Dear Raul, As the Technics EPC-300 has an elliptical stylus(albeit on a titanium cantilever), I figured that a used example would be an interesting candidate a line contact retip by Axel. Perhaps this will take it to "better than new" performance level.
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.
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.
13,665 responses Add your response
Hello Raul, I hope when you get around to the Acutex 420 you will enjoy it more, but...The 420, on my system, is a bold performer. It does not always get out of the way of the music but adds its own twist/pace. I do not think it will pass your total neutrality test. Again, I hope I am wrong and you enjoy. On another note, I am back to the Nagatron 9600, and still think, conical stylus or not, that it is one fine cartridge. Have you revisited yours, or upgraded the stylus? Mine is very neutral to my ears. It handles surface noise so well, I wonder if it is a conical. What would a triangle stylus look like? Did you or anyone on this forum look at it through a microscope? Also, I picked up a Sony xl 44l. Now all I need a MC phono amp. |
Regards, Raul: Thanks for your measured response. Was there a fight? "maybe because our music references are different or because I like other kind of distortions and not those ones." Played bass & contra-alto clarinet with symphonic orchestra & operatic ensemble for several years. Every stage offered different acoustics, the hall & number of seats filled had an influence too. Same for studios, a direct to disc & something from Booker T. Jones replay with a noticeable difference. The effects of resonance and pressurization are well described if one finds ones' self seated in front of the tympani, oboe, bassoon & french horn to the left. There's a contrast in the experience heard (and felt) when sitting in aisle eight or the "heavens", which can also be interesting. No "Pro" experience but there are, reputedly, differences with mics & their placement. When listening to a recording I'm sometimes aware of this. "References" necessarily imply qualifications, in real life there are variables to be dealt with. Your comment should be, and is, appreciated. Peace, |
Dear Dgarretson: Agree, the EPC-300 is a candidate for Axel and yes " will take it to better than new ". Today I take one step forward with all vintage cartridges and is to re-tip it as fast as money permit it. No one of several cartridges where I made it disapoint me. I already give all the effort and time to hear and test it in original condition and the time to move on is now. I can't be sticky with " past sucess/experiences " I like to explore and experience " new things ". I just bought two LOMC and two MM/MI cartridges. Denon DL-H5LC, Micro Seiki Lc-80W, Pionner PC-400 and Fidelity Research FR-6SE. All these will go to Axel after I make a " fast " test on it especialy with the FR where I want to know /confirm what Halcro heard and reported with this cartridge. That LOMC Denon was an unexpected finding because was designed for the Asia market and in its time a high price model. The MS LOMC is a very well regarded performer not easy to find out and I think I was lucky to put my hands on it. We will see. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Acman3: Certainly the Nagatron 9600 is a great design and can compete with the best of the best. My sample is waiting on line to go for re-tip to recovery the fenomenal " status " I now the cartridge can shows. I think we are lucky to own it. Btw, that Sony XL44L is just great after the Axel's touch but even in original condition is very good, you will see when have the opportunity to hear it. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Raul, I'm wondering what arm you're intending to run the FR-6SE on as it is rather low compliance for a MM and so sounds best in a heavy, controlled arm? It sounds very much better in my FR-66s than any of my 'lesser' arms.....which should be no surprise given that Fidelity Research would have carefully matched its performance for their arms? It will possibly sound better at your 100K Ohms loading than my 60K loading and a fair bit of capacitance helps with the highs? I suspect that this cartridge will benefit greatly from Axel's 'touch'.....and look forward to your reports? Regards Henry |
Dear Halcro: Thank's. I don't have the 66 but the 64 and some other high mass tonearms ( SAEC. ) and my AT 1503 with a 18grs. headshell gives a " healthy " 40grs on effective mass, so I think I can meet the cartridge needs even I own three different 18grs. headshells and always I can use my own tonearm design and I will. After your experiences I was looking for this FR 6SE cartridge and I have good expectations on it, we will see. