Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas
Dear Griffithds, I watch the German ebay nearly every day.
In comparison with ebay. com it is like Eldorado for the
MM carts. The intesresting AKG's (8E,8ES and 25 MD)are
usually listed as defective or with broken stylus. The prices are not constant but, say, about 50 Euro. I have seldom seen styli for the mentioned versions. No wonder that Axel discovered this fact also and try to make his
buseness of it. He even post his ad. at this ebay. But he
obviously never thought about the possibility to produce
and sell styli for those carts. I have no idea if he can
produce the plastic holder for the stylus which is btw
pretty complex. But to put the stylus with the rubber ring in the existing 'holder' looks to me very simple.
Now I of course listed my 8ES on ebay.com with $100 start price and sold the cart to some Russian guy and was astonished with the postage cost to the Russian Federation. 'Zone 3' or something by which Russia is treated like Nord Korea. Well my 'deduction' or 'induction' is that if Raul had wrote about 8ES then I would certainly get at least $250.

Regards,
Hi Nadric,

Am I understanding you correctly? The "> $200 for the retip" is what your "pressure
fitted nude line diamond in a tapered aluminum cantilever" would cost? If this is true, then someone bought your AKG for less than $100 could wind up with a mighty fine cartridge for under $300. May not have been worth it to you, but sounds like a good deal to me.
The old saying, ones mans junk is another mans treasure seem to aply here.
Regards,
Don
Raul you and i may not be on the same page when it comes to whats needed in our systems to have the best sound.

I am most definitely on the same page with you when it comes to your recommendations. I have not been disappointed yet and picked up a P8E on ebay this morning. Seems like original owner but he stated a lot of hours i feel good about it though as i made him a offer that he took.

Might be time for me and Axel to get down to business.

Thanks for the suggestion and im sure another winner.
Mike
Sorry. Should have written "P8ES" instead of P8E in all instances.
Dear Nikola,
You can be certain that I know why I won the auction in question. I think the fact that no one else bid on the Grace 714 may be an indication of waning fascination for vintage tonearms. I say this, because I have seen prices on other vintage tonearms going lower, as well.

But I would be interested to learn whether anyone else here has had experience with the 714, especially with a Grace cartridge. I know Raul uses a different model, all-metal, Grace tonearm and seems to like it.
Dear Lew, Your 'argument' like 'the price was such it was
impossible to resist' is worn out by the repitable use, so to speak. Your 'low offer' for the Grace arm is probable a way of speaking because I observed this item. You won for the simple reason that your bid was the highest. We all know, I assume, how ebay works. Regarding your AKG's. There is also the model P 8E but this is not the same as P 8 ES as far as I know . Anyway I never heard about 8E Van den Hul. You shoud recheck your nomeclature. I hope for you that both styli are ok.

Dear Griffithds, I understand your euphoria reg. Axels AKG
carts but he also need to buy them like the B&O carts on the German ebay. His cheapest cantilever/stylus combo is 99 Euro. I am sure that he will not provide 'my' pressure
fitted nude line diamond in a tapered aluminum cantilever
for the price you mentioned. So you probable got a less specimen than the original which is provided with a special cantilever as well with a special stylus. I sold my P 8ES
for about $100 on ebay.com. To me it makes no sense to pay
> $200 for the retip under such conditions. With all those carts that we accumulated during Rauls MM thread we need, I should think, some exit strategy for the probable resell chances. To own a 'jewel' of an MM cart is one thing but to own a cart that you don't like and are not able to resell is one other.

Regards,

Hi Lewm,

++++"I regretted having done so, because I really do not need it. Today, I won the darn thing for my low offer. I fully expected to be outbid at the last minute, but no such luck."++++

I had to chuckle when I read this. Been there, done that!
We must suffer from the same illness!
Regards,
Don
Hi Raul and Nandric,

The AKG P8's might be the new gold mine find. It appears that Axel has not only the P8's but also the P25's and the P15's. His web site states all have (in his words),with renewal of the implementation of the needle. He also states the cartridges are "good as new". No need to spend countless hours searching various e/bay sites trying to find one of these!
The P15 appears to be the most current AKG. Is their anyone on this forum who has knowledge about how this one would perform when compared to the P8? Being the latest model does not necessarily mean better! The Acutex LPM 420 comes to mind!
Curious minds want to know!
Regards,
Don
I own a P8E and a P8E Super Nova vdH. I must listen to them one of these days. Cannot tear myself away from the 320. Too lazy to mount a new cartridge, might be another way of putting it. I can easily see that they are both "low riders" as Raul suggests.

