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
Dear Fleib: Very good information from your last post, thank's.

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dlaloum: Axel handle exotic materials but in rod shape. I asked him about tube cantilevers because my XL-44L came with and I wanted to have the same kind of cantilever but he told me he can't do it: no suppliers.

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

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul,

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

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

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

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

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

I'm running it on my epa 100 mk2 arm at 1.74g VTF, just a hair tail up. It likes my lighter 9gr headshell better than my 12g one. It's relatively easy to set up, unlike the 20ss which, after a year, I'm still fiddling with.
Banquo363, I think you have eloquently described the MF-200 as I have experienced it as well.

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

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

Regards,
Jim
Hi Nandric, I hope Axel is able to cope with the Genesis body & cantilever. I think VdH, Gyger S might be a better choice if you want to replicate the sound of a Microridge? which is virtually identical to AT Microline. The shape is supposed to replicate the cutterhead and wear evenly for no record damage. Hard to separate fact from hype, although it's one that might last 1 - 2K hrs. I think diamond quality/polish comes into play, clear gem-like vs industrial dk grey. When I say micro I'm referring to those types in general. The Optimised Contour Contact Line is Soundsmith top diamond and costs $450 on existing cantilever. Perhaps Axel can advise better.
Regards,
Hi Raul, I never owned an Accuphase cart so I'm not positive, but pretty sure the cantilever was boron. The AC-3 that came after had hollow boron w/beryllium rod for strength, rigidity. The generator specs for the Accuphase and Monster are virtually identical. All the LOMC are 4 ohms. I think beryllium would be a good choice. It's slightly heavier than boron, perhaps more rigid. It's more brittle though. My impression of the AC-2 was a little more relaxed and musical, maybe slightly less accurate than than the Genesis 1000.
Regards,
Another excellent post from Banquo.
How refreshing to hear qualitative descriptions which actually contain a modicum of sensibility?
Compare these subjective/objective analyses to the cliched, meaningless jargon usually proffered by the erstwhile audio press?
"...instruments I had never heard before..."
"...as if Quasimodo was actually standing between my speakers...."

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

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

Well done.
Henry
Yes, a tubular sapphire cantilever
Here's a url:
http://www.accuphase.com/cat/ac-2en.pdf
I have never really got my MM's to sound as good as some on this thread seem to get. Whenever I brought up all things being equal I believed MM's sound better with SS and mc's with tubes. Mm's always sounded a bit soft on tubes and mc's definately superior on tubes. To me there is o doubt about that. Always vigorous debate on this viewpoint.

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

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

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

Cheers
Hi Shane,
I would like to think that the choice of electronics was not the defining characteristic in extracting the worth of either cartridge technology.......but I'm not sure that it may be of some influence?

Having said that however.......I have never been a great fan of the EPC-100Mk3.....and I know Raul will say that it doesn't compare to the Mk4..... But having now completed a comprehensive study of many of my finest cartridges.....both MMs and LOMCs.......the Mk3 shows deficiencies in many areas not the least being the most important.........it lacks a soul.
There is precious little emotion emanating therefrom...and that to me.....condemns it?
I have no experience with the AT 25 but my experiences with the AT-22s was even more desultory than the Mk3.
It may be that you really haven't experienced the very best MMs that we regularly speak about here?
The Empires, the Astatic, the Signets (TK-3,5,7) and even the Virtuoso?
A phono stage which allows a loading of at least 60K Ohms and variable capacitance values is also important for MMs.
Finally the arm is very important for high-compliance MMs as I found out to my chagrin?
The famous Phantom II just about destroyed every MM I tried with it...so much so that I was forced to sell it.
And if you ever do obtain one of the great MMs........remember that switching from it to a LOMC will always sound initially impressive.
It's switching back the other way that the truth is revealed IMHO?
I have noticed in the last two years or so.....that almost all the new high-end phono stages which have been introduced.....feature adjustable impedance and adjustable capacitance as well as MC and MM inputs?
And even some of the new mid-range phono stages come so equipped?

