Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas
Hi Raul,

I have been meaning to contact you about your upcomming Acutex reviews. How is it progressing? I am quite interested in hearing how you compare the 420 to the rest of the field. Especially how and where you would rank it when compared to my top 2 cartridges, the AT20SS and the Virtuoso.
Hi Nandric,

++++they can (ex)change the whole cantilver/stylus combo for much less money++++

The exchange price is about 1/2 of the full price, or what it would cost you to send your cartridge to SoundSmith for their best ($450), cantiliver/stylus replacement! Concidering the SS cheapest version ($150), is a improvement over the original, it would be smarter to send Peter the cartridge instead of having it replaced. Of course, you would have to decide what's it worth, the waiting of 3 or 4 months for its return from SS?
Hello Nandric, It's much the same with the CA carts. Because there is no grip color to designate status, there's the little gold faceplate. Mine has a V, so I know just how special it is. When the faceplate fell off, I glued it back on right away. Alas, the Maestro has a (you guessed it) black faceplate, so it's obviously the top one.

It's interesting that CA doesn't say anything about the stylus. On Musical Surrounding's web site (US importer) some of the specs differ from CA. They say that they all have a tip r/R = 5/80um. I think CA used to specify different tips. I know they used to have a fancy name for the Maestro tip, but now they only say boron cantilever.

The problem with replacing the stylus is finding one worthy enough. I think the Jico AT-95 shibata or vivid line are pretty good. Any aluminum cantilevered modern one could be transplanted, or 3400 series P-mount styli can be substituted. Right now I'm experimenting with a tip from a 92E. This seems to be about the same quality as the orig? only with high cu. There are also other P-mounts, some better with line contact or even micro styli. I have it on a low mass arm, a modified Sonus Formula 4. It sounds pretty good. I have a 140LC, another high cu stylus that I didn't really like on another cart. Maybe I'll try transplanting that. The 7V sounds pretty good on there. That's another transplant though. The problem is the AT 3400 series is generally budget carts. I still think a boron or other exotic cantilever w/micro would be the ultimate. BTW, there probably are tolerance differences between models.
Regards,
Dear Professor, There is this 'if' in logic. The first one
is: if the premise is not true than the deduced statments
are also not true. The second is: all the premisses need to
be true. I was not aware that the 'colour of the grip' was
relevant for my assumptions. If the 'colour of the grip' is
actually relevant than I obviously missed (at least) one
of the premisses. However if the 'generator' (aka 'corpus') is the same and this is also the case with the cantilever and the stylus than we still have only compliance which is different. BTW the producer need to somehow justify the price difference. But this issue bring us back to Fleib and his assumptions regarding the Clearaudio MM prices (as example). Ie the buyers have no idea that they can (ex)change the whole cantilver/stylus combo for much less money. And this actually explains, the price difference. Or so I thought.

Regards,

Regards,
Regards, Nandric: Nikola, you've stumbled on something that in the cartridge industry is a closely guarded secret. It's not the stylus configuration that determines the performance, it's the color of the grip! The evidence is obvious: AT, Orto, etc., their finest cartridges all share the same characteristic, the grips are BLACK!

Acutex provides supporting evidence in the booklet that accompanies the LPM carts. Orange, red, blue, #4, #3, #2. Then there's #1, of course it's black. All one needs to do is look at the last four pages of the brochure. It's all there. Channel seperation, fr, compliance, even output improve progressively. This gives rise to the frequently observed "colorations" heard with different carts, it's the color of the grip having their way. Sounds are heard with greater awareness in the darkest of nights, black Lp's have superior sonics, many of the finest films are termed Bete Noire, financial affairs are best kept in the black. In regard to certain other affairs (one's audio budget, of course), it's judicious to keep the significant other in the dark. The list goes on.

Peace,
Regards, Regarding Acutex 412,415 and 420. They share the
same body (aka 'generator') and differ only qua compliance.
So, it seems, only the tonearms should make any difference
qua sound (?). If the contra argument is the stylus (412?)
this argument does not apply for 415 versus 420. If logic
is analytic than only some 'strong' empirical statements or
evidence can refute my assumption. BTW I still enjoy my
Virtuoso and have not (yet) listened to my Acutex 'collection'.