OK. Earlier last week, I placed a low bid on a Grace 714 (wood) tonearm, on eBay. I regretted having done so, because I really do not need it. Today, I won the darn thing for my low offer. I fully expected to be outbid at the last minute, but no such luck. One thing that interests me about the Grace 714 is the degree to which it resembles the new Durand Telos, in terms of construction, albeit Telos uses exotic hardwood instead of teak and is 12-inches vs 9.5. Any suggestions re the 714? It's mint and complete with box and all accessories, still in the bags. Maybe it's a good match for my Grace Ruby cartridge.
Dear Dgob: As Nandric posted and my self a weeks ago the line AKG models P8 could be a little confusing because there are some P8 that not only differ on stylus but on cartridge body shape too.

I'm talking about the original P8E that as Nandric posted was an earlier model than the P25MDs.
Now, this latest AKG models almost all suffer of that suspension problem but the P8E through my experiences with thee samples did not.

I will try to make a review, the cartridge deserve it and there will be a picture. Problem is that I need time to do it.

Even that my advise is to hear this vintage gem: another one! that I'm discovering.

Now, if I remember at least one of my P25s works perfect and what I remember is very good but I need to test it to be more precise.

What is clear to me is that all these AKG are really good performers and I know that the persons that own it are very satisfied with. We have to remember that the AKG top of the line ever P100LE is something special and " eats " in a different table.
Whom already experienced the AKG playback quality performance level knows that almost all around cartridge are only " toys " against it. You can read the Agon review about.

Btw, any of you can find the P8E almost easily through ebay germany site and time to time on USA site.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi Raul and Nandric,

Your comments on the AKG P8 come at an interesting time. I have just ordered a (good as new), AKG P8E Super Nova VDH from one of our favorite retippers, Axel. He has them listed at 199 euro including the vat tax. For those of us not living in Europe, I calculate the non Vat Tax price to be $216. For a rebuilt with new VDH stylus and suspension, seem like a bargin to me!
Nandric. You list 3 P8's. 1)The P8ES, 2)The P8ES super nova and 3)The P8ES super nova VDH. Of the 3, Would the VDH be concidered at the top of the pecking order? Raul had mentioned earlier in this forum that the AKG P8's were rather confusing because their being so many variations. I could not agree with him more!
Regards,
Don
Dear Raul&Dgob, The AKG P -8ES was produced in 1977 as the
top of the line ( 300 DM). Then come the P-8 ES super nova
and P-8ES super nova Van den Hul. While the AKG styli were
special in the sense of reduced mass Van den Hul styli become then 'modern' or 'something new' so one was able to show off:'my has the Van den Hul stylus'. According to Andreoli a worthless and 'dangerous' stylus. I assume that
this was the Gyger I which was very difficult to produce
(see my post about Gyger).
The P 8 series was replaced by P 25 MD (25,35 cu), P 15 MD,etc.
The problem of all those AKG carts was the hardening of the
suspension as function of time and light. Only those which were kept in 'the dark' survived. AKG was aware of this problem and destroyed the whole stock of carts and styli to avoid possible legal liability. While all of them were innovative and special the obvious problem is to get an functional stylus. No wonder the styli are more expensive then the carts without or disfunctional stylus. BTW the suspension is/was as no other. A thin metal plate with a small hole in which the stylus and the rubber ring are fitted. I agree with Raul's quality valuation of the brand in general and the P 8ES in particular but need to warn the 'innocent' for the lack of styli. It took me 2 years to get a good stylus for my P-8ES Super Nova. Ie the search for a good specimen may become an exercize in frustration.

Regards,
Hi Raul,

Is that the standard AKG P8E or a variant in the line? Also, do you plan a review of it?

Cheers
Dear friends: A change on CA topic.

From yesterday I'm listening to my AKG P8E for the first time in years. What can I say?, nothing but: WHAT KIND OF CARTRIDGE THIS AKG IS, just wonderful performer by any standards.

Yes, this could be for any one the " new kid on the block ", better that what I remember and very nice " surprise ": great cartridge with a beautiful nude elliptical stylus that rides very low that I was a little under stress thinking that the bottom cartridge plate could hit the LP but no no problem at all and only a high quality sound level that I'm enjoying hour after hour and LP after the other.

This cartridge is not hard to find out and at fair price. My advise?: go for it, go and hunt it as soon is possible. You will not dissapointed with.
Pleasedon't ask, AKG way better that our Signets and more in the 320 Acutexs and CA.

