very good for its price range but IMHO not the best out there.

If it is true that loading set up is critical for MM/MIs it is critical too the phono stage design and phono stage quality performance level. Your Samuels use IC for its gain stages and active RIIA implementation, these design choices has some advantages but critical disadvantages. Why to use ICs instead discrete circuits?, one reason is to stay in a market price range ( normaly a low price range, like the Samuels ) other reason is that to fulfil top performance through a full discrete design demands a higher knowledge level and better skills from the designers.

Till today I never heard an ICs based phono stage design that outperforms a good discrete based design. I'm talking of quality level performance.

I think that your experiences and comparisons in your system , IMHO, can't be taked as a true comparison because not only electronics ( critical ) but tonearms were different.

Maybe if you compare the Puritas and the 20SS through the Samuels you can have a more " fair " comparison with less " different parameters " that affect the overall comparison.

As I posted my reference is a LOMC cartridge and for good reasons but for good reasons too some of the top MM/MI I own and owned are a real challenge to any LOMC including your Puritas.

Both designs ( LOMC and MM/MI ) are not perfect and the best on these designs is that many of us today have two alternatives instead only LOMC like in the past.

I know that the important subject here is what you heard and hear through your system because is the way you like to " live " with. This post is only an opinion but yours is the important one.

Thank you again for share your experiences that as many other audio experiences always are: learning ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi Lew, Yes, the orig stylus for the 980 Is the D98, but the D81 is interchangeable, so are the other Pickering styli I mentioned. I don't know if there is any difference between a D81S and a D98S, possibly compliance or some qualitative difference? The Pickering 7500 seems to be identical to the 980 LZ. I've compared specs with a couple of guys that have the 7500, including David. Apparently there was a predecessor, the XLZ-4500S. It has a stereohedron and the 7500 has a stereohedron II. I like the Pickering stylus holder better than Stantons.

I'm rather new to the Stanton line, this 980 is my first. I bought it NOS from Kevin at KAB a few years ago. He's the one who told me about stylus possibilities. Matter of fact, when I bought it I also got the D3001 (.2 x .7) stylus to go with it. In the old days I didn't like Stantons, specifically the 681 which is what I usually heard. This dislike continued until I heard the 881. By that time I was into LOMC. I noticed the listings in the cart database for the 500 series. I think the problem with all these Stanton/Pickering is cheap styli and holders.
Regards,
Hello Banquo,

Thanks for your comments. I have encountered this argument before regarding detail retrieval and the extent to which many audiophiles go to obtain greater realism in their audio playback. My question is what are audiophiles trying to obtain when they purchase 5 or more cartridges? Many on this forum own more than 10. If the idea is to just get a very nice musical rendition of a given performance then all this effort of chasing the new cartridge of the month is totally unecessary. Why the great pursuit to find the ultimate cartridge? I believe that great audio is unecessary to have a moving musical experience. I have sat in my car long after I parked to hear a very moving performance on the car radio. To me audio is totally different animal. It's objectives can only be defined by the user. What I have described are my objectives and what gives me great satisfaction. I am not suggesting that this should be the pursuit of anyone else or that it should be a priority for anyone else. Still I don't consider the details I described in regards to Ella Fitzgerald as akin to an artifact in the corner of a movie screen. She is a living breathing person with personality and emotion with the intent to convey a message through her art. I see it as a completely valid pursuit to get as close to that musical intention of the artist as possible. If this is of no interest to anyone, great. You can save a lot of money and frustration. For me, I love the pain and the gain.

Best wishes,
Hello Montepilot, thanks for your interesting comments on the MM/MI verses your Alnic MC. I think most of us realize that some expensive LOMC's, like your Alnic are probably better in some, or possibly all, areas than our favorite MM's,but like you, I would have trouble explaining a "needle" for $5,000 to my wife. Hopefully I will get to hear some top LOMC's after I get my children through college ( 3-4 years). In the meantime I get to listen to some good music through MM/MI , and as you said , if you had not heard what top MC's could do, you would be happy as I am listening through MM/MI. I guess as usual,in my case, ignorance is bliss.

As far as why some of us own 10 or more cartridges's, I personally like to hear different presentations from the different cartridges. Sort of like getting different interconnects or a different preamplifier.

I am glad you have found audio nirvana!

Danny
Montepilot, Thanks for your further response. You have a very nice system that is obviously very capable of reproducing the fine detail of which you speak. On my way home from work today, I was thinking like Banquo. I was wondering, could you tell whether it was white rice or brown rice or wild rice, bouncing on the drum skin? And like Banquo I was questioning whether I care about detail retrieval. But I do care. I think of my system as an instrument for playing LPs as accurately as possible. After that, I can choose the "flavors" for myself. Fact is, I don't feel deprived of inner detail whilst listening to the Grace Ruby or the Stanton 980LZS. When I compare them to a "good" MC, the Ortofon MC7500, I don't feel that the Orto retrieves significantly more detail. And the former two cartridges are more "musical". This was exactly the remark of a close friend who listened to the two cartridge types in my system two days ago.

As for MM phono stages, it is my observation that there are some great bargains to be had among used and even vintage phono stages, some of which feature adjustable loading for MMs. I was able to pick up a Silvaweld SWH550 phono stage about a year ago by winning an auction on eBay. I use it for MM, only, although it does have an optional input for MC as well. Once I changed its output coupling caps, it is a dream. Nandric, you might be happy with a tube type MM-only phono.