Regards,
Interesting Link Professor, on bearing friction.
It shows Teres.......believing in 'stylus drag' before he could accurately prove it exists via the Timeline?
Many pertinent comments there possibly requiring amendments to views held by some only 2 years ago?
Cheers
Regards, Raul/Henry/Lew/Fleib: Tables that feature bearing friction. Great thread and relevent to the current discussion, some of you might remember it ;).

Fleib: Jean Nantais resolves a question of terminology by refering to the phenomena as "Stylus friction drag".

I've been enjoying a Pio. PL-70L 11 (a second tier Exclusive) for several months now, coreless/slotless hanging rotor, eddy current brake. Very smooth pitch, sounds open and free of grunge, it proceeds with no discernable concern for exteraneous influence on speed. The above mentioned thread helped with the decision to acquire the Pio. TT, a belated thank you to those who posted to it. T_bone, too.

For a nice illustration of the internals of a coreless motor: http://www.thevintageknob.org/yamaha-YP-D71.html. For a comparison of motor design: http://www.thevintageknob.org/denon-DP-80.html, the illustrations help make Henry's point about the differences between a slotted coil-wound armature and coreless/slotless designs. The Yammie had good reviews for a consumer-level deck (as did the quieter coreless Kenwood KD-770 and KD-990), has an interesting tonearm and is VERY affordable. Please be aware these are not recommendations, just info. gleaned while researching a good quality/budget friendly coreless motored deck. A fun site to look around in, click on "TVK Museum", you'll find the Pio. P-3 and Kenwood L-07D, among others.

Peace,
Dear Nicola, If you refer to bass response, your statement does not apply to the Sound Lab 845PX; believe me. How about transient response to make those cannon shots sound "real"? ESLs do that better than most. (Also, and in parenthesis, the frequencies of the cannon shots are not in the low bass at all, more like 100 to 300 Hz range.) Transistor amps have trouble pushing ESLs in the low bass, because the impedance of an ESL is quite high at low frequencies (and conversely becomes quite low at high frequencies, just like a capacitor). It takes a sturdy tube amp, preferably an OTL, to bring out bass response in a big ESL. Anyway, I do not sit around listening for those cannon shots any more; I could not sit through the sturm und drang that comes before them.
Regards, Dyna10-X. By the way, a first generation 10-X still remains in my collection, a survivor. IMHO, the Acutex LPM 415STR maintains the presence and soundstage of the 420, as does the (sleeper) 412. The upper-mids are more forward so listeners who focus on reeded instruments and strings might prefer the 415. I thought them just a tad too assertive whereas several others commented on a vagueness of inner detail in the mids with the 420. As you have both carts, you are fortunately in the position to make up your own mind.

As you mentioned, at the price a good value. When your 415 is run in, would you be kind enough to post your impressions?

Peace,
Dear Lew, I think one can understand your attitude regarding 1812 Overture. But this has not much to do with carts (tracking) but with the Achilles tendon of electrostatic speakers...

Regards,
I haven't got the 415 yet. Based on the info that comes with the 420 the bodies are all the same in the 4xx series and the 415 stylus has a slightly lower cu but is otherwise the same as the 420. The Italian seller has some 415 for sale and they are 15 euro cheaper than the 420 so they should still be a great buy.
I am thankful that I can live without ever hearing the 1812 Overture again.
Thank you Henry

Yes - fantastic and fascinating article...
Vinyl records - the impossible medium... so many things that cannot be achieved perfectly, and yet the end approximation we get can be so damn good!

It is interesting that the TT101 and related JVC drives appear to use a similar design principle to the Rockport Sirius III...

I wonder how many other drives are out there that use similar principles?

bye for now

David
Dear Halcro: No one can do it, at least the ones I try with.

Btw, it is not only the high compliance subject the one that helps to cartridge tracking abilities but the whole suspension system including stylus tip but certainly low compliance MC has no this ability to negociate the 1812.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Griffithds,
That article was like a thunderbolt to me when I read it.
Glad you also appreciated it?

Thanks Fleib for the compliment. Your thoughts on cartridges, together with David's.......have been invaluable to me.

