Dear Axel: Yes, when we have how to compare between MM/MI and LOMC then we can " fall " in count that there is almost no contest by the LOMC cartridges.
+++++ " Also, I think the wrong direction has already been taken by some new MM design " +++++
this is very unfortunate ( for say the least ) and I like you agree that is a wrong " road/direction ".
It is so wrong direction ( maybe those cartridges designers/manufacturers can't " see " yet te real subject about. ) that we can find/get today for 5K? a LOMI! that like the LOMC cartridges must pass for those additional " terrible " gain stages that degrade the cartridge signal. This is only one example of that ( IMHO ) wrong " road ", of course that for them and for other people that is the right " road ".
The real subject here is that from my point of view all those today very good cartridge designers can/could make great MM/MI cartridges if they forgot for a " moment " the LOMC ones and take care about music sound reproduction, I mean REAL music. Maybe they need to return to their each one " origin/root " of why they start making cartridge design other than $$$$$. They ( IMHO ) need to re-start to hear in their own audio systems some of those vintage MM/MI cartridges and make their own conclusions about.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Lewm: +++++ " to come out and write what you have written on this subject. However, we each have to reach a decision for ourselves between our fave LOMCs and MMs,...." +++++
the every person " believes " and what every person " speaks " is related with each one compromises/priorities ( in this case on the music sound reproduction in a home system subject. ), each one compromise with " my self " and each one decency.
I like to " see " the people at their " eyes " always and not have to " get down " my look when I say to any one: Hello!
I always say that the name of my " obligation/pledge " is the MUSIC and nothing less even that some people here in this forum accuse me of a " commercial audio agenda ": totally wrong, my audio agenda is the MUSIC and how to be near the real MUSIC through our home audio systems.
I don't support any kind of audio technology or any kind of audio item ( like two-three persons in this forum. ) for and only commercial interest.
I don't say that one or other product is great ( when I know it is not ) only because I need ( for doing business ) that the people believe " my LIE ", this kind of attitude that unfortunatelly often exist here has a name: dishonest and corrupted one.
Yes, here and now IMHO the LOMC cartridge sound is wrong and the best way to enjoy the REAL music is through the MM/MI cartridge alternative. From now I support the LOMC cartridge alternative only like a second option for analog LP reproduction source.
Like you say ( and I agree with ): each one have to reach a decision by " ourselves " on the MM/MI cartridge subject.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Gents,
Is there any correlation with your perference of MM's with their purity and lack of brightness with all the SS gear you have?
IMO tubes can a lot of the MM ease and more that you are talking about. |
Downunder,
I suspect the universal response that you will receive to your questions is: "NO".
I suspect that (like myself) most people are talking about colourations and not just brightness with MC's. The form of emphasis that spotlights aspects of performances. I know that there is a view (which I largely share) that tubes and MC's focus on third order harmonics and can fool one into believing that this is closer to a live performance. However, they are not.
A similar example (both performance and cost wise) might be with cables. Here the Siltech cables (at least up to their G5 range) would stand in the tubes, MC's camp and something like the Audio Physics silver range would be more in the SS/MM camp. The argument resolves around 'fidelity' and how 'high' or not the tools' performance stands regarding live performance and/or recorded performances (itself an obviously important - though rarely noted - distinction).
However, in the last analysis it comes down to one's taste and that is difficult to dismiss, I think.
Just my £0.1's worth. |
Erratum,
It should have read: "Anaylsis 'Plus' silver range". |
Dgob et al, Please, please let us not let this thread degenerate into a tubes vs solid state argument. Your statement to the effect that tubes "focus" on third order harmonic distortion is, to be polite, inaccurate on all levels. But I defend and respect your preference for solid state devices. Here I think we are looking for magical combinations of cartridge/tonearm/turntable/phono stage, with cartridge as the variable under discussion. FWIW, as I noted above, I bought a solid state phono stage to audition my MM cartridges; it will be driving an all tube linestage and amplifiers downstream. |
Dear Downunder: The whole MM/MI subject and my conclusions ( where other people agree ) on it is not related to tube/hybrid or SS electronics or a synergy with. The subject is an objetive and more deepest than that.