My sample is in mint condition and in original shape, as I said: wonderful!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul, I am alas not able to understand your latest
statement. Fleib should correct me if I am wrong but my
assumption is that Axel by changing the cantilever needs
to (re)adjust the suspension (?). Anyway he must check the
suspension.
Looking to my both cantilevers my quess is that because the boron cantiliever is so thin the nude line diamond was not possible to fit. On my aluminum cantilever one can clearly see the 'stone' as well what 'pressure fitting' is.
No glue of any kind can be seen with my (50x) microscop. What I mean is that the line diamond looks bigger then the boron cantilever.BTW Axel can't provide micro ridge styli. Not to my knowledge that is but I got from him a list with
all kinds of styli he can provide.

Griffithds, the first time I heard about 'pressure fitted
styli' in aluminum cantilevers was from Carr's contribution in this thread. In his wording this was the advantage of aluminum in comparison with the 'exotic' cantilevers which need (some) glue to be fitted. So there is no direct contact between the stylus and the cantilever because the glue is inbetween, so to speak. I was so impressed with his argument that I ordered the aluminum cantilever with nude line diamond. Otherwise I would certainly choose some of the 'exotics'. To me this combo
looks very impressive mainly because one can see the diamond in all its 'glory'.

Regards,
Dear Grifftithds and all: The refresh was about suspension and tunning someway ??? that suspension. We have to remember that manipulating a cartridge suspension we can change the cartridge performance and that two same cartridges can sound a little different with that manipulation at the cartridge suspension.

In the case of my Sonus D5 and LPM 315 the works were full: cantilever/stylus and suspension update.

About the Clearaudio Virtuoso Wood I think all of us already discuss in deep about and even that CA choose AT they made " something " other than the cartridge body to fulfil a hig performance level that even ( after SS or Axel " touch ". ) the Maestro can't achieve.

I agree, CA loosed the " train " here because that cartridge could be even better that what we are listening.

We have to remember too that with , normally, top cartridges the designers/manufacturers made a fine tunning/voicing work that is what in many ways makes the difference and the CA is IMHO no exception about or they were lucky enough if they did not that voicing.

I have no doubt that a cantilever/stylus/suspension up date beats almost any original vintage cartridge even the Nandric post.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi Nandric,

Good to hear some feedback on the Virtuoso changes. I can understand not hearing any difference between two different stylus profiles, but I'm alittle susprise at your comment concerning the two cantiliver materials. I wonder if the the wood top is absorbing/canceling out the suttle differences the two should present? Were you able to do a comparision with a stock/original cartridge and one of your "improved" versions?
The ideal of a pressure fitted stylus has caught my attention and is something I have concidered to do with mine.
Yes the CA MM all share the same generator. I think the more expensive ones have closer tolerances. Once again, they do NOT have the same motor as the AT-95. They have the same body, cu and output. They might all have the same tip, a bonded .3 x .7 elliptical(?) on a straight alum cantilever. Stylus assemblies appear to be made by AT. Maestro is boron/micro, same cu and might also made by AT. Soundsmith $150 upgrade is tapered aluminum cantilever and a nude .3 x .7 elliptical. Obviously, this isn't an upgrade for Maestro.

Nandric, It's a shame that your miscommunication with Axel resulted in a HE tip on boron. I would have guessed that it would still be more refined than the aluminum/LC. We still don't know what a Maestro stylus sounds like on a Virtuoso. I suspect it would outperform them all.
Regards,
Regarding the Virtuoso. I am sure that Raul mentioned somewhere that Peter Lederman (?) told him that the stylus of the (original) Virtuoso was mediocre. According to Fleib
all Clearaudo MM carts share the same 'corpus' and/or 'generator' but differ qua cantilever and styli.
Axel 'moded' my two Virtuoso's with 'pressure fited nude
line' stylus in a tapered aluminum cantilever, while the second one was fitted with a boron cantilever with hyper elliptical stylus. What he prefix 'hyper' means I have no
idea except the price (in comparison with 'simple elliptical'). To my embarrassment I must confess not to be able to hear any difference between the two. The added emabarrasment is the fact that boron/elliptical combo was
more expensive. I hate it to pay to much for anything.