Dear Lew,
Well said. I believe Raul stated that it was his high-compliance Technics EPC100Mk4 which was able to successfully track the cannon shots on the Telarc 1812 Overture?
It would be interesting to know if any low-compliance cartridge has ever achieved that feat?
Hi David,
Here is the link to the full Peter Moncreif article
HERE
I hope you appreciate it as much as I do?

On the question of DD turntables.......I don't believe they are all created equal and are thus a panacea for the problems of 'stylus drag'?
As I reported....there was a clearly audible difference when I inserted the Victor TT-101 in my system in place of the Victor TT-81.
Now everything about these turntables is identical except for the coreless DC motor in the 101 and the dual quartz locked positive and negative servo control.
I am thus ready to conclude that these two differences.......aimed solely at maintaining constant speed control........are responsible for the improvements I immediately heard?
And yes.......whilst I heard both low-compliance and high-compliance cartridges with the TT-81, the greatest improvement over the performance of the Raven with low-compliance cartridges......was with the TT-101.
Seems to me that it is likely that our favoured high compliance MM's may in fact be even more of a bargain than we realise.
If they require less of the TT drive for optimum sound, then we get the best result out of a more economical system... the saving may not be limited to only the cartridge.
I think there is more truth to your statement than we might realise?
Regards
Henry
Dear Henry, Groove modulations increase friction, so they are in that sense one and the same. Further, i think you hit on something with your low compliance v high compliance post. If we say that on average low compliance cartridges do not track as well as high compliance ones, then it does stand to reason that mistracking is happening because of the lesser capability of the low compliance cartridge to negotiate the groove modulations. This also results in an increase in friction, as the stylus is yanked to and fro whilst traversing the groove. The worst case scenario is when the stylus is tossed completely out of the groove momentarily, which we hear as "mistracking". So I can believe that there may be more stylus drag (friction) with low compliance cartridges. (Define friction as all forces acting opposite to the vector of the torque of the turntable, and I think you will see that groove modulations are another source of friction, not the only source but an important one. Witness what you have already observed.)
What I'm trying to say with that is that the stylus tip shape and self cartridge tracking abilities maybe/seems to me have a main influence in this whole drag/friction TT speed changes subject other that a not so good TT overall design on this specific regards.

R.
Dear Halcro: Of coursed that's groove modulation but the in between stylus tip and groove modulation makes " friction " because are in touch: no friction no drag and no music.

Now, I think I already posted somewhere my next experiences on something related with that subject:

for other reasons I had to make some tests with different cartridges consisting to find out how many seconds ( sg. ) delay the TT to stop while a cartridge was still in the LP grooves. I have somewhere all those tests where I used MM and MC cartridges some with similar VTF and all with different compliance , suspension type and stylus tip.

I remember that even cartridges with similar VTF and near compliance but with different stylus tip shape stopped at different time. I can't remember ( I have to look for the tests. ) if line contact or spheric or ellipthical stopped before than the others but I'm sure that there was a " trend " on the stylus tip shape subject about.

I made those extensive tests taking in count the same LP tracks ( I used two-tree LPs with 6-7 tracks at different distance from the TT spindle.

What I'm trying to say with that is that the stylus tip shape and self cartridge tracking abilities maybe/seems to me have a main influence in this whole drag/friction TT speed changes subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hello Dyna10x, Great to know you are enjoying the Acutex 420. It seemed to improve til about 20 hrs on my system.

I am curious about the 415 so whenever you get around to it, please give us your impressions. I seem to remember Timeltel
saying he was not impressed by it, which surprised me,since the 315 was so good. Maybe just a different sample as these cartridges are so old now.

Danny
Hi Henry, I think it's just a definition of terms that we're talking about here. I'm not sure how inclusive the term 'stylus drag' is. Maybe it would include automodulation, or the motions of the stylus as described above. I'm not positive about this or know if there is common agreement. You might be right. I took a quick look at your system - very nice indeed.
Regards,
Halcro,

Great article. Thank you for the reprint. It's a wonder that actual music comes out of the end train wreck. Just amazing to say the least!
Hi Henry,

went looking for the link but could not find it.... some assistance?