I don't believe this is a co-incidence but decidedly inspired by the influence of this long running thread?
And for this.....I congratulate Raul for his maverick courage and stubborn perseverance.....and all the contributors who have kept this thread alive and created a groundswell of change in the perception of the 'old' MM technology.
It was not so long ago that phono stages were being sold with 'MC only' inputs?
Viva Le Republic!
Hi Henry

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

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

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

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

I agree, the phantom tone arm I could never get quiet with mm's let alone sound good. I use my P3 and Ortofon 12 inch arms for that. It is mc only.
Henry, you are stretching a VERY long bow linking this thread to any release of high end phono stages. Most Phobos stages have always offered mm.

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

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

Can't think of too many more recent high end phono's off the top of my head
Hi Shane,
I lived with the Kebschull valve preamp with full valve phono stage......6 valves in total.......for 20 years.
I think I have a handle on valve beauty?
Measuring ruler flat is not necessarily a recipe for greatness?
I've heard cartridges, preamps, amps and speakers which....supposedly...measured that way and a toss-up between boredom and agony was the net result :^(
On the contrary, some of us are quite sensitive to high frequency ringing and compression in solid state phono stages. It is quite plausible that tube phono stages are more benign in dealing with high frequency resonances generated by MC's. Certainly your fellow countrymen, the Garrot Brothers, were of the view that MC's go with tubes, MM's go with solid state.
Henry

Todays valve gear has changed a bit from 25 years ago. Have you not heard Valin's musing of SS and tubes merging. Not quite but closer :-)

Did you have the same handle of appreciation of mm's when you had your tube pre amp as you do now?

I was only talking about transducers being flat. I would never say my tube amps were ruler flat :-)

Cheers
The Kebschull preamp uses internal MC transformers for the MC input, and does not represent a high gain tube phono preamp. You may well have a skewed view of the tube world if this was your reference.
Shane,
You complain of not achieving the great performance traits with your MMs ....that others on this Forum appear to be accomplishing?
Without attacking any of your associated equipment.....I try to explain perhaps a reason for this that is easily rectified?
For some strange reason.....you appear to take this suggestion as a personal attack on you and your two mentioned MM cartridges.....and then proceed to defend them to the death?
Yes.....you're right.
Your two MM cartridges are the best ever produced and the reason you prefer LOMCs is because they are intrinsically better.
Enjoy the music.
Dear Fleib, Depending on the kind of repair the cart must be 'opened' or not. By the 'retip' the usual procedure is to insert the cantilever/stylus combo ( as provided by supplier) in the 'tube' on which the bobbin (with the coils) is fastened. The cantilever is then glued in the tube. The reverse 'act' presupposes that the old
cantilever should somehow be pulled out. I have no idea how
this is done but assume that some solvent must be used.
What kind of stylus one can order is not only dependant on
what Axel can provide but also, I think, on the thickness
of the cantilever. On my AT 180 and the Virtuoso with the boron cantilever one can hardly see the stylus even with the 'help' of an hand-microscope (50x). The line contact diamond on my other Virtuoso on the other side can be seen
with the 'nacked eye'. I think that the 'microridge' stylus
is 'invented' for those 'thiny' cantilevers. Alas I also need to wait till Axel has some spare time ( I hoped for preferent treatmnet) so I have still no idea what kind of stylus or cantilever/stylus combo he will put in 'our' Genesis.
Regards,
Dear Banquo 363, To be honest I consider your comparison
of your Astatic cart with MY FR-64 S (+ B60) insulting.
I just bought a pedestal to put this 'work of art' in my
living/listening room such than anyone with some esthetical sense can also enjoy the beauty. Now try , for the comparison sake, to put your cart on whatever pedestal in your living room and I can ensure you that your best friends (if you have any) will recommend to you some decent asylum in your neighbourhood while others will advice some of their own psychiatrist.