The conclusions comes/flow in a " free " way after more than two years ( this thread start in January 2008 and I start it after many months testing the MM/MI experience. ) of a in deep very large process with the MM/MI and MC cartridges where I use the best audio " tools " for it including my audio music experiences.
Those " tools " include ( between other things ): almost any tonearm at hand ( vintage and some today ones ), almost any MC top rated cartridge ( vintage and today ), almost any MM/MI cartridge, different TTs ( BD and DD ), tests with my system and other people systems ( these ones mainly with tubes and with limitations for loading the MM/MI cartridges. ), with opinions on other people in their systems and in my system, in audio systems ranging from 20K to 500K ( dedicated to MC ones with different type of electronics/speakers/analog rig/room treatment....), etc, etc.
All the work/test/voicing were made following the rules on set-up, matching tonearm, mainly with the same test recordings ( music LPs ), taking in count different listening SPL system levels, etc, etc.
Trying to speculate about tube/SS subject IMHO is a total misunderstood on that long process that bring in very precise way my conclusions on the subject.
Downunder I try not leaveing nothing to the random and try to be fair between the MC and MM/MI trying to put in even/similar full/whole listening conditions.
I don't test/listen " oranges " against " bananas " but oranges vs oranges. Every single set-up cartridge parameter were optimized for each cartridge: tonearm matching, loading impedance/capacitance, headshell matching, SPL listening, overall cleaning, temperature, VTA/SRA, VTF, AZ, etc, etc.. I try always to have only one variable: the cartridge it self.
I hope all these help to avoid speculations on the whole subject and that when any one make comparisons in its own audio system he makes putting the MC and MM/MI in the same/similar conditions: optimize each one quality performance reproduction.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Downunder,
Just to clarify. Despite Raul's undoubtedly sincere efforts, his comments come down to an observation of fidelity. Plain and simple.
Lewm,
Apologies but I was trying to give an example and not criticise. My point was more about perception and hifi: not about universal truths. You can see my position earlier in this thread concerning "absolutes".
I hope I stand a little clearer in the comments that I made and still support.
Cheers |
While I am not prepared to declare MC's superior to MM's in every respect, or vise versa, I do think Downunder is correct; to a degree. I made the very same point in one of my previous posts. I do think that, as a group, and generally speaking, solid state equipment does not have the "juicyness", and dimensionality, nor the sense of aliveness of good tube equipment. All, traits of real instruments playing in a real space. SS amplification tends to sound more tonally dry than real life, and with less of that, hard to describe, sense of aliveness. Like a coiled spring ready to explode at any moment. Conversely, tube equipment tube equipment often lacks the precisely delineated leading edge, and ability to sound convincingly nasty when it is appropriate. Live music can be very nasty sounding. In my experience, MM's while having the edge in the "juicyness", and dimensionality area, simply don't have the sense of aliveness, or speed of MC's; when compared to the real thing. It then becomes ovious that a correlation is inevitable. To those that profess to not making those connections or correlations, I say it's impossible; unless the equipment used to make the comparisons can be deemed perfect, and absolutely neutral. I think most of us would agree that no piece of equipment is perfect, and absolutely neutral. Anyone who does think that is simply not familiar enough with the sound of real instruments. As with most things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
I realize many will disagree, but that is the way I hear it. The intent is not to start a SS vs, tube controversy, but to point out an obvious correlation. I do believe there is as Downunder points out, a connection. BTW, tubes do not "focus" on third order harmonics, and SS on the second. It is exactly the opposite.
I spend several hours every day around the sound of live instruments playing in a real space (I am a professional musician), either in my practice studio, or on stage playing in symphony orchestras. All I can say is that what I described above is the way I hear it. |
Where would the Audio Technica AT20SLa rank among the best MM cartridges ever made? Also pitted against the Shure V15VMR-LE?? Both from same era of the 1980's...Thanks, Ray |
Dear Frogman: IMHO your group generalizations are only that a " generalization " and could means almost nothing in what I posted all over this thread.