The speed/drag issue is interesting.
The fact that there is such an influence is undoubted, the question remains HOW MUCH of an influence, and where does it sit within the scope of audibility/psycho acoustics?
And what are known valid solutions that move the effect on a turntable down below the threshold of perception?

You mentioned that your TT101 achieved a noticeable improvement most likely due to handling this phenomenon more effectively.

But this type of technology was used in many subsequent more economical Victor/JVC DD's - so is it the double quartz lock tech... or something else about the engineering of the table?

Getting back to our MM topic - the higher the VTF the higher the friction and drag will be.
So presumably, a TT capable of providing superb speed stability with a high compliance low VTF design, might not do so well with low compliance high VTF cartridge design.
Although one would expect that one that does well with high VTF designs will be fine with low VTF ones.

How does one quantify this !?! ie: how does one identify a particular TT's parameters and capabilities.
Clearly the W&F specs are far too crude to give any true indication? (or are they?)

On your TT101 where you claimed to notice a definite improvement over the TT80 - were you using a high compliance low VTF cartridge, or one of those evil high vtf MC devices...
And have you compared the delta improvement between the two types?

Up to now I have placed the "turntable speed control" aspects in the unknown basket... for future investigation - but this might be an opportune time to open the topic up.

Also with these great classic drives (TT101, SP10, others) reaching the stage where parts are no longer available (electronics/specialised chips), what alternatives do we have that achieve this goal... preferably without selling our firstborn....
Is this where the Technics SL1200's with max mods come in?

Seems to me that it is likely that our favoured high compliance MM's may in fact be even more of a bargain than we realise.
If they require less of the TT drive for optimum sound, then we get the best result out of a more economical system... the saving may not be limited to only the cartridge.

The decamegabuck+ tables may be at least partly a solution to a problem that does not exist with our MM's.

(or I may have had too much Grand Marnier with my coffee and chocolate brownies at dinner...)

bye for now

David
Thanks to this thread which I have followed with interest for almost a year I bought my first vintage mm the acutex 420. Well I actually got 2 because they seemed like a great buy. So I have ended up with a 420 & 415. I have just mounted the 420 and played Dire Straits love over gold and I am very impressed to say the least. I am looking forward lots of listening pleasure with this gem.
Dear Fleib,
It is not friction which is causing 'stylus drag' but groove modulation.
Here is an excerpt from an article by Peter Moncreif published in the IAR
Automodulation Distortion

The turntable designer might instead try to deliberately use a very weak motor, with very weak kicks. But that still doesn't solve the above compromise dilemma (he'd still have to move to a lighter platter, if he wants reasonable startup times). And it also creates a new problem, relating to automodulation distortion.
What's this new distortion? Turntables get slowed down by outside forces, such as the drag of the stylus in the groove. This drag changes as the groove angle changes with large amplitude music signals. The more that the stylus is yanked side to side by a larger groove excursion representing a louder music signal or transient, the more its passage is impeded in the direction along the linear vector of the groove travel representing the time axis.
What's doing the impeding? The turntable is moving the groove under the stylus in a linear direction along the time axis. If there's zero music signal amplitude, the groove is relatively straight, and the groove walls are parallel to this direction of travel, and so these groove walls offer minimal resistance to the stylus gliding past them. But when there's large signal amplitude, then the groove swings wildly from side to side, so the groove walls are more nearly perpendicular to the ultimate direction of the stylus' travel, which is the time axis direction. Thus, the stylus slams into the nearly perpendicular groove wall, which naturally offers more impediment to its travel in the time axis direction. Think of it as the difference between gliding along on an ice rink, parallel to its surface, versus slamming into an ice wall perpendicular to your direction of travel. Pretty dramatic difference, right?
What happens when the stylus slams into the groove wall? Who gives way? Well, the stylus might be smaller than the groove wall, but he's a sturdy little bugger, being made of diamond and being anchored firmly to the pickup arm fixed on the plinth. So he hardly budges longitudinally, in the time axis direction (although he's free to swing from side to side, to track groove modulations). Instead, it's the groove wall that yields. Its soft vinyl gets momentarily deformed. As the compressed vinyl reacts to and springs back from this deformation, some of the energy gets transformed into heat, while another part causes the groove wall to partially shudder to a stop, i.e. to slow down. Thus, the groove wall slamming into the immovable stylus, at a nearly perpendicular angle to the groove's time axis motion, causes the groove wall itself to recoil from this collision and slow down in its motion along the time axis direction. When the groove slows down, of course the whole record slows down and the whole turntable platter slows down.
In sum, when the music gets loud, the larger side to side groove modulations become more nearly perpendicular to the stylus' steady travel along the time axis direction of the groove. The groove wall has acquired a vector component that effectively collides with the stylus, instead of gliding along parallel to it. Along this time axis direction, the stylus position is fixed, so it is the groove wall that loses in this collision, and the groove (hence turntable) slows down in the time axis direction.
This means, quite simply, that loud music slows down your turntable.
If you'd like to read the whole article, there is a link on my Systems Page.
Regards
Henry
Nandric, clearly you have not been drinking enough of the cool aid regarding the LOMC cartridge. Consider the pathos and suffering of those who have. Manufacturer: if we build this highly priced LOMC they will buy it (the fools!!!) Why will they buy it, you may ask? Because it is newer & has 5Mhz higher attentuation than the last years release.
Maybe we should talk about friction rather than stylus drag. A cart on a linear arm has no stylus drag, but there is still friction. Stylus drag is caused by the difference in offset angle of the cart compared to a line from tip to pivot.