Regards,
The Kebschull preamp uses internal MC transformers for the MC input, and does not represent a high gain tube phono preamp.
Hmmm....I've got it here right in front of me.
Can't see anything that looks like MC transformers? Can you post a schematic?
MC input handled without noise Koetsu Urishi, VdH Grasshopper, Clearaudio Concerto, Clearaudio Insider Gold and Lyra Helikon.
Enough gain if you ask me?
You may well have a skewed view of the tube world if this was your reference.
You may well be right.
It is still the finest, purist most transparent and transcendental sound I have heard in my system....or any other.
Henry, why would I think anything you or anybody else is getting personal. We are talking hifi not rugby league :-)

Since you still have your tube pre, why don't you use the tube phono stage in it to see if you can get better performance from your lomc's. Nothing to lose except time.

Cheers
When I was in Germany a few years ago I looked at purchasing a Kebschull VV150 preamp. Was advised that it used internal MC transformers, located rear left inside. Relevance is not the gain, it is that as you know transformers are not universally applicable to all MC's. They require matching to the cartridge in terms of turns ratio and primary and secondary loading. To me a tube phono stage has no fets/transformers/opamps/transistors between the cartridge and the first tube. If you have a different all tube model then well and good.
Certainly your fellow countrymen, the Garrot Brothers, were of the view that MC's go with tubes, MM's go with solid state.
I visited John and Brian Garrott on several occasions and spoke with them on the phone many times and they conveyed no such philosophies to me.
Their disdain for MC cartridges was palpable and they loved nothing more than playing the top Supex MC with Entec head amp through their stacked quads and then switching (with an interchangeable headshell no less) to their P77 MM and watching your expression.
They played with full valve amplification at their house at Mona Vale and never played MCs other than to display the differences.
Garrot Bros -= when I was working with them in the mid 80's they had a modified NAD 3020 running into Brian's home made electrostatics. They had a preference for MMs and yes they loved to put the P77 after a MC for shock value. However they also associated MC's with "soft flaccid" valve preamps. They were quite clear about this. You do realise that they later did produce their own moving coil.
Dear banquo363: Yes, I agree with you as Dean_man and other Astatic MF-200: nothing short as a marvelous performer.

+++++ " The Astatic is the first cart to play through it without distortion all the while conveying in full detail the drama of the musical climax. The instruments retain their tone throughout these difficult passages. The 20ss can play without any obvious distortion as well but also without the fullness and presence of the Astatic. " +++++

I posted almost the same, the tracking MF-200 habilities is second to none not even the 20SS can eve it. If it is true that the 20SS makes a great job running the Telarc 1812 overture the MF-200 makes not a great job but a seamless one that no other cartridge I remember shares.

I posted several tiemes the critical importance on cartridge own tracking habilities as a characteriostic that always makes a difference for the better or worst.
That the stylus stay always in the grooves makes the difference a paromouint differences.
Tone, timing, focus, flow of the music are some distinctive factors that we can aware on cartridge differences on tracking habilities and this sole characteristic put the MF-200 in a different quality performance level than any other cartridge.

Due to its greatness IMHO is a must to have at least two samples of the MF-200.

Sooner or latter I will make an official Agon review, this cartridge deserve it.

Good to know you " discovery " the greatness of this Astatic.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lespier: Maybe in some time the AC-2 came with sapphire cantilever but mine came with a non-sapphire one or at least not a " pure " sapphire ", I mean that could be a sapphire cantilever with a cover of " something " that preclude to see the " sapphire " build material: transparent/clear.