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: Almost all the months in this year I was hearing either MM/MI and LOMC " new " cartridges and left the " past " top of the line cartridges. Two days ago, after more than a year, I mounted again my Technics EPC100CMK4 that I never tested in my today " new "/improved analog systemand I'm amaze again as the first time at : What a high high quality level this cartridge can shows!!! As good as the Goldring G800 or the Astatic MF 200 or even the Clearaudio Virtuoso and the Sony XL44L perform the refinement level on the Technics sounds is not matched for any of the other cartridges. Refinements that you can be aware only if you test it through the Technics. It is not easy for me try to explain it because in some way is something " new " for me that I heard it in some ways only through my LOMC reference cartridge. It is not that is more transparent or dynamic or better frequency extremes or inner detail/layering and the like but I think that is more on how handle the music transients and the better definition of those transients and its harmonics. The kind of the cartridge work with music transients gives to the Technics performance a " complete " performance as we hear it on a live event where nothing be missing. It is a subtle " hearing " but at the level that I'm hearing this subtle word means a lot because is not easy to surpass any of the quality level performance of those cartridges named here. This Technics " new " experience tell me that I have not to forget all those " past " gems that I own and that I hve to listed again to some of them. After this cartridge experience I think I was totally " mad " the day that I decided to put on sale and sold it, fortunately I was lucky enough and the buyer repent of what he bought and I recovery the EPC100CMK4. I think I will return to some of the " old " cartridges I tested over the years including those modest/humble Ortofon M20 Supers. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Raul, "All these will go to Axel after I make a " fast " test on it" Perhaps the most important thing I learned since reading your posts over the past few years is the potential for fine tuning any cartridge by not only VTA and VTF but also matching with tonearm, headshell, and loading. Given this range of parameters, how can you make a "fast test" with any meaning? Even for cartridges where you conduct your more "normal" test/review, do you keep notes for preferred set up with each one? You have auditioned an almost unbelievable number of cartridges over the past few years and I don't know how you would keep track of so many otherwise. |
Dear Nandric: You know that I have in " great " place the Acutex M320 ( flat nose. ), for me is a fantastic performer and due to your " insistence " to find out that stylus replacement and some other persons speaking on the cartridge I just mounted again and confirm its " pedigree ": just fantastic!!!. I owned three cartridge samples, I sold one of them and today I own the one I'm enjoying and a second sample with an after market stylus. You don't said it but I assume that your sample came with and after market stylus ( right?. ) and what I want to tell you is that along other cartridges I will send that cartridge sample to Axel for an up-grade and to compare it against my original version. The original is so good that for the first time I can't be sure if the up-graded one could beats it. The thing is that if you can't put your hands in the NOS Acutex stylus replacement then I can share with you ( and all ) if the up-graded is worth to do it. This up-grade could take some time for now because Axel has more than ten cartridges from me and I don't want to send him any more till I receive what he has. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: Nandric posted: ++++ " I am sure that Lew is willing to give Raul a good bottle of wine in exchange for the disclosure of his new reference (MC) cart. " +++++ when I tested in deep this LOMC reference cartridge I decided not to disclose it till I can compare it not only against other"today "LOMC I own/owned or heard it, against the best MM/MI samples but against other vintage LOMC that for any reason I never owned or listened but that I know were top performers. I had very clear what to look for and suddenly started to appear one after one through ebay/agon ads and I started to bought it and sended directly to Axel. When I received and tested the Sony XL44L I really was and am exicited due to its first rate behavior against that LOMC reference and against any today LOMC that I already own or heard it. No it not surpass my reference one but is near it. I don't receive yet around 10+ vintage LOMC ones that I know will be " surprisinly " great performers. My today LOMC project did not born two weeks ago but several months ago after my Ortofon MC2000 experiences, yes this is my today cartridge reference and I hope that when I receive all those vintage LOMC cartridge don't lost very fast its reference status, I don't want to have a new reference cartridge every single week ( could be???? ) and that's why I did not disclose it till I have a " complete " tested scenario " but I think nothing is wrong to share with you which cartridge is that one reference. My MC2000 sample is not the original one but has the VdH touch: boron cantilever/VDH stylus against the original tapered aluminum/line contact design. Yes, performs better than the original. This is not an easy cartridge by any standards, has a " crazy " low low output: 