Regards,
I bought two Koetsu Urushi's from a dealer in Akihabara, the electronic district in Tokyo, via the auspices of my son who speaks perfect Japanese. We had to wait two weeks for them to be made on special order. Of the two, one had a "fairly" straight cantilever, but the other was grossly deviated to one side. I did not really notice the defect until I got back to the US. But I sent the defective one back to that dealer (via my very tolerant son, again) and he arranged for me to get a replacement, without batting an eyelash, like he was used to it. (This was a tribute to Dan's ability to be charming and polite in Japanese, I cannot help thinking.) I do love the cartridge, but i thought the "quality control" was indefensible, which is to say there was no control of quality. I actually think that the lower end cartridges made by mainstream companies, like Shure, Grado, Denon, AT, etc, are more likely to be consistent from sample to sample than are the fancy ones. Lyra and Transfig may be exceptions to that generalization.
fyi -Re Garrot P77 - I heard this cartridge in the Garrot Bros own system which was an old tt with a heavily modified Nad 3020 and home made electrostatics built by Brian, John's brother. The odd thing was that in their system the P77 sounded like a moving coil, and the moving coils we listened to sounded in their system dull and uninteresting. They were very much of the view that moving coils with that "nasty top end" were for "soft rolled off" valve preamps and their MM was for more accurate solid state preamps. But I have to say dinner with the Garrots was fish and chips with some herbal drink that was a bit suspect.
Hi Dover,

I am constantly amazed at what trade secrets get revealed on this forum. Thank you for that Koetsu's/Garrot Bros. input!
BTW. I own one of those Garrott Bros. cartridges. The P77 and concider something special indeed!
Thanks again.

Regards,
Don
The reality is these cartridge manufacturers want to sell as many as possible, that means producing products that will sound great, even in suboptimal set ups ( which in my experience includes many audiophile's ). Look how many ways are there really to cut a cat in cartridge design - these guys are producing designs to a flavour that they think will sell, accuracy is not the primary goal.
If you want crazy, when I was in the audio business at customers requests we sent 90% of Koetsu's to Garrots for tuning and installation of microscanner stylus. We even had customers buy brand new Koetsu Rosewoods and have us send them straight to Garrots before using.
Why -
1. Microscanner tip pulled more info from Koetsu.
2. On the stone bodied Koetsu's the cartridge motor was held in with paper shims. We had some where the cartridge motor simply fell out while playing. Garrots used to glue down the generators.
Why didn't Sugano change - he didn't need to.
Hi Tubed1,

It is my understanding, that the Maestro is a Virtuoso Wood with a different cantiliver/stylus and more wood top hat. It would be my quess that the cantiliver/stylus brightened up the cartridge to much so they added aditional wood to tone it down!

Regards,
Don
Lewm, that is an interesting observation "the cantilever/stylus on the Clearaudio Virtuoso is nothing special to begin with". One wonders why on earth Clearaudio chose the AT95 motor in the first place, and what could have been with an AT cartridge a little higher on the evolutionary scale? It must have met specifications for a wide range of applications by just changing the stylus and wood/metal mount. Having recently secured a NOS sealed in the box a Virtuoso Ebony I now understand why these units are so hard to come by and easy to get rid of. Clearaudio only manufactured/produced the Ebony body for Marantz turntables for a ltd duration of time. Yes, for those still seeking a V Wood Ebony - you get it, find the turntable and you will find the Ebony. I also question why Clearaudio refuses to print stylus specifications and configuration. My sealed unit is without the metal mounting plate and having a curious mind am wondering if anyone else has mounted in this fashion and does it sound better? How will a Maestro stylus configuration on a V Wood sound? I am also pondering if anyone can tell me of the three woods, Ebony, Fernambuk and Santine which one sounds the warmest? Clearly this cartridge could sound even more outstanding with not only an upgraded cantilever but an upgraded stylus as well. Hyper Eliptical or Shibata. Raul in your opinion is this motor worthy of a conical?
Hi Lewm,

There was someone on this forum who was going to send a Virtuoso off to SS for his TOTL cantiliver/stylus upgrade. I do not recall ever hearing a update to that experiment? I wonder how it turned out?
I have come to understand the "refresh", is nothing more than a suspension replacement ("O"ring/donut replacement, perhaps a readjustment to realign the stylus). Raul, if it is more or even less than I have stated, please enlighten us to the facts!
Lewm, I was honestly quite susprised that SS basic cantiliver/stylus upgrade ($150), made the amount of improvement that it did. Same cantiliver material, same stylus shape/profile. This was not a 20 or 30 year old cartridge.
Why would someone who buys a $1000 cartridge, be expected to send it off for a $150 cantiliver/stylus replacement to get the best out of it. Is there any cartridge manufactured that does not benefit from someone elses cantiliver/stylus replacement? Are all cartridges just a product in development, to be completed by the end user thru a aftermarket source?
I know I'll never buy another new Virtuoso without it going thru SS first for the basic $150 replacement! To me, that's a no brainer! Clear Audio could have built this SS version of the Virtuoso for far less the $150 extra and would of had a far better cartridge to sell. It wasn't like they were filling a price point in their line up! The Virtuoso was at one time the TOTL MM for ClearAudio. For just a few more dollars, they could of had a giant slayer. I think they just missed the boat on this one!
Regards,
Don
Dear Don, What the heck is a "refresh"? Raul really has not defined it clearly. I hope he will comment further.