Thanks to bring your link here. I will ask Axel when he has in his hands, at the end Axel handle sapphire cantilevers.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Here is an interesting memory from the man who 'bank-rolled' the Garrot Bros. it contains some insights into the properties of styli and cantilevers:-
elroyvomlacheren -- Sat, 12/18/2010 - 06:01
The missing link
I stumbled over some posts about the late Garrott bros, and though I usually never blog nor use any forums, I thought it adequate to clear some of the thoughts, feelings and obscure history of the Garrott Bros. Some posts were right and brought warm and hurting memories and some were dead wrong. The ones who remember the Garrott family well remember them as living in an enclosed space, very isolated from the world around them. They concentrated on their work and left the world pass by. In the quietness and peacefullness of their living they mastered cartridge repairing, retipping and building never achieved by anyone in the past nor up today. I had first contact with the Garrott brothers at the age of fifeteen, which was over 30 years back from now. Half a child but most enthusiastic about HiFi I digged out their address to make first contact. At that time, there was no net - we had telex, letterpost ans later faxmachines. I still remember the day to have Johns voice on my phoneanswering machine. I was too scared to called back - I was still at school learning English as my fourth foreign language amd it took me two days to find the courage calling him. Finally made it and he was surprised that I wanted to meet them in Oz. It was very exceptional back the to fly to Oz amd back to Europe - Oz was a one way destination and at that age it really must have been exceptional. We immediately became friends. In fact, as they did not have children they kind of adopted me to their family, and as it was the way they lived, all in secrecy. Over the years the did teach me all of their secrets and they remain in my hands still. After my frist degree I entered university and  studied design, architectury and engineering and I addem my knowledge to the projects we had. I was working in secrecy in  OZ over the Euro winter I brought my findings to Oz. While we had the retipping service for all cartridges around the world (except for Linn, which John thought was a non honest company and refused to work on any Linn cartridge) there was the P66 and P77 cartridge. HiFi circles all seem to need a topic to dial in, they did on the diamond. In fact, the diamond is an essential part of the whole component, but only one. The same importance goes to the allingment, the mounting , the rake, the length of the cantilever, the material, the magnetic construction, the damping, the coil assembly, the field arrangemet, the inductance and much more. As usual, the hifi comunity reduced it to the A&E with Garrott stylus, which was fine for us and still makes me smile by today. It did't change much when I added the leaflet where the cartridges were named "dynamic coil". It should at least make people think that the dynamic change from the A&E to a P66/77 did NOT come from the diamond. I did have a good free lance job for Lamorghini Spa. then and it was partly about suspension and damping, which makes the difference for a car going fast or slow, but customers thinking about the horsepower. Same with cartridges. The secret really lay in the dynamic balance of the moving parts. As the P66 and P77 were for Brian and John Garrott, we made a set of 3 cartridges, the K1/K2/K3 to represent or 3 party, as I became a full Garrott family member and the K series came from my idea to make a lower cost series to give more people the chance to enjoy vinyl. By that time CD was in the wake and I thought it best to fight it in the beginning. The K series were fixture mounted diamonds, which were less expensive to make, but still had the exceptional polis all our diamonds had - exceptional. to say the least. The were round/eliptic/parabolic.shape. They were fully balanced, as were the P66(elliptic)P77(parabolic MScanner). They were differently balanced, as the tip mass was different from the K to the P series. I then initiated the making of a series of MC cartridges. 