0.05mv, other than my Phonolinepreamp I know no other active high gain phono stage ( obviously I dis not heard all the phono stages out there ao could be other that can do it with no noise. ) that can handle with out noise and I mean it: no noise. The cartridge is not only a " pain in the ass " low output design but a high compliance ( 20 cu. ) cartridge with a weight around 11grs. Why Ortofon designed this cartridge with those characteristics? is something out of my mind but certainly they knew what they did it. In its time this cartridge was listened almost only through the Ortofon dedicated SUT and even in this way the noise always was a " problem " . The cartridge was a reference one for some reviewers as J. Gordon Holt to name some one. The Ortofon MC2000 shares with other top cartridge performers ( Acutex M320 ( flat nose. ), Astatic MF200, Goldring G800, Sony XL44L, etc, etc. ) one superlative cartridge characteristic: great tracking habilities, it is delicious to listen the MC2000. I'm question my self right from the begining: why or how is it that a cartridge signal that needs to pass for more phono stages can outperform cartridges ( like the MM/MIs or higher output LOMC ones. ) that did not?. Is the MC2000 design a near " perfect " one?: I can't say it for sure???? Btw, my latest LOMC purchase is the Lyra Clavis Da Capo and I want to try it because I owned and sold it when I bought the Helikon. Today I know that not only the Helikon but the Skala and the Titan or Olympos ( I heard it all those Lyras. )can't make many things that the Da Capo can ( as I remember it. ). I bought it with broken cantilever so this permit me at once an " up grade " and I hope that my expectations on this Lyra can be achieved, we will see. Ok gentlemans as you can read there is no secrest about my MC2000 reference as with this subject I always am willing to share with all of you all my audio experiences. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Raul, I don't care what kind of 'meat', to use the butcher metaphor, is in the 'tail' of my styli. There is no way to deduce anything from the MM 'kinds'. The 'magnetic flux' by Astatic is as good for me as the moving- magnet or iron in the other carts. But I am not sure about the 'tail' by the aftermarket styli. I fear that those may have the 'devil tail'. Whatever Axel can do he needs this 'stylus tail' to put and glue some of his cantilever/stylus combo's in it. The fear is always connected with the lack of knowledge and in my case this the case with those 'tails' or tubes in the stylus holder. That is why I am willing to wait till I can get the original stylus for my (poor)M 320. But if Herr Professor or Fleib or both think that the 'tail' is not important I can get the after market kind for 19 Euro on ebay.de and ask Axel to put some of those 'exotic' cantilever/stylus combo in there. Regards, |
Dear Storyboy: It is not very clear about because some of the Empire patents refered to IM/MI type but with out any sign of which models. Now, the person that makes the cartridge data " bible " on VE is some one that knows a lot on cartridges and he made a distinction on the Empire MM and the Empire IM/MI and he decided that the 4000 and the 1000 are MM. In the other side Empire was very enfatic that with the 4000s the load capacitance must be very low because the HF are way affected and normaly this happen with MM where the IM/MI are a lot less suceptible on load capacitance. IMHO to be absolutely sure wich type are those Empire models we have to ask Axel when my sample return or we have to open a cartridge and see how was designed. In the mean time to say if it is MM or IM/MI is not 100% for sure. Thank's for your post. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Regards, Storyboy, Raul: "A sampling of full-frequency stereo recordings that provide a true test of stereo-system performance": The Forty Minute Raga/Ali Akbar Khan. Johnny Puelo and his Harmonica Gang, Vol. 2. Switched-On Bach. Time Out/Dave Brubeck. Abraxas/Santana. Hair, soundtrack. Pearl/J. Joplin. Oliver/original cast. Parsley Sage Rosemary & Thyme/Simon-Garfunkle. Trombones Unlimited/Liberty label. (LST-7449, if you've just got to have this one). From the accompanying brochure included with my 1000ZE/X stylus. Not dated but early '70s seems about right from the referenced recordings. Also, "15 degree vertical tracking angle". By RIAA agreement 20-22 degrees was adopted in 1974 (IIRC). Stylus is adaptable to Empire 9xx, 2xxx, (some) 4xxx & at least one 8xxx series cart, an X/VE. These AFAIK are moving magnet design. Now for the good part: "Exclusive induced field moving magnet stylus". "Who is on first." Peace, |