That quote from Fremer was about conventional vs strain gauge carts? All carts are sensitive to velocity regardless of design. The quote was out of context and probably about the moving mass. In a MC design, because coil vibrations and stability are of primary concern, those parameters become more important. They are usually better served by more mass and moderate compliance.
Regards,
Since experiencing the sonic quality DD and rim-drive tables within the past couple of years, I've accepted statements about the importance of (minimizing) stylus drag and constant platter rotation. Earlier this year Michael Fremer made an interesting statement in a cartridge review in Stereophile that seems to address this issue.

"Magnet-based cartridges, MM or MC, are devices that are sensitive to velocity, which is measured as distance over time"

No wonder accurate and constant speed of the stylus tracing the groove is so important to our listening perceptions.
eni Handric,

+++Will someone care to explain why those low compliance carts
are produced at all? There must be some reason I assume?+++

One word answer. GREED.
Why build low price, high compliance (MM/MI)cartridges, when the press (because of ad revenue), has convinced us that the low compliance (MC), high price cartridges is the answer to all things analog.
The best MM's sell for hundreds, the best MC's sell for 10's of thousands.
Will someone care to explain why those low compliance carts
are produced at all? There must be some reason I assume?

Regards,
Seems to me that what you are saying is that higher VTF (lower compliance) involves greater friction and therefore greater resistance to motion....

Which makes sense...

The interesting corollary that you bring up, is that a TT designed for higher stylus friction needs to have either hugely greater inertia, or ultra precise platter control so as to overcome the additional drag (one way or the other!)

Given that both methods of "drag" mitigation are expensive to achieve.... the High Compliance / Low VTF approach becomes the best value method of achieving the engineering goal. (high tracking ability... no drag impact)

Which naturally leads us back to the theme of this thread.

It appears that not only are the cartridges/styli better value for money, but the Turntables & Arms may be as well.

With manufacturers relaunching their MM ranges....
Ortofon 2M Black
AT150ANV
CA Virtuoso/Maestro

perhaps the other giants will come back to the game : Shure & Stanton

A new generation V15 or ML140... 881S...

Seems to me there is room between the M97xE at $80 and the AT150ANV at $770 for a whole range of HE and MR cartridges from Shure, and Stereohedrons from Stanton/Pickering...