3 for us all - the blackP87 elliptical, the red P88 parabolic and the goldenP89 MScanner. We made the housings, printings anodisations here in Switzerland and used parts from our watchmaking industry. I did read that somewhere that they were affraid of the Cd and dwindling sales. This is dead wrong. The company was fully backed by my finances of 2Mio$US at Westpackbank. I wanted to give them their love back so I gave them the possibility to live the way they were used to and made their work excell. They never had any financial problems, and all they ever produced was bought by myself or backed by myself untill they got payed by their customers. We made batches of the P87/88/89 in the size of 400/400/200pcs. over the years. I was running a repairstation for ProHifi for Radio and TV servicing EMT's and Ortofons. While the MC-type P series were made for the then used mid mass arms which needed mid compliance cartridges, I had to service the tractors style types over here. I made retippings with Garrott round and elliptical styli for SPU's and the made a pro cartridge available in Switzerland only called the True Blue. 30pcs. batch, low compliance cross coil Garrott suspension style, aluminum cantilever with a Weintz parabolic. This was a wonderfull cartridge, but for heavy mass arms only. So we had two chains - I was on the pro heavy mass work and the Garrotts were on the HiFi medium mass. It was the time of the so called sharp needles - the then S-nadel was made by Gyger over here and marketed by VdH. He later renamed it VdH, but actually is a Gyger S. Friend of the Garrotts remember they did not dring alcohol. They still had fun getting a booze. After watching Roos around Cox's river road, we mounted a Gyger on a P89 and really got the booze - phasey and not natural. I should mention the importance of balanced weights. We have had around 100 types of diamonds, some with same shape but different weight, which is very important. We had multiple types of cantilever, aluminum, boron rods and tubes, with and without drill, Berillium strights, conicals, flat tops, flat tops with slits, ruby and so on. The magic always layed in the balance, not in the individual part. It is a very common missunderstanding that the stiffer the cantilever the better the sound because of lower transmission loss. Most cantilevers do not allow a mechanical rigid mounting of the diamond mechanically except for the glue. In this case aluminum is the best fixture possible with the lowest loss. Then the cantilever does NOT end at the coil armature. In fact, it ends within the backside polepiece, and the suspension wire is part of the cantilever, so the ultra rigid boron rod cantilever transferes the energy to the supple suspension wire which resonates much more than it would with an aluminum one. I will not discuss on cartridge building but would like to focus the reader on the real work we did at Garrott bros. If you would have sent the lets say a working Kiseki, you would have received a much better balanced Kiseki back without changing the stylus nor the cantilever. We did have the very best years all the way untill John got ill. It was a hard time as it was not sure if his sickness could be treated or not. As they were living as a party of 4 their very long live, isolated in the blue mountains, in the bushes behind Merimbula it was hard to immagine for Brian to go on without his brother. He took his time of from their house way behind Bega and headed for Merimbula again and think about the future. It was difficult to get in cintact with all of them. John was at his hous with Normita Gerrott and Brian away with Teresita and looking back they tried out how life would be parted in two. Tears run over my face when remembering those difficult times, which I thought would be more easy to remember after 20 years have passed now, but it is still too hurting. I got my last call from Brian after his turning back 3 weeks before they commited suicide, which they did in secrecy, as thethe distributor chain, which seems to be y could not immagine to ever part from each other. I excuse for not beeing able to think nor write about it. I was informed about the tragedy by the local police and then  had to arrange according to their wills. I was not able to lay my hands on any cartridge for years as the memories were to hard. I only kept the proparts I was involved with anyway, and the rest was auctioned. The company was bought by Philippe Luder of Melbourne who was well known to John and Brian and they felt that their name would be in good hands and stayed in OZ. I incognito visited the company to see if they follow the will and ideal of the Garrott bros and I was very pleased that they really do their best to live up to the Garrott bros name. Though the current P88 is different to the late P88, it still uses the same body and some identical design features, and it is fair to make the best out of the currently availeable parts, which I very much believe they do. I warmly would recommend a try. I am not in any way anymore related to Garrott bros, but remember my family each and every miunte of my life. Thank you
Dear Halcro: ++++++ " I would like to think that the choice of electronics was not the defining characteristic in extracting the worth of either cartridge technology... " +++++