Regards, Nikola: Generic styli=caveat emptor. Quality is "all over the map". For the generics, VTF is given anywhere between 1.5 & 5.0gm downforce, the quality (and condition) of the suspension may be somewhat questionable. This vendor's information is (typically) accurate: http://www.turntableneedles.com/Needle-707-DE_p_1318.html. There are other references to this assembly's (Pfansteil #707-DE) similarity to the Piezo Y-308, I believe this was discussed on this thread a year or so ago. Another vendor: http://www.thevoiceofmusic.com/catalog/part_detail.asp?PNumberBase=707&SearchType=MfgNameNeedles&MfgName=Piezo&Categories= The 4-digit code (4707) preceding the description (DE -> Diamond Elliptical, 707-D7 would be a diamond 0.7 conical) usually indicates generic, 3-digits (707), OEM. For a fresh assembly from a reputable source, search JICO. They'll have the Piezo stylus as well as an offering for several of the cross-referenced carts from the above list. No association with the above vendors. Good luck! Peace, |
Dear Professor, 'caveat emptor' is , alas, my conclusion connected with those styli you mentioned. I have bought 3 or so of those a year ago and they all are worthless for the purpose :M 320. This is also not the answer to my question. So I need to rephrase my question. When we judge the looks of a girl we are, I assume, interested in both sides: the front and the behind. In the context of the styli there was already much attention for the 'front side' or (the kinds of) the cantilever/stylus combo's. Those however are not in the void of air but must also have a 'behind'. I myself must confess to be interested in both sides of both , uh, domains. Assuming that the producers pay so much attention to the front side of the stylus construction one may assume that this also apply for the back side of the same construction. I observed this connection by the AKG carts by which one can see both sides very clearly. That is also my reason to be sceptical about the 'wonders' Axel can achive by ,as you called them, 'generic styli' or , even better, 'generic styli holders'. Regards, |
Messrs. The consensus here seems to be that original OEM styli are by far the best. In regard to aftermarket and generic styli; are some brands and/or makers preferable to others? Obviously they cannot all be the same. Did Astatic make better replacement styli than Phanstiel, or vice versa? I know that Jico is highly regarded now but what about NOS replacements from different makers? There were many companies making and selling styli during the golden age of vinyl, surely a few stand out as superior. I had read somewhere that Astatic made OEM styli for Empire, maybe or maybe not. However, some of the stylus makers must have been OEM as well as aftermarket suppliers. There does not seem to be much information available about the replacement stylus makers and it seems to be a subject worth exploration. John |
Regards, Nikola: The replacement styli from JICO seem to fall outside the category of "generic" and have pretty much gained the confidence of the audiophile community. Offered are two Akai assemblies of the Piezo YM-308 family. Variations for Kenwood, Piezo & several other brands, the Akai RS120E is $35, the remainder list for $22 to $25, if that's any indication of specs. All are conical. If compatible with your Acutex body, any of these would be of fresh manufacture. JICO is responsive to email queries, compliance values would be a consideration. There is a good probability the "V-M Audio" (link in previous post) listing for the stylus *707-DE is an OEM Piezo replacement, identified as an an elliptical. If so (the several OEM styli I've purchased there have been exactly as listed), this might be an interesting assembly with the potential for acceptable performance. If the description is accurate, it would be anticipated as the equivalent of an M310E, if there is such an animal. I've found the vendor responsible, well informed and quick to respond. Considering the influence of the cantilever/stylus on performance it should go without mention that what is heard is a Pfansteil 707-DE, or a JICO YM-308, not the Acutex M320STR-111, a modified nude Shibata. If my objective were an Axel M320ML-Ruby (whatever), and were certain of the fit, the fresh suspension of the JICO assembly would be a first choice for Axel's delicate attentions. Caveat emptor is still in effect, there's no assurance the fitment of the Piezo YM-308 assembly is correct for the Acutex M3xx body. Perhaps someone else can offer advice? Or, PayPal Gary at V-M Audio $12.00 & then you're just a click away from being the authority. :) Again, good luck & Peace, |
Dear Professor & Acman, My metaphor about the girls 'behind' has, I think, more 'supstance' than I originaly thought. Fleib already noticed that the most new MC carts have the same (thick) boron cantilever from whatever supplyer. This I called the 'front side' fixation. That is to say our attention for the styli. Well I noticed Raul's ,say, new orientation focused on the 'behind' of the styli. Thanks to Axel he can choose whatever cantilever/stylus combo he likes so his attention moved to what he calls the 'motor' of an cart. I prefer the expression 'generator'. I assume that he discovered that many 'old generators' are as good or even better than the new one and is consequently buying them as much as his shares in the Mexican oil industry allow him to do. Some of those go linea recta to Axel, the other get only some provisional test and than follow the same travel direction. As is usually the case with his recommentations I am somehow always too late. Those Ortofon MC 2000, for example, were everywhere just one month ago but are now nowhere to find. I even checked the Serbian ebay with no luck. Regards, |