bye for now

David
Hi Lew,
It's not the MCs per se which are causing more stylus drag.....but any low compliance cartridge.
My theory being that the low compliance does not allow the cantilever to 'bend' easily around the groove 'barrier' whereas the high compliance bends more readily thus avoiding the 'drag' process more readily?
However......as LOMCs are generally low compliance and MMs high......the effects are heard with the MCs most people are using?
YMMV of course :^)
Dear Henry, Why do you think absolute stable speed is more of a factor with MC cartridges than with MM ones? Unless your MCs are mistracking, it should make no difference. And mistracking would have little to do with speed stability, so I am puzzled. The only other way I can think of it is maybe there may be more stylus drag with some MCs vs some MMs, because of the shapes of the styli, perhaps?
For the last 10 years I have been bothered by the 'distortions' I was perceiving with low compliance LOMC cartridges on heavily modulated grooves especially in the upper frequencies.
When I returned to high compliance MM cartridges due to this thread of Raul's.....There was a heavenly freedom from these particular distortions which lead me to believe that MM cartridges were inherently better and more 'linear' than LOMCs?
And I now have a collection of over 20 of the most marvellous cartridges....most of them MMs.
With the insertion of the Victor TT-81 direct drive turntable and recently the supreme TT-101...... I have discovered that what I thought of, as 'LOMC distortion' on highly modulated vinyl grooves.......was nothing more than 'stylus drag'?
With the recently purchased Sutherland Timeline laser weight available for $400 from Elusive Disc......one can clearly see the effects of 'stylus drag' on heavily modulated vinyl grooves.
Reading what happens to the stylus as it hits these grooves almost at right angles to the direction of travel.......I thought to myself, that high-compliance cantilevers would 'bend' more easily and navigate the change of direction whereas low-compliance cantilevers would stubbornly keep trying to force their way 'through' the groove and thus slow down more?
With a superb DD turntable which is quartz-locked and servo-controlled and is able to micro-adjust speed in a forward and backward direction......the problems of stylus drag disappear.
And this is exactly what has happened. There is zero stylus drag with the Victor TT-101 even with the most heavily modulated passages (as clearly shown on the Timeline).....and now....when I play any of my LOMC low-compliance cartridges......I hear absolutely no high frequency distortion anymore.
I am now listening to these cartridges (FR-7f, DV-1s, Universe) on the TT-101 with new respect for the qualities of LOMCs.
May I return to the 'dark side' :^)
Folks the thing about this passion i have for bright lively sounds from my system is so elusive. No doubt for me vinyl is the front end that is the winner for the sound i love and have been chasing for a long time. What seems to happen is i have it and then its gone. Lately Ive been able to devote more time to tweaking and listening. What i'm hearing at this time is as Raul puts it a very nice 3d wide open stage. I just replaced my volume control it has dropped the noise floor a ton and is bringing the music from a super dark background. I dont know whats going to be the next revelation for better sound and i'm sure its out there. Moving Magnet cartridges in my opinion are a big factor in lively clear sound also. To get my favorite music to sound like a live concert is tough for the main reason of saving my ears. Classic rock and blues concerts are 100db plus but in the 90 to 100 db range at the house for now live concert lps sure sound real nice. And on it goes fantastic hobby.
There is much merit in what you and Durand say. For what it's worth, I attend live performances at least twice a month, mostly jazz, either in night clubs or at the Kennedy Center in DC. The Terrace Theater at the KC has some of the best acoustics I know about, and if you want to hear clean real music, it's the best in DC, IMO. In other live venues (e.g., noisy and poorly miked jazz clubs or when I happen to have a bad seat or when the sound amplification system is a disaster), the sound is not always so great, nor do I want to reproduce it on my home system. I also sing once a week with a professional jazz pianist at a jazz vocal workshop, where i am standing right next to the full-size grand piano (not a keyboard), so I certainly know what piano can sound like. Yes, I seek all the qualities of live music in my home system. (What else would any self-respecting audiophile say?) But there are always variables we cannot control or choose, such as quality of the recording, record wear on used LPs, etc, etc. In my opinion, because of such issues, compounded by what actually happens at recording venues, there is an element of serendipity involved in the creation of a "real" sense of live music in my living room. These factors that can't be known to me leave room for falling in love with alternate visions of reality.
Thanks much Nandric and Griffithsds, I have both but wondered if I needed to bother switching bodies as the 412 "body" is mounted. The 420 stylus still seems like it needs a touch more break in.
Hi Headsnappin,

The way the Acutex manual reads, it lead me to believe that the entire line of LPM cartridges have the same body, just different or should I say higher levels of quality styluses. The stated output is down slightly on the 420 vs. the others in the line. 3.5 on all but the 420 which states its 3.2. I think this is a typing error. There are other typing errors in the manual. The specification page states the stylus case for the 420 is black. It is black but page 7 says it gray. Anyway, just my opinion and I'm sticking to it!