I can't agree more with you. Downunder is stiucky to the idea of LOMC/tubes and MM/SS as its best couple. I discussed with him in the past about supporting what you posted.

I still support that the MM/MI tracking cartridge habilities makes a difference on quality performance for the better against its LOMC counterpart. Better tracking habilities means almost always lower a lot lower distortions that gives near neutral performance against more colored performance with higher distortions ina LOMC cartridge due to more problems on tracking cartridge habilities.

According to Downunder IMHO if one electronics kind of technology makes a better match to MM/MI or to LOMC then both electronics designs are wrong. A good electronics design must add the less and lose the less with absolutely accuracy to makes any cartridge kind to shows at its best and IMHO if one each kind of electronics can't do it then it is because failures somewhere in the electronics designs.

Seems to me there are no valid factros/parameters to say LOMC is matched better with tubes electronics but for the contary due to the very low output of MC cartridge the " natural " couple to a MC cartridge is the very low noise active high gain characteristic on the SS electronics, don't you think?

The other important part on what we think on the whole subject has to be with: how " euphonic " are biased our ears/brain?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: ++++ " ome of us are quite sensitive to high frequency ringing and compression in solid state phono stages. " +++++

again, this depends on the SS electronics design. IMHO any SS good design plain and simple does not shows that " ringing and comprression... " and if did then there are somewhere failures in its design but not because is a SS design.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Fleib/Lespier: My Accuphase AC-2 is on the " road " to Axel so I have not on hand for the moment. This is my second sample where the first one alredy sold.

I think that Lespier is right and the AC-2 comes with tubular sapphire cantilever. My confusion was because in the AC-2 the cantilever is not transparent/clear as the ones in the B&O or ADC cartridges that comes with sapphire cantilevers too.

Now, I never had on hand the Genesis 1000 ( I send directly to Axel from the seller. ) that you say was designed/builded at the same place/designer than the AC-2, maybe I'm wrong but: the Genesis 1000 comes with Ruby ( similar as sapphire material. )cantilever? or is only a misunderstanding from my part.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Halcro: +++++ " And if you ever do obtain one of the great MMs........remember that switching from it to a LOMC will always sound initially impressive.
It's switching back the other way that the truth is revealed IMHO... " ++++

agree, but I think that Downunder really likes or likes more that what heposted the MM/MI alternative because he said here:

+++++ " however I have no desire to take these two mm's off the table. They sound superb. " ++++++

Btw, Downunder if you like the AT-25 then you have to find out the AT-24 that's its stand alone ( similar model. ) twin that gives you a better quality performance level.
I'm with you on the greatness of the stand alone P100CMK4 really a must to have/experience. The problem with the Halcro MK3 is more on its headshell integrated design ( that degrade the cartridge signal. ) than on the MK3 version.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Banquo363: ++++" Due to its greatness IMHO is a must to have at least two samples of the MF-200. " ++++

my meaning there is to have the original MF-200 along a MF-300 ( same cartridge motor but lower price. ) where this one can be up-graded by Axel trying to achieve a next step level over the already great MF-200!!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Thanks Henry for the "missing link "post. There is a lot of information to digest in that post, both technical and emotional. Sometimes more is said in a few paragraphs than a whole book.

Breaking the Grace F8/F9 comparison to listen to the Garrott.

Thanks,
Danny
Dear Halcro: That " missing link " is really informative and in many ways confirm not only what J.Carr shared with us about aluminum cantilevers but what Fleib posted about Gyger stylus shape on an answer to Nandric.

Thank you to share with us this great " link ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: I think that maybe you can help me: as you know I bought a Dynavector Karat Nova 17D/13D? but now that I see it I can say for sure that the cantilever in my sample has not not only the 1.3mm length but neither 1.7mmm but a larger cantilever so my cartridge sample is not on original shape about.

I will send it to Axel to a modification and my question to you is what can I ask to Axel: to fix with a 1.7mm or 1.3mm cantilever or leave to Axel the choice about?

Thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Downunder: +++++ " The Vitus, ARC, Aesthetix, Ypsilon, Boulder and Allnic do not offer capacitance loading. " +++++

with some of this phono stages my take is this:

some people buy expensive very expensive audio items as a status symbol more than with quality performance level on their minds. For these kind of people ( that I respect all of them. ) staus is their main priority and obviously status means expensive/top LOMC cartridges, for these people MM/MI cartridges is an " insult " only to mentioned and obviously the manufacturers take care on what the customers needs here.