Why is that?, the audio electronics I own ( Phonolinepreamp and Amplifiers. ) only has to your " generalizations " the name: SS, and that's almost all.
Its quality performance is almost perfect and the name of that almost perfect quality performance is NEUTRALITY. As a fact neutrality is one of my audio system main targets and characteristic.
Your post oblige me to clarify in a precise way on the subject and that's why I bring here what other Agoner musician ( no, he is not an owner of that unit. ) that attend and is in touch with the live event ( like me. ) write about my audio system SS Phonolinepreamp when he heard it in his own system in place of its tube one ( with out making any single fine tunning or change on tonearm/cartridge set-up to the " new " SS unit. ), this person for whom I have a great respect owns Revel speakers, Raven TT, Triplanar tonearm and in that time a Ruby 2 LOMC cartridge:
+++++ " . The Essential 3160 ( this is my SS Phonolinepreamp ) sounded > more like tubes than did my tubed..... That is not to say that it > sounded tubed in a gimmicky way. It was warmer, but not dark. Rich, but not > unfocused. Full, but not bloated in any way. Raul spoke of many different.....
Piano was simply the best I have heard come out of my speakers. > All the things you associate with "live" piano sound were present. The > initial attack was full in a way I don't think I have heard in any system. > It had bite without any of the expected tinnyness ever present in electronic > reproduction. Fullness, richness, and bloom were really "there." Decay of > notes was stunning. Orchestral instruments were rendered equally > realistically but with much more focus and greater soundstage depth. Cymbals > had shimmer and were combined with real weight and body as in life. Weight > and attack on drums was terrific as well. " +++++
As you can see part of the " tools " that I were and am using through the whole long process that bring " alone " the conclusions in the subject are good enough to make those cartridge comaprisons, my Phonolinepreamp has a second MM phono stage with the same top quality performance than the MC one. Remember?: oranges against oranges, nothing less.
You own the P-76 and AT 170 ML, I don't know if you already listening to it at the right load impedance/capacitance but you can read what Dgarretson posted about:
+++++ " My impression of 100K loading is similar to Timeltel above. With 100K the good character of P-76 is enhanced with improved inner detail & refinement in HF. These improvements are reminiscient of a good MC cartridge-- further diminishing any advantage that MC might have in the areas of resolution & spatiality. The difference is great enough to conclude that you need to try 100K to hear what MM can do. " +++++
I invite you to see and read about the Dgarretson audio system here: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vaslt&1140494870
Anyway, IMHO the tube-SS subject is IMHO out of the thread " equation " for the conclusions. The whoile subject is more " serious ", deepest and learning than that.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul.
|
Frogman: That Agoner experience/opinion with the SS Phonolinepreamp is not a close/each day audio friend, that was the one and only time I meet him: he lives in USA and I in México city. What you read it was/is what he shared to other two very close friends of him.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Frogman,
I only play the cello at a low level and so would not comment. However, if you read the FM Acoustics website, you will see numerous renowned musicians speaking about their quite different perceptions of that solid state equipment. Yet, my initial use of analogy should not be misunderstood and perceived as the point of my statements. I share your sensitivity to the aporia of judgement particlularly in its wider application to art and politics. On these subjects I could write a book and have friends who have done so.