In general, does it surprise anyone that a new cantilever/stylus, which must also include a new suspension (or a "refresh") would be an improvement over the originals on a 20 to 30-year-old cartridge that was never top of the line in the first place? To me, this is almost a no-brainer, unless the person doing the work was incompetent, which is not the case for any of the companies under discussion.

Similarly, some one of us said that the cantilever/stylus on the Clearaudio Virtuoso is nothing special to begin with (made by AT, alu cantilever, etc, etc), so it also does not surprise me that a higher quality cantilever/stylus from Axel or from SS would be a marked upgrade to the Virtuoso. Both Nandric and you (Don) attest to that fact.
Hi Raul,

You have sent several cartridges to VdH for "refresh" only. You have also sent cartridges that had the cantiliver/stylus replaced. This would also have to include a suspension "refresh". Surely they don't reuse the old suspension, do they?
Are we going to have to compare three cartridges, one original, one with "refresh only", and one with a cantiliver/stylus replacement and suspension "refresh", to be able to determine what each level change acomplishes?
Based on all that has been said in this forum, perhaps in most cases, it is better to just "refresh", a known upper level cartridge which has old suspension.
What bothers me is my findings with my two Virtuoso's. One being the red original that I know to have good suspension, and the other, a black with the Sound Smith basic cantiliver/stylus replacement which must have included a suspension "refresh".
I hear a very positive improvement with the Sound Smith version. Well worth the money spent. This improvement has to be from the cantiliver/stylus change only.
If the SS cartridge only had the "refresh" done on it, I do not think I could have heard any difference between my two cartridges. Both would of had good suspensions!
Should we, the buyers of old cartridges, just assume that they all need to be sent off for a "refresh"? If the suspension in these old cartridges are not bottoming out, do we assume everything is OK. Would the new (modern), materials being used in the suspension "refresh" make it worthwhile to even send these off these OK cartridges for suspension replacement?
Looking forward to a reply from you or anyone else with opinions on this.

Regards,
Don
Dear Griffithds: Till today I made it on two of them, one was the LPM 315 and the other the Sonus Dimension 5.
In both cartridges the VdH upgrades performs were better than the originals. We have to consider here that on the VdH work was a " refresh "/fine tunning to the cartridges suspension nad this sole fact makes a difference usually for the better.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi Raul,

Have a question?
Back on 10/24/11, you posted something you were concidering. That was to send 20+ of your cartridges (that you had multiples of), off for a cantliver/stylus upgrade to compare against the originals. Is this something that you have done (sent them off)? If not, I hope you have not given up on this ideal. I for one would concider this comparision quite interesting.
I understand the cost of this experiment would not be cheap! Perhaps just a few to start?
Regards,
Don
Regards All,

For those of you with the Shure ML140HE, there is a supply of the original NOS N140HE stylus on ebay under cartridges/needles. NOS's don't come up very often. Get it while you can!

Regards,
Don
Raul, Those small(er) MBLs must have been the ones I subsequently heard at RMAF in 2010. I agree; that was a very nice sounding system, one of my favorites at the show. And Dobbins proved to be a very nice guy. I listened to two cartridges, each mounted on a separate Reed tonearm, both of which were mounted on his "The Beat" turntable. I think it was an Ortofon A90 vs an Allnic Puritas or a SoundSmith Sussuro. This was one of the few rooms at the show where one could compare two cartridges using the same downstream components throughout.
WOW!
This is the most informative thread on the planet!
Thank you very much everybody.

Al
Dear Rnadell: RM IMHO is one of the few " big names " on electronics design and in specific tube ones.

Last time I heard a RM electronics was at S.Doobins's place where his amplifier was running a pair of MBL speakers with really good aplomb that showed no tube signature. Even that was my first exposure to that audio system I can say I like it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Pauze: Well the phono stage is " normally " a limiting factor and your 640p is a decent one against other higfher price phono stages.
I never heard to that Cambridge device but looks fine on specs. Maybe a real limiting factor is its fixed 220pf on capacitance that does not permit changes of value to try a better match with different cartridges.

I hope that with a different headshell you can enjoy the 315 that's better performer that what you already experienced.

IMHO the 315 is easily at the same 20SS performance level and IMHO better that the ADC or those Signets but the TK10ML SeriesII.