Regards,
Don
Dear Lewm and friends: +++++ " As to your post about the absolute judgement of cartridges vis a vis the real sound of music, my opinion is "yes and no". As you say, it is a very complex subject.......................... As it stands, we are left to compare each individual cartridge to our imagination of the real thing " +++++

as I posted we need a reference/standards to compare. For the persons that attends regulary to hear live music that reference is live music. If we don't attend to hear live music then we are at " random " and what we like is only that " what we like " but with not very strong " foundation ".

The next opinion ( that in some way confirm what I posted here and several times in other threads. At least one person where I coincide. ) came from the Talea tonearm designer/manufacturer whom is: musician, recording engineering, audiophile and audio item designer:

+++++ " But this also touches another important aspect that’s harder to talk about. When do we know that something sounds good? Basically, if you have enough experience listening to live music, you know what an instrument sounds like. That’s the “good” sound, the reference. It’s not about whether you like it to sound one way or another, it’s just a reality. I am aware that, for some people, the experience of listening to music can have more to do with creating a specific atmosphere than searching for realism. They might like to have the sound be more mellow, or have more excitement, perhaps a stronger bass component, or a bit of brightness; that’s a completely legitimate goal of course. That sound however can’t be said to be “better” than one provided by a more realistic rendition. Nowadays, most people are looking for the most holographic, life-like representation of reality (and not just in sound). If that’s indeed what you like, realistic reproduction is the goal. If you want to feel that you’re in the jazz club with the musicians, that reality is your reference. More generally, if you have somebody play an instrument for you, then listen to the same instrument on a recording, you should be able to tell whether the recording is close to the real thing or not. It doesn’t matter whether you like the reproduced sound better for whatever reason; it’s either closer to reality or not. " +++++

Lew, you said that you and me always disagree in this whole subject. Please let me know what is wrong for you or why you don't agree with that overall opinion I posted and where I'm in agreement.
Of course any one of you are welcomed to participate in this " critical " subject.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: I hope that mine be the 420, I don't receive it yet but I think at the end of this week could arrive along the LPM320IIISTR sample.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Headsnappin, According to me they have the same 'corpus'
(grey) but different styli: red for the 412 and black for
the 420.

Regards,
I only inspected my 412 boxes in order to see if there are
some 420 carts in there. Alas. The Italian may look confused but an error at their own cost is to optimistic qua expectation. So I need some kind of accumulation of the
bravery to inspect the 420 boxes. Anyway this 'Italian proposition' seems to be over. I am alas on non speaking terms with this guy Branko Polak who listed so many on
Audiogon market. Otherwise I would like to ask him how many he bought in Italy.

Regards,
I looked at my 420str and it seems to be correct grey and black according to the supplied manual. On the cartridge it self the only script is Acutex on one side of the grey colored plastic and LPM on the other side.
I need to express my (our) gratitude to Fleib and Dlaloum for their important contributions to this thread. As members we get a much better understanding about MM carts in general and the cantilevers/styli in particular. We get
a kind of 'knowledge advantage' in comparison with those
who are not members of our forum. I already made 'profit'
in both senses of the expression (knowledge and money) thanks to their contribution. My Virtuoso (black) I got for 50 Euro at the German ebay (no other bidders)and I was able to order exactly the right parts for the retip by Alex. Only a month before I was totally ignorant about all the intricacy involved by cantilever/ styli combos.

Regards,
If the body of your 420STR is grey then it is the correct model: body colours being the easiest way to distinguish.
From my own experience selling items it seems like they would have checked the contents before listing it. Seems suspicious to me. With that said I would have not purchased the cartridge were it not for feedback from the group. A new wonderful cartridge will show up, it's not the end of the world.
You guys scared me into checking the contents of the box that came to me from Italy. Fortunately for me, I seem to have gotten a bona fide 420. One wonders how an NOS 415 (or 412?) crawled into an NOS container for a 420, if I understand the situation correctly. Based on Raul's and Timeltel's opinions, the 415 would not be far behind, if at all behind, the 420 in terms of performance, assuming one can extrapolate from the 315 reviews.