By extention, this aporia could for example raise questions about neutrality representing fidelity to live performances, particularly where those live performances can be in distinct acoustic spaces that might lend emphasis to anomalous parts of the frequency range. These performances (many of which I am sure we have all attended at some point) are literally "live" but not necessarily 'neutral'. It is in this light that I worry whenever I hear reference to "live performances" that seem to believe that these occur in a vacuum or that perfect neutrality captures the 'live event' rather than the 'recorded event'. And I am not disagreeing with anyone here, just stating my perceptions and position. |
Frogman,
Another commentator who it would be interesting to hear from is Jose Maldanado, the designer of the Essential 3160. I have personnel experience of his exceptional hearing and it would be intriguing to hear his take on those subjects. However, he no longer seems to post on this site and I have been told that the parameters of considering the merits of MM's or MC's preclude any analogous references. Shame. |
I have heard good and bad SS setups and tube setups, it is difficult to make a good set up, but once you start getting a good sound (maybe not perfect) you can tell. A good setup can be either SS or tubes, I have close contact with an exceptional SS system, and I have a pretty good Tube system with horns (IMHO), we have compared in several occasions our systems and even with some obvious differences the final taste of the music is not that different! And the differences between MC and MM are very clear and repetitive, every time we switch to a MC cart the same type of sound comes out, as when we switch to MM. There are always the same differences between MM and MC in any good setup and this differences are not SS related or Tube related or more suitable for either setup. I will try to point out some of this differences I am talking about and try to put my finger on them, please bear with me: As a whole the first impression I get when changing from MC to MM is a unnatural high end on the MC cart. After a while you ears kind of get past that (or you adjust to that), then a very difficult to explain thing happens, music through a MC seems more detailed, the voices seem closer, but ambience retrieval seems lost. You can focus more on certain details but as a whole the music is gone and you are left with a sort of looking glass that amplifies certain details but blurs the whole event. This takes life away from the experience. MM is just more present as a whole more in your face and even more detailed without loosing focus... I hope I could explain it better but one thing is sure for me, the same thing happens on a SS or a tube set up. |
Dgob,
thank you for the very toughtful response to my post. If you reread my post, you will notice my liberal use of qualifiers such as: "generally speaking", "tends to...", "often lacks..." etc. Not once did I state that one technology or another cannot provide excellent performnace. Having said that, I stand by my observations; generally speaking.
One of the main problems with the use of the word "accuracy", is that more times than not the user is referring to tonal accuracy. If only it were that simple. In that respect, I mainly agree with you that the venue where the recording was made has a major influence in the perception of such. Tonal accuracy is but one piece of the wonderful complexity of music. If musical accuracy is the goal, and it should be, along with tonal or timbral accuray, we have to consider first and foremost rhythmic accuracy. It is there that the true soul of a performance lies. After that we should look at textural accuracy, and spatial accuracy. Although the last is, to me, far less important.
I completely agree that there is some excellent SS equipment that gets very close to tonal accuracy; just as there is of the tube persuasion. I don't claim to have heard anywhere near every piece of equipment that is out there. But I have heard quite a few of the heavy hitters (my system is not too shabby either), in some very well put together systems, and I can confidently tell you that in just about every instance when I have listened to music on a system that allowed me to suspend disbelief, it was a tube based system. What allowed me to suspend disbelief was not wether the sound was tonally accurate (whatever that means), but the sense that the music was alive; that a good enough portion of whatever it is that tells your brain that it is human beings making those sounds was preserved.
Raul, I have indeed heard the AT 170ML (not the P-76, yet)loaded at 100K, and while this loading does allow it to show more air and clarity, it did not give it the immediacy, and musical vibrancy of my Vandenhul Grasshopper, and certainly not like my old Decca London, which is, admittedly, grossly inaccurate tonally. The AT 170 ML is fantastic at letting me hear, study, and analyze the tone of a particular instrumentalist on a recording; I can't think of any MC thatI have owned let me do that to the same degree. But, if what I want to really dig deep into the trully subtle phrasing nuances of the same player, no MM I have heard allows me to do that to the same degree that my Vandenhul, or my Decca does (of course, I don't need to point out that the Decca is not a MC).
As in politics, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
Regards. |
Dear Frogman: +++++ " I can't think of any MC thatI have owned let me do that to the same degree. But, if what I want to really dig deep into the trully subtle phrasing nuances of the same player, no MM I have heard allows me to do that .... " +++++
that " subtle phrasing nuances " IMHO is more a synergy/matching tonearm/cartridge subject that a cartridge characteristic.
The fact that you don't heard it through MM/MI ( well not a totaly true fact due that the Decca belongs to the MM/MI carrtridge type. ) in your system it does not means you can't heard it in a better synergy/matching system than yours. I don't want to go in deep with linear traking tonearms or VPI TTs that normaly is what you are using or with your phono stage performance and certainly not with my SS electronics where you can't even imagine its top quality performance.