Btw, that Shure/Jico SAS is surprising good.

+++++ " Since taking up a cart collection, one of my favorite things to do is listen to the different carts and train myself to recognize how each cart presents the music differently. " +++++

agree with that. That kind of different experiences help you to understand in better way and to learn deepest on the analog overall subject. IMHO what makes a difference for the better or worst is the cartridge set-up and other than the electrical parameters ( impedance/capacitance. ) you need to trained on VTA/SRA and Azymuth cartridge set up: to find out the each cartrisge spot on is a " hard task " full of patience and good ears as understanding of sound/music reproduction and how should be the sound we perceive trough our system.

You are not the only that " have to learn a lot ", IMHO all of us are still learning and we learn almost every single day about so many audio subjects.

IMHO one of the last " frontiers " on audio knowledge is about distortions, to be aware of and to discern about each one kind of. This distortion frontier is a challenge to all of us because things are that we are accustom to several distortions in audio that we took as part of the music/system performance and not as a distortions. Problem could be that because we are accustom with several distortions when some of it " disappear or goes lower " we don't like what we hear.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi Rich, Yes, RM designed the Beveridge amplifiers way back when he was a youth.
Hi Raul,

Have yet to try the 315 with added mass (hopefully tonight). I'll report my findings when I do -- I'm hoping for a very nice listening session if I can get my setup right!

My favorites and go-to carts are, in no particular order:

Audio Technica AT20 with ATN20SS
Signet TK9e
Signet TK7SU with either TKN3 or ATN20SS styli
Shure V15 Type 3 with JICO SAS
ADC XLM Mk III

I have many other carts, which also include a few MCs, but the above are my current "ones to beat" and I like them all for different reasons.

My setup is altogether very modest -- I run a Cambridge Audio 640p as my preamp. I do feel my preamp is a limiting factor at the moment, and I am in the process of putting together a battery powered pre. My listening space is a small home studio in a spare room, and is acoustically treated with bass traps and side/rear/ceiling absorbers. The speakers are two sets of active monitors that I alternate depending on my mood.

As a long time DJ, I'm a recent convert to all things audiophile, and am learning to properly play the jazz and soul LPs I've collected through the years. I still have a lot to learn and experience in this hobby. Since taking up a cart collection, one of my favorite things to do is listen to the different carts and train myself to recognize how each cart presents the music differently.
Dear Lewm, Roger Modjesky of Music Reference worked for Beverage at the time of the production of your speakers. I have visited with him on several occations and he has spoken about Beverage equipment with great pride. I would suspect that he knows as much as anyone about your speakers. He is in Santa Barbara California. He manufactures an ESL himself.
Dear Fleib,
My goat was not gotten. But it would be fair to say I did over-react. That is because I am so electro-ecstatic with the system as it currently sounds that I took the opportunity to brag a bit. I do concede that ESLs tend to roll off after about 15kHz, partly because they become extremely directional and partly because the impedance naturally drops to extremely low values such that no amplifier is very happy with them. But I never found that to be an issue. In fact, the aftermarket treble step-up transformer that I am using, in addition to its other virtues, has incredible extreme hf response, in terms of quality of sound. Cymbals and triangles are to die for. When I owned KLH9s was the only time I felt the urge to augment the treble response of an ESL, and that was because the 9s start to beam at even 2 to 3kHz.

There is nothing broken about the Beveridge amplifiers, but they appear to be original, which means all parts are about 30 years old. Time to refresh them. And in the process, I hope to upgrade some parts of the circuit, with the help of the very same Bill Thalmann who worked on my Denon DP80 and on my Technics tt's. (I can replace parts myself, but I am insecure about tweaking a solid state circuit; the Bev amps use an SS input stage and a tube output stage.)

This is all OT, and I apologize. By now this thread has gotten to be more like a Twitter or Facebook account than a forum. Which is cool, IMO.
Hi Timeltel,

++++I'm curious about how many have explored the cartridge isolation option and what their impressions are++++