If we take the Vitus phono stage that has a retail price of 60K only for the phono stage where you need other 60K for the line preamp: 120K!!!! we can confirm it through the M.Fremer review where he stated:

++++ " No alternate capacitive loadings are offered, but really—how many buyers will use an MM cartridge with a $60,000 phono preamp? " +++++

obviously that here exist a " stupid "/very low knowledge on the whole MM/MI subject and no one cares about.

This Vitus is IMHO a " shame " of 60K/120K product even for LOMC cartridges. How is possible that for that kind of money the inverse RIAA eq. deviation comes down from 200 hz at 0.15db and goes down to 20 hz at 0.75db !!!!!!!!!

and even that MF reviewed something like this: the greatness of the century over anything he heard ever. If a person can't detect that huge deviations then is only because is deaf or there is some " interest " down there with the audio item manufacturer.

Anyway, do you think that a Vitus owner cares on that specific RIAA subject?, certainly not what cares is that other people can see what he has/own.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
The typical Vitus owner does not know what a "db" is, and if he does see that number, he thinks 0.75 db is a very small error. He does know what $60,000 is and that spending it on a phono stage should guarantee perfection. For Fremer himself, there is no excuse. He clearly does know his stuff. I would posit that if one takes the old HP/TAS stance that listening tests and subjective opinions are all that count, then one can ignore inaccurate RIAA equalization. We all know that imperfections in one part of the reproduction chain can serendipitously compensate for imperfections elsewhere, so as to give a copacetic result. If one would give MF the benefit of the doubt, it may be that he quoted those RIAA specs so as to point out to the cognoscenti the technical shortcomings of the Vitus, even while he praised the sound (or maybe that was John Atkinson's measurement).

Have you read MF's comparison of the Caliburn to the Onedof turntable? $150,000 for a turntable with no tonearm that comes with a $5-rubber mat.... a rubber mat!!!! MF did a decent job showing that the rubber mat had to go, but there is no excuse for the maker to have supplied it in the first place.
Hopefully someone on this thread bought the mf 300 stylus I saw on ebay last night ($45!) and is now gone. I didn't think about the possibility of sending to Axel as Raul suggests.

Dear Nandric: I have no friends except my cartridges and I fear some would die of envy if I put the Astatic on a pedestal; so, I refrain from conducting the experiment you outline.

Dear Jim: I'll probably be getting some Ikeda silver leads soon and I'll let you know the results. Right now I'm using copper litz. BTW, I used mine with the stylus guard off. Be careful! I nearly took the cantilever right off when trying to remove the guard.
Dear Lewm: Yes, who cares about on a 60K audio item: he don't bought because of accuracy.

Was J.Atkinson whom made the measurements.

Again, yes there is noe xcuse for that $ 5.00 rubber-mat.

About the audio system owners that bought$$$$ mainly because status is one of the reasons why exist very expensive products that can't justify through quality performance level those very high prices.

When I started to bought " dozens " of LOMC cartridges my primary target is to have only the top ( high price ) cartridge models does not cares how good or not were. Then I learned but I invest a lot of money to learn.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Banquo363, the terror of removing that guard! Although I have a spare stylus I think I'll play it safe and continue with the guard in place ;)

FWIW I'm thoroughly enjoying silver leads (SME) with mine, preceded by some DIY silver ones, and initially copper Litz.
Dear Banquo 363, I bought the MF 300 stylus as a spare for my MF 200. This seller may have some more: phonoed@aol.com

Regards,
Hi Raul, My memory was faulty concerning the AC2. As I mentioned, I never owned one. Sapphire tube + line contact it is, thanks to Lespier. The Genesis 1000 is diamond coated boron tube + Microridge. Nakatsuka developed cartridges using what he thought, the best materials available at that time.