I have long experiences with Grasshopers including the Colibri and I know what you mean by immediacy that it is exactly what the P-76 and other MM/MI cartridges shows all the time, a natural immediacy with less distortion than the Grashoopers or the Ikeda ones.
I'm using the P-76 in direct connection fashion in an unipivot tonearm and no one Grashooper I try it with it matching tonearm even the whole music presentation of the P-76 or other top MM/MI performers.
Maybe I'm wrong but for make statements/conclusions like mines on the MM/MI and MC cartridge performance subject you have to have exactly the right, precise and wide alternative " set of tools " to do it, including wide and in deep know-how on the whole subject. IMHO for what you posted, for what are your system maybe you don't have all those " set of tools " to make a even/fair comparison ( oranges vs oranges ) and in the other side always exist the " each one perception and each one priorities ".
Frogman, if you listen to two different cartridges where there is a difference in the SPL of the system reproduction your perception is different if the SPL is even for both cartridges. This and many other subjects has to be take it in count when you are making serious and in deep comparisons on quality performance with audio items. I don't know if you do it, I did.
Anyway, " the exception confirm the rule ". No, I'm not saying that my opinion is the rule, I write with a more wide means.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Frogman,
Thank you. On the issue of acoustics and venue, this obviously can affect both the various venues in which the same piece of music might be played by the same musicians with widely differing outcomes not to mention the differing venues in which we receive/reproduce "a" recorded event. More detailed considerations of these issues can be seen in Paul E. Sabine's 'Acoustics and Architecture' or (to a less detailed extent) in Leo Beranek's 'Concert Halls and Opera Houses: music, acoustics, and architecture'.
My real concern residing around fidelity to "a" recorded performance not necessarily representing "real music", which is rarely as neutral as we might imagine/hope. But we digress. Back to our observations of the merits of MM's (which I largely share regarding 'greater/higher-fidelity to the recorded event') in relation to MC's. |
Dear friends: I just receive ( two days ago ) my AKG P-100LE and I can say that is something to hear ( for say the least ), even I'm thinking in a fast review on it: yes it is that good.
I will take more days hearing it and trying to fine tunning and make comparisons with other cartridges. I need to know and confirm what " a priori " I'm listening right now and what is its quality performance.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Rayr2: That At 20SLa was one of the top Audio Technica cartridges and IMHO compete with almost any top MM/MI, I like it over the Shure V15V.
Its quality performance is realy near of the AT 20SS that is a great Audio Technica cartridge but I don't hear for some time the 20SLa. I think and hope that Dgob who own too and hear it not many days from now can give you a more " recent " opinion.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Rayr2,
Certainly, I have been playing my cartridge recently and if it helps:
The AT20 SLa is a truly great cartridge. I'm finding it really difficult to rank the MM's though as nearly all of high quality ones seem to present the musical event accurately only with distinct voicings. It plays similar to the original ADC XLM-1 integrated but provides more of a pocket of sound in which the musicians form a more harmonious whole. Its midrange is rich and vibrant but not 'coloured' as I had assumed at one point, having switched from cartridges that present in a more vibrant and or tighter way: namely, the Nagaoka MP50 and Glanz G5. These two bring leading edge attach (particulary on brass, percussion and/including keyboards, cymbals, drums and vibraphones).
As I say, from my experience in my system, I would not sell my AT20. |
Raul...fellas... which tonearm would you keep if you had to choose only one
I have Micro seiki ma505 Technics EPA100 I have a few more but i need to sell one...
also out of these pivoted arms which one sounds better with the andante P-76
as you guys may well know I use rabco tonearm but do not want to give away something that I may want ..