Dear Nandric: I'm still waiting for the Axel answer, he has one of mi Goldring G800 samples with an after market stylus/cantilever and I want to send him my Acutex M320 second sample with an AMSC. Sooner or latter we could have the answer from him. On the ortofon MC 2000 side be carefuly before you buy this cartridge due to its very low output: 0.05mv, that's a challenge for " any one ". Be sure that your Phono stage can handel it straight through a non-noise high gain active circuit that IMHO is the only option for the cartridge can shows you its greatness. I own two MC-2000 samples na d the original one is going to Axel best and top of the line stylus/cantilever he " plays ", IMHO the cartridge deserve the best I can make for it about. Btw, I wish I be a designer/expert on LOMC cartridge to find out/know why this old Ortofon MC-2000 IMHO outperforms the today very well regarded Ortofon A-90 and all other Ortofon LOMC that were designed after it. Well, all other LOMC I heard it too. I own/owned all those Ortofon models but the Windfeld and the A-90 that right now I'm enjoying for a few hours comparing it against the vintage one. If you have the " right " analog rig then the MC-2000 is The Cartridge. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Raul, In some sense you got your gold mine in Germany while Axel got his in Mexico. No wonder you are both very fond of each other. But you are not explicit enough about the cantilevers/styli combo's which you ordered by Axel. I am familiar only with two of those. The pressure fitted line contact in aluminum cantilever and the boron/ nude elliptical. The first mentioned one is, as we all know, exceptional. Fleib may be interested to know that the boron one is much thiner than what he observed as usual in the present day MC carts. I have no idea how many producers of those parts there are but quess that thereare only few. Consequently the cart producers can use only those that are actually produced. So Axel must have some NOS stock of both: cantilevers and styli which are not produced at present. I noticed, for example,the Gyger II which is not in producton for some time while the Gyger company or this part of the Gyger company may be already exit. One also rarely sees beryllium cantilevers at present. Deed you try other combo's than aluminum/ line contact and what is your impresson about those? BTW while I know that you are not impressed with Basis Exclusive phono-pre I am because I own this one. I hope of course that this one can manage the Ortofon 2000 but I need to find one first to find out. Regards, |
Dear nandric: Let me re-read all the Axel orders to know exactly what he did and is doing with all my cartridges because are so many that I have not on memory, let you know when that happen. Btw, I own so many cartridges/stylus replacement ( in good and bad shape. ) that really don't know what I have or don't remember if something I own or not. Things happen that yesterday looking for a cartridge I found out the original Acutex M320 stylus replacement with bent cantilever and this was the one that came in my first M320 sample, I bought the LP Gear replacement and just forgot I have that one. So now I will send the M320 to Axel with the original stylus replacement to fix it! Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Acman3: You are right about the Nagatron 9600. Even that is not a great tracker as its little brother 350/360 it performs really really good and as you said: dead neutral, shinning both frequency extremes that put the right frame for the frequency range in between. Even that our cartridges does not came with the original stylus replacement but with a down side Nagatron spheric/conical??? stylus in an aluminum cantilever is a top performer better that what I remember the first time I tested. I had the Nagatron 9600 on line to goes to Axel and after my today listening excercise I'm in a hard call: could be wise to send it to Axel for a change on cantilever/stylus when the cartridge performs so good in its today status?, unfortunatelly I don't have a second sample. The original Nagatron 9600 was designed with a boron catilever and a quasi-line contact stylus. This seems a lot better " characteristics " that what we have now. What could be your take about?, thank's. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dover: Certainly the T2000 SUT put on its signature even that was designed in " specific " for the MC-2000 cartridge. I owned for years and used with other cartridges too. That SUT impede that the MC2000 can shows you everything it can do. My preference is for an active high gain stage. Both ways the MC 2000 is a challenge to any analog rig and this is a little " unfortunate " becvause this quality performance level must be for any one but Ortofon designed in that " wrong " way ". In its time the cartridge was a market success that the same market asked Ortofon to design a same MC 2000 with a higher output and Ortofon did it with the MC 2000MK2 that came in a beautiful white ceramic body and with 0.125mv on output and with a " heavy " degraded quality performance level against the original MC 2000. So, Ortofon intented but the " magic " was in the MC 2000 original design. Why?, I really like to know it. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: The stylus drag subject and its influence in what we heard were discussed on several threads and I found out this post that gives a " scientific "/real measures about and that seems to me that as the post said: whom can hear that " microscopic " speed deviation?, could any one of you?: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1222902620&openflup&112&4#112 Btw, I just received my digital manual tacomether and I will start to make measures on my TT speed habilities on accuracy and % time deviations. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: Just arrived the Azden LOMC GM-P5L that I bought on ebay. Beautiful made cartridge that's a P-mount design but that with a clever " characteristic " we can use the cartridge with out a normal P-mount adaptor as any 1/2" cartridge ( I will see if that " characteristic " helps for I can use my other P-mount Azden cartridges. ). I don't heard it yet but I'm excited for what I see and what I read in the cartridge manual: boron cantilever with line contact stylus and 0.2mv output level, 10hz to 60khz on frequency response and from its frequency chart I can see that not only has a flat response over the frequency range but 36+ dbs of separation at 1khz. Something " weird " is that the manual states that the cartridge likes between 100pf to 300pf on load capacitance, this is the first time I see a load capacitance spec on a LOMC cartridge and I have to ask any of you: WHY? Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Acman3: During the last 10-12 days that I'm testing different cartridges I left running my Acutex 420 for it has 60+ playback hours and test to evaluate if its performance really change for the better mainly in the hf range. The " call " for the Acutex was and is very hard ( for say the least " ) against the Nagatron " 9600 " performance and against the M320/LPM320. Simple as this: no contest, my opinion on the 420 quality performance did not changed a lot on what I posted months ago. It is true that the cartridge performance imrpoves a little with more playback hours but IMHO what was wrong with is still wrong. Is hard to think that the 420 was designed for the same people that designed the M320/LPM320s. Thw 420 is a non-accuarte/non-neutral cartridge with higher distorions that I can or accustom to accept. Many of that " inner detail " that Frogman posted exist but is more distorted that with other better cartridges where with the 420 I losted definition and clear detail presentation not only that the layering is there but that that layering be really clear with a truly different output level. The other cartridges have that on spades. Nagatron side again: I'm running my 9600 with a VTF 2.1grs, could you tell me the VTF on your set up?, thank's. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Hello Raul, I am currently listening yo the Acutex 315 lpm so I know what you mean when comparing the 420 against the other Acutex 3xx models. Still ,I enjoy the Acutex 420. Also Frogman and others are saying the Acutex 420 likes linear arms, so you may need to get another arm to fully hear it. I was somewhere around 1.8 to 2.0 Vtf on the Nagatron 9600 with a few mistracks even at that weight. I am with you on messing up a good thing by changing the stylus on the Nagatron, but I would like to hear it with a better stylus so I am inclined to upgrade it. I purchased a Nagatron 1460ie stylus from Garage-a records to see if I could at least upgrade the stylus to epiliptical and the 1460ie stylus has the same blue mark as the one on the 9600, so maybe it has a 1460ie stylus as the seller stated . To replace the stylus you would need to transplant the shank. I am not going to do it because as you said, it probably cannot be replaced if I mess up I will let a professional add a line contact and boron cantilever to get close to the original. |
While we're onto Acutexes again, I'll add that I'm running in an M415 after 100 hours with the M420. The 420 was very addictive. Like most addictions the stimulation may be due to an additive substance. In this case(rest assured for purpose of analogy only) the substance is more hydroponically organic than lysergically synthetic. The 415 is not too far off the 420. I'm using the 415 stylus in a 420 body. Oddly, in contrast to the 420, the 415 stylus likes the tonearm high up in back, at least during break-in. My M320 has been with Axel for about a month. Hopefully Raul's and my pieces will return soon for comparison. |
Dear Dgarretson, Axel is one man company working for one 'big spender' from Mexico. We need to wait till the Mexican reaches the bottom of his (oil?) source. I intend to post to Axel two carts on Monday but am very reluctant to ask any question about the duration. Anyway thanks to you I can estimate the duration for + one month, or so, from Monday. |