The AC2 was developed in late '70s when shibata and line contact were best available, I believe. The AC3 was early '80s and had micro type. The Monsters were mid/late '80s and both the 1000 and 2000 have boron tube/Microridge. This seemed to carry on to ZYX, also Nakatsuka. I believe one ZYX had boron tube, but now discontinued? I think now they either have solid boron or diamond cantilever with Microridge.
Regards,

Tracing this history of his LOMC, it seems all the generators are similar, as I mentioned. Sapphire or boron tube are unavailable, perhaps Axel will know what's best.
Dear Henry, An interesting story about Garrot brothers indeed. When we discussed cantilevers and styli I mentioned this 'stubborn' Swiss Reto Luigi Andreoli and
his 'deviant' opinion reg. styli and cantilevers. He become known with his Magic diamond LOMC. What I deed not mention because there was no connection nor any reason is that he spend 2 years by Garrot's to learn the trade. So,
it seems, that ''Luigi's opinions'' are actually learned by
Garrots while his carts are made in 'Garrots tradition'. Ie
to understand Andreoli one need to know his 'Garrots past'.
When you posted your 'euphoric' report about Axel's retip
of your FR-7 and the Virtuoso I informed Axel with the remark 'Halcro wrote an ode about your craftsmanship' . I just recommended to him to read 'the ode' about Garrots with the remark that he will find some interesting info in the ode about his own trade.
Regards,
Dear Nikola,
This is too much of a coincidence?
Could your Andreoli be the actual author of that article?
Glad you enjoyed it.
Regard
Halcro/Nandric - back in the 80's I was sending about 10-15 cartridges per month to Garrots for retipping, both old and new - usually for a microscanner tip, mostly Koetsu's. I suspect that like any cartridge designer they could probably tell what a cartridge would sound like from the construction, not just cantilever, tip, but also coil configuration etc. Koetsu's were usually fettled internally as well, although they did not talk about it too much. I know one fix was to glue down the "guts" internally as the stone bodied Koetsu's internals were held in with paper shims. They considered Koetsu's poorly built and would remedy the issues as they saw them.
In terms of other cartridges they would usually come back to me with recommendations on tips and cantilevers. They refused to put microscanner tips on some cartridges.
One example I had was the Denon 103 - recommended weinz parabolic tip with a hybrid cantilever of boron & aluminium.
I do think that they were artisans that used their knowledge of cartridge construction to produce rebuilt cartridges to their preference, and they were fantastic - both MM and MC.
Dear Halcro, Even more 'coincidental' is the fact that this
Andreoli is a kind of 'intellectual omnivore'. As if there
is no scientific field unfamiliar to him. But his comprehensive
article is writen in German and very technical so
I was not able to understand many details. I posted his
article to Dertonarm and Thuchan in hope that they would
write some comment but both seem to have left our forum.
Thuchan wrote to me that his reason is the 'new site'(aka
'owners') while my dear Daniel is not responding to my
emails. Incomprehensible considering the fact that the person
in casu (some Serbian) is such a nice guy.
BTW the info about Andreoli and Garrots was from some of
his friends . I have no idea if the (moving) story that you posted is writen by Andreoli.

Regards,
Dear Henry, I hate to admit that somebody else is right.
By rereading the Garrot story I was able to recognize many
details which I rembember from Andreoli's article. Then
his mentioning of Switzerland , the aluminum cantilevers
with pressure fitted diamonds (aka 'no glue'),etc.,etc,.
My confusion or , better, uncertainity, was caused by those
two years that he was assumed to have spend with Garrots.
There is this 'devil' and 'details' again. If one assume that proposition A is true then ,logicaly, some other proposition B can't be true, etc. Now I am nearly 100% sure
that the story is writen by Andreoli. I already admired his
mind but now I also admire his human character.

Regards,
I have a MC head amp built by Rito Andreoli under his electronics brand Blue Audio Systems Design, called The Star, it's the best SS step up I've heard, way more transparent than the Klyne 7 I had.