Good Listening!! |
Re the P-76 the change in it is remarkable. its opened up totally after 30hrs, and playing it on the linear tracking Technics SL-7 it's treble in particular is remarkable. Cymbals simply beautiful, and the lowther shout of my DX2's is tamed by the purity and space of the upper mid range and treble. Soundstaging is relaxing, and utterly biguiling. The Lowthers dont do base a lot, but there's a naturalness to what's there that agian has an utterly relaxing and deeply involving presence. Also, dynamics have becoe leme less sharp, not lessened, and i am wanting to use that word naturalness again. Winston Masalis on Hothouse Flowers is truly magical. Thank you again, Raul |
On a prosaic note, does anybody know where to acquire the 1/2" mounting clip that works with an Empire 999 SE/X cartridge body?
Thanks,
Dave |
Lharasim, You are presenting everyone with a dilemna. What about selling one of the "few more"? :^) Not having a P-76, I cannot venture real-world experience but I based on my experience with other light-ish low VTF MM carts and these two arms (the MA-505 in a few different guises), I would probably keep the EPA-100. This offends my aesthetic sensibilities because I love the machined look of the Micro/SAECs of the era (aside from being a fantastic arm), but I think the EPA is a more flexible arm which sounds very good with my MM carts.
That said, the real problem with the EPA-100 in its normal configuration is that it cannot take heavy carts the way the Micro can (with an added c/w) unless you happen to have the sold-optionally heavy-weight end-piece for the EPA-100. |
Dear Lharasim: I concur with T_bone, keep the Epa-100 and let go the 505.
I don't try with many tonearms the P-76 but IMHO it sound really good with different tonearms, this cartridge ( like other MM/MI's. ) is tonearm friendly.
Regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Great thread Raul ! Unfortunately I do not have the time to read it from cover to cover, but I had several impressive experiences with the venerable AT-180ML back in the early 1990ies. I even modified 6-7 samples (glued the cantilever-assembly fix into the mounting - this did greatly increase both resolution as well as dynamic attack).
I still hope that one day we will see a MM-cart with really low moving mass or a truly great executed field coil design cartridge.
I still believe that there is ample room for improvement with the MM, MI, or maybe one day a CCP-chip based cartridge.
Moving coil has enjoyed the majority of the enthusiastic research and development in the past 2-3 decades.
Maybe we will see soon something completely new in terms of transducer design in phono pick-up. A completely new approach. Meanwhile I really would love to see a truly high-end MM-design - one that can rival the best LOMC in terms of resolution and low-level detail - seeing the light of day.
Cheers, D. |
Dertonarm,
Maybe a quick read of all the thread will give you some perspective on the general line of experience being expressed. The best LOMC's seem to have formed an important backdrop time and again. |
Dear Jsadurni: +++++ " MM is just more present as a whole more in your face and even more detailed without loosing focus... I hope I could explain it better but one thing is sure for me, the same thing happens on a SS or a tube set up. " +++++
this is a reality: " things happen on SS or tube set up ". IMHO when something perform good it perform good almost always and does not depend on the electronic type technology. A cartridge has to be a " universal " audio item and in the same manner than MC are the MM/MI are a universal ones too.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Gilbodavid: It's nice to read that the P-76 performs so good " anywhere ", it does not matters in which audio system is working and this confirm the Jsadurni post and my last one.
The alive presence of the music through the P-76 is remarkable, it is hard to say if this cartridge has a weak characteristic.
Regards and enjoy the msuic, Raul. |
Thanks Guys I guess I will end up selling the micro seiki arm then...
I am really not into pivioted arms though!!
I may also sell a few of my adante p-76's I have too...
got to get some money oh well
Good Listening! |
Dear Dietrich: That ATML180-OCC is a jewel of cartridge, I own it from new and I waas lucky to put my hands on it because this Audio Technica model never comes to America, its market was Asia and Europe. Things happen that the México Director of AT was/is a close friend of mine and he bring it direct from Japan to me: like many other AT auido items that I owned or own.
The one that sale in USA-México was the ATML170-OCC ( that I own too ) that is great performer too.