I do not have a tone arm that uses removable headshells. I have a Graham 2.2 that have removable arm wands. I still use (if needed), isolations options.
What I use are thin lead shims that were designed for resonant reduction of phono cartridges. I bought them while in Japan, must be at least 20+ years ago. They do work. They measure 20mm long X 14mm wide X 0.5mm thick with slots on the sides for the screws to pass thru. It just slides between the mating surfaces (cartridge to arm wand), before the screws are installed. It seems that the more flimsy the cartridge body is, the better it works. When I opened the box that held the Acutex 420, I chuckled when seeing its plastic housing. The 1st thing I went looking for was the lead shim. I have never heard this cartridge without the shim installed. I have learned thru years of use when it's needed, so why waste my time in testing and confirming!
It has no effect when used with the Clear Audio Virtuoso Wood (wood material top hat) or the Benz Micro Ruby 3 (ebony body). I also can not hear any difference when it is used on cartridges that use metals for their boby material(upper level Signets, AT15/20's etc.). It made such a big improvment on the Denon 103R, (plastic body), that I decided to remove the plastic body on the 103R and install the Midas alum. body ($$$) in its place. Over the years, I have tried the shim on many different cartridges. I have never found a cartridge that it would produced a NEGATIVE effect on and I long ago quit worring about the added weight this little shim gave to the arm.
It is my go to device when a cartridge I'm trying will not come into focus as I expect it should!
Regards
Don
Lew, I thought I'd get your goat with the electrostatic rant, although I put enough qualifiers in there that you could have felt exempt. I'm sure your Sound Lab are superb. In many speakers super tweeters are just tweeters with extended response and not add-ons. Some single driver full range speakers need a little help with the extreme high end. I think that's why Fostex makes quite a few. Although you're listening in the lofty world of ESLs, I'm back to dynamic drivers. Eton kevlar woofers happen to be some of my favorites, but I'd never let you get near with your target gun. LOL, my woofers are discontinued and I'd probably have to send them to Germany to be repaired. It's a little difficult to compare cone materials on different motors but the only thing that rivals for speed is metal, which has other problems. I'm sure you're looking forward to direct drive ESLs. Hope you have someone who knows what they're doing with the amps.
Regards,
Regards, Raul: You wrote: "I know that especially vintage cartridges maybe cartridge suspension is not the same, my experiences about were different from yours and from Timeltel ones.--- "Please don't be so sticky on that resonance frequency ( tonearm/cartridge. ) and more on whole cartridge set up".

Relative to the Acutex 315, I believe we arrived at just about the same destination, a mid mass arm with nom. 12gm at the headshell, but by different routes. Nonetheless, there are practical applications for the introduction of a number of materials, not just as additional weight at the headshell but also for effecting critical mechanical damping of the cartridge.

There are many comments on cart/headshell/arm match ups but it's audiophile mysticism to suggest that, in some instances, a positive effect can be effected in either resonance reduction or the influence on voice when introducing an isolating device. Meanwhile the same practitioners who suggest shims or espouse various materials used in the fabrication of their headshells don't bat an eye when viewing cartridge isolation as gimmickry.

As doing so has a discernible effect I don't hesitate to try this when "tuning" a cart to the headshell/arm so I'm curious about how many have explored the cartridge isolation option and what their impressions are. Please don't misunderstand, this is not suggested as a universal improvement, but when faced with a cartridge one feels is not performing to its potential, experimenting with cartridge isolation is not a thing to be casually dismissed.

BTW, Lew, congratulations on the Beveridge 2SWs.

Peace,
Dear Don and friends: +++++ " There is one that you highlighted, has actually caught me by suprise............ That cartridge is the Astatic MF100. There is nothing in its performance that brings attention to any part of itself. It just gets out of the way and lets the music flow. It truly is a cartridge I could live with forever and be quite happy. " +++++

yes, the Astatic MF-100 ( as similar moving flux design: Glanz and Micro seiki LF-7. ) are a " surprise " for any person that heard it.

IMHO the MF-100 belongs to that very selected cartridge's group that not only are at the top in performance but to that non-WOW cartridge's characteristics as several other that are not even in the same MF-100 's league.

Other than you I can remember only Dgarretson as an owner of it and I think he likes too.

The Astatic MF-100 ( I own the 200-300 too . ) is only one of several top alternatives that almost all should looking for because is worth the effort and because this different alternative si to a different alternative and for some of you a better one that with what you are sticky for so long.

In the last 2-3 weeks I was and am listening to my Micro Seiki's cartridge and I don't feel any necessity to hear or test any other cartridge including my LOMC reference.
It is hard try to find out any down side to these cartridges and I'm really a person that always ask for " perfection ".

I understand that the MF-100 came with Shibata type stylus where the MS was designed with an elliptical ( 3x7 ) one, even this both performs alike.

From some time now seems to me that many of you already losted the " emotion " to discover/experience new gems out there that are waiting for " all " of us.

Regards and enjoy the msuic,
R.
Dear Pauze: Very good performer that Acutex LPM 315.

+++++ " in comparison to some of my other carts " ++++

Can you tell us which other cartridges and which phonolinepreamp are you running?