The good news to everyone ( including you ) is that all those great vintage MM/MI cartridges are a nice " discovery " to almost all of us with a tremendous advantage: today each one audio system is a lot better than what we had 20 years ago, this fact makes the today vintage MM/MI experience a unique one and " surprising " good even over the best LOMC. Do you want resolution and lo-level detail: easy try to find that 180-OCC or better yet an AKG P100LE, well I know it is not an easy task to put your hands on one of these cartridges but is worth to take the time to find it.
In the mid-time buy this, hear it in your system and then comeback to share with us your experiences: http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1260085504&/B-O-Bang---Olufsen-MMC2-cartridge
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dietrich: I forgot, you are right about " glued the cantilever assembly fix into the mounting ", I try it this ( many years ago ) with my ADC Astrion and I agree that works for the better: problem is that you can't change the stylus when is need it.
I own two Astrion: one glued and the other in normal status and I can hear the differences between them.
Btw, I don't tired to say that the MM/MI alternative is the " best audio keep secret ever ".
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Now guys you can put your hands on that great P-76 through Lharasim, good.
regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Hi All,
Can anyone sell me the adapter for the B&O MMC-2? I'd like to play it on my Audiocraft AC3300, which seems to do an amazing job with all of my MM/MI's.
Many thanks |
Dgob, If you go on eBay and search on the topic "P mount adapter" or "P mount cartridge adapter", you will likely find an adapter for ca $10 to $15. I bought a pretty nice one for use with the Andante P76 in that fashion. The one I got has gold-plated pins, nicely made. I've got an NOS B&O MMC1 that came with its original adapter, made by B&O. It does not look to be as nice as the one I got from eBay. Or, I think SoundSmith will sell you an adapter for $50. |
Dgob, Garage A Records will be more then happy to sell you one |
Siniy123 & Lewm,
Many thanks for your kind help and support. I have managed to order one.
Well, apart from Raul's new favourite (the AKG P-100LE), I think that's it for now - I've managed to amass the top 10 mm's recommended on this site. I'm looking forward to familiarising myself with them and better forming my opinion of their merits in my system and regarding my objective and psychoacoustic priorities. |
Dear Dgarretson: Maybe you have to buy other Empire cartridge ( very low price ) like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/EMPIRE-TURNTABLE-SPU-CARTRIDGE-2000-E-i-NEW-OLD-STOCK_W0QQitemZ300354113379QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item45ee800f63#ht_500wt_1182
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Careful of that cgi.ebay.com/EMPIRE-TURNTABLE- #ht_500wt_1182 Cartridge auction. The cartridge comes without a stylus.-bird |
Since in any case I need to find an NOS stylus for my 999XE/X, do you think the 2000 is the better of the two cartridges? |
Dear Dave: Very hard to say in a precise way. With out have a precise argument other than the 999XE is on the same " family " than the great 1000 ZE my HO is that maybe the 999 is better.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dgob, where did you find most of your cartridges? I have not been searching that long but I am having trouble finding one except for the Nagaoka mp50. Does anyone know the difference between the mp50 and the mp50 super? Thanks Richard |
Dear Richard: The main difference is in the cantilever that in the Super is sapphire instead boron in the regular 50.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Richard,
I have been assisted by some of the posters on this thread (Michael, Lawrence and Raul in particular). The other sources have been hifi friends over here in the UK and, finally, constant searches on eBay and specialist sites. It didn't take me too long but I suspect the real trick is having patience for your selected target to show up and to let people know that you're looking for it.
Good luck |
Dgob, thanks for the info. I am looking for the Nagaoka mp-50 super to start with. For sure this hobby breeds patience or you go crazy. Thanks Richard |
Ricahrd,
I have not heard the MP50 Super with its sapphire cantilever. The only one I've even seen for sale was Raul's. However, I highly rate the MP50 original and you can still find these going on eBay. Sadly, as with the law of supply and demand in general, its price seems to have increased since I bought mine. I'd start by securing one of these if you don't have one yet.
As I say, 'highly recommended' (at least from what I have been able to get from it in my system and listening environment)!
Good luck |
I have been following this ever-growing thread for some time. A couple of fellow Audigoners in Australia I know had taken the plunge and had tried out some vintage MM’s with mixed results. As the entry price was comparatively so low I put my suspicions aside and decided it was worth trying this out myself. I had delayed this because my previous phono stage did not come with a MM option but the Audia Flight I now use does. With some advice from Raul who sent me a short list of some interesting MM’s for sale I went for a NOS Empire 1080LT with adapter on auction from a European seller who turned out to be excellent. The cart and adapter arrived separately but they arrived and he advised me of the delay with the adapter. Another seller would only sell to US buyers. Not sure why with vintage gear but he is entitled to his rules and its his sale.
My analogue front end consists of Basis Debut vacuum/Synchro Wave/Vector 4/Audia Flight phono and I had been using a Transfiguration Orpheus. Prior to the Orpheus I had a Jubilee and before that a Wilson Benesch Carbon. The Orpheus was, by quite a margin the best cartridge I had used. I set up using a Mint LP protractor. As preparation for the MM I fed the MM inputs a digital signal via an IRIAA filter for over 2 weeks.
Enter the Empire 1080 LT. First thing first this took me a good 2 hours to set up correctly. Those bolts and nuts rather than a threaded system are a right royal PITA. Minor adjustments to cantilever alignment were extremely fiddly to make and I had to walk away from the set up more than once. Finally, though I had it set up as close to perfect as I could manage.
I set it to 1.25 gm VTF with a parallel arm tube. Capacitance was set to 300 pF. Antiskate was backed right off as far as I could go with the Vector but this seemed about right. The Audia Flight is 47 k Ohms and not the 100 k Ohms Raul and others recommend but it’s what I have.
Initial impressions of the sound were positive but I was not bowled over. Excellent separation of instruments with good width and height but depth was not as good as with the Orpheus. There was a lack of warmth to the sound compared with the Orpheus and the bass while articulate lacked impact. There was a lack of air and the view into the recording space was limited. There was good drive and real snap but the performance was not totally convincing and it was not what one could call a 3D experience.
I continued to run the Empire for about 6 hours and on Sunday ran the system close to non-stop for 6 hours. I didn’t listen, just had the TT on play and got up at the end of the side of a record I do not value highly and put it back to track 1. I kept the system powered up and then after dinner sat down and put on the Fantasy 45 re-issue of Curtis Counce’s “You get more bounce with Curtis Counce”. This was at precisely 6.45 pm. I know the time exactly because I checked my watch as soon as the cymbal strike on track 1 filled the room. What followed was an experience I had not thought possible from this US$156.00 cartridge or from any other for that matter. I sat transfixed, my smile growing wider as the record played. I had never heard it sound like this. It was truly thrilling. Now the bass was both articulate and had real impact. Depth had gone beyond what I had ever experienced with the Orpheus and the drum kit was in the room. It was more dynamic than I had ever heard my system sound with any medium. Sax and trumpet portrayed beautifully. The overall sound was detailed but not etched in any way. It was immediate. I played all four sides to make sure it wasn’t just a happy coincidence with this particular disc. Then I put on another Fantasy 45 – The Guitar Artistry of Charlie Byrd and put on House of the Rising Sun. Whoa!! This is what it should sound like. Sensational.
OK you get my drift. This is the most emotionally involving music replay I have ever experienced. Sounds like hyperbole but it is what I am hearing. I’m not sure what other MM’s sound like but I intend to find out. It may be that I have just struck an unusually synergistic match with my particular combination but some of my comments sound very much like those of others with very different systems.
Raul, a big thankyou for taking the time to write the initial post that piqued my interest and later, for the assistance in finding this Empire MM. There was nothing in it for you except sharing with another hobbyist what you knew to be the case with MM’s and I am very grateful you took the time to do this. I’m hopefully getting a Garrott P77 later this week so I’ll see how that one goes though I am reluctant having got to this point to change anything. Now back to my listening chair. |
Phaser, You'll like the Garrott P77. I think it is one of the better MMs I have. |
Since it came up, I realize how scarce the Garrott P-77 is (I've been watching for a long while), but if I don't ask It'll never happen, does anyone know of one that might be available for reasonable $$$? Thanks -bird |