If you read my Agon review you can see that I was using a medium mass tonearm with a 12grs headshell and performs great in my system, it even performs in that way almost from the very begin: a few minutes on playback.

I know that especialy vintage cartridges maybe cartridge suspension is not the same, my experiences about were different from yours and from Timeltel ones.

Please don't be so sticky on that resonance frequency ( tonearm/cartridge. ) and more on whole cartridge set up: including load impedance/capacitance.
If I was you I will re-start from the begining with frist step be cleaning the cartridge pin connectors and not only this but " cleaning " with a razor-blade like and then after the set up reset to clean perfectly the cartridge stylus: maybe you will need a good 30+ magnifier.

Yes, that more heavy headshell should help about as could be ,as an option , a different headshell build material.

Anyway, your anser to my questions can help for all we here could be more precise on each one advises.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R
Thanks for the suggestions Fleib, Timetel, and Lewm. I'll try moving it back to the heavier arm and using a heavier headshell.

I wonder if my NOS 312 will exhibit the same shift in compliance. I have yet to mount it for any listening. I also managed to purchase a couple of the Acutex 420s before the Italian seller's stock depleted, so the light arm may still come in handy.
This issue was mentioned earlier in the eternal thread; after 20-30 years on the shelf, the compliance of an actual sample of any MM, especially if NOS, may be quite a bit lower than the advertised value. Give it time and use and maybe it will loosen up. Or use a heavier tonearm.
Regards, Pauze: Agree with Fleib. There's a hint of what he's suggesting in your comments about resonance increasing with the lighter arm. If you have a headshell weight, you might try it. My 315 didn't settle down until, out of frustration, I isolated it from the headshell with a surfaced dime. Running it at 1.35-1.4gm VTF, a 9.5gm Acos headshell on an EPA-250, loading at 300pF seems about right.

Peace,
Hi Pauze, If the cart is resonating above the recommended range (8 - 12Hz), then it normally means your arm is too light, not too heavy. However, I wouldn't put too much stock in that especially if you switched to a light arm and there was no change. I don't know the compliance of the cart but maybe you should switch back to the heavier arm. You could even try a heavier headshell. From your description I suspect you're tracking too light. I think 1.9 or 2.0g is max, maybe you could take it up a bit. Assuming that your alignment is good and the needle is clean etc, maybe you just need some more hrs on the cart? It's a common fallacy that suspensions usually will harden with time. They almost never do. Even 30 + yrs ago they used synthetic rubber compounds that don't normally dry up. Suspension failure is almost always due to failure of the suspension wire. Break-in varies from cart to cart and some take a very long time. I don't have one of these carts so that's about all I can tell you. Many people start out with max VTF and back off some after the cart is performing properly.
Regards,
I'm a longtime lurker to this thread, and thanks to it I've amassed a nice collection of great vintage carts.

One cart is an Acutex LPM 315 with a NOS stylus I purchased a while back. In my Technics 1200mk2 mid-mass arm, with the lowest mass headshell I could find, I was getting a resonance figure of around 13Hz+ according to my Shure Era V test record. Also, in comparison to some of my other carts, I found the Acutex 315 sound a little on the wooly side. I understand that this cart loves low mass, so after a few months, I've gotten my hands on an ADC LMF-2 (and am still hunting for a nice, reasonably priced Black Widow!).

Over the weekend, I mounted up the Acutex and checked resonance -- no change! Still peaking in the 12-14Hz range (note that the Shure record tops out at 14). Subjectively, I notice a LOT more bass, but that wooliness is still there. In fact, I'd say it sounds a lot WORSE overall in comparison to mounting it on the mid-mass arm.

My weekly listening time is on the very short side, but my best guess is that I'm at the 20-30 hour mark as far as break in on the stylus. Could it be that I'm still within break-in range and should keep going to see better resonance figures and cleaning up of the sound? Or is it that my 315 stylus suspension is hardened beyond stock compliance?

I fear it's the latter.
Alex7333, If you have a Cardas test LP, bands 2a thru 2c are excellent for breaking in a cartridge. At the end of band 2c, the cartridge is prevented from going further across the LP; you have to lift it at that point and re-start it at the beginning of band 2a. Several trips though these tracks will get your suspension loose in short order. Highly recommended if you only have the patience to hang around while the LP does the work. By all means, DON'T listen to it; one beauty of it is that the rest of your system can be turned off during this process.
Dreamers rejoyce! And drool over your next possible upgrade:

http://audiohalloffame.com/go/index.php

If they could just add the Worlds Most Beautiful Cartridge Category. That Vyger Signature is just visually outrageous. One cannot help to wonder just how it might sound.