Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas
Dear friends: I found out this CA Maestro review that was made more than a year ago:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/frr.pl?ranlg&1275789975&&&/Clearaudio-Maestro-Cartridge

even that Phaser and mine systems are different and that the period of time between the Maestro and the Virtuoso reviews was so long IMHO at the main cartridge characteristics ( Clearaudio " signature ". ) I think that Phaser and I are in agreement.

I was unaware of Phaser's review till this week and now I would like to know from Phaser if he still think almost the same on the Maestro performance after more than a year of his review.

Anyway, good to know that even that the Maestro is a little different design shares Virtuoso Black Wood high quality perfomance level.
Btw, I " ranked " the Virtuoso a top the Maestro and one of the reasons is that the Virtuoso is IMHO better " inside the sound "/detail. Not that the Maestro does not shines in this regard but the Virtuoso BW is a little better, as I posted: maybe to much wood in the Maestro but who knows.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Hi Griffithds, ***There is quite a difference between the Specs. of Rauls cartridge, and the specs. of my old Virtuoso (see the comparisions earlier on either this thread or on Rauls actual review).***
What specs are you referring to, the stylus/replacement? There is no difference in electrical specs AFAIK. It would not be unusual for a replacement stylus/cantilever to have a slightly different SRA/VTA. I assume that Soundsmith's replacement is superior to to the original stylus/cantilever. Raul mentioned that Peter Ledermann said that it was a bonded diamond. Pictures of the cantilever look like it's not even tapered on the orig. Mine came w/o a cantilever, so I don't really know. I think that if you sent the old one to Soundsmith it would be the same except for the wood top.
Regards,
Hi Jorsan,

The comment "Bingo", pertained to my Virtuoso that was bought in 2008. I rotate my cartridges often, so their is know way to tell how many hrs. are on it. It has been one of my 2 favorites so I have tended to use it more than the others. I had the stylus checked for wear and was told it was in good shape. Some signs of wear was evident but still alot of live left in it. Shortly after that, Raul did his review which got me looking for a replacement. I have bought and just recieved a Black Virtuoso with the Sound Smith basic cantiliver/stylus replacement. I am in the processes of compareing the two and 1st thing that I have noticed is the VTA's of the two are quite different. I'm not willing to comment on any differences that I'm hearing until I have had more time with the new one. The new Black is just slightly down in the back. I have a tiny bubble level (weights less than .1gr.), that I set on my tonearm just above the cartridge and use it to perfectly center the bubble when I 1st setup a cartridge. Think of the bubble centered in the black circle, not touching the circle anywhere. This is perfectly level. The new Black Virtuoso requires the bubble to float to the back of the circle, just barely touching the black circle. That is where I have found so far and I repeat, so far I looking for the sweet spot on the new Black Virtuoso. This would be as Raul has described, slightly up in the back. My old Virtuoso (red), required the bubble to float back so far that 1/2 of the bubble laid on the back side of the black circle before the sweet spot was discovered. Is it possible that the old suspension became weak thereby forcing my to raise the arm up excessively to find the sweet spot? Possibly. It's also possible that stylus angle was always at this degree. Lets call it a Q.A. issue. Perhaps their has been a change in the build of this design pertaining to VTA? There is quite a difference between the Specs. of Rauls cartridge, and the specs. of my old Virtuoso (see the comparisions earlier on either this thread or on Rauls actual review). I must apologize for the length of this but I'm trying to both explain and also understand all of this myself. I'm seriously begining to think that there has been improvements to this cartridge design over the years, and the differences between my old Wood and the new Wood (both in specs. and VTA angle), is brings this to light.
Regards, Dgob: The wrongly maligned :) BW sounds great with the XLM-11 but in it's current location acoustic feedback initiates an intolerable resonance.

There is however much to be investigated concerning the impact of various materials between pickup and plinth, J. Gordon's relating of these influences in comparison to musical insturments may seem somewhat "romantic" to some but is not to be dismissed.

Halcro and Thuchan are responsible for an exploration of wooden headshells and I'm finding the boxwood Yamamoto HS3 is effective in reducing the bass bloom sometimes heard with even the best alu. cantilevers. The neutrality of the ebony HS1s (thanks for turning me on to this, Henry) does nice work in relieving the "rounding off" experienced with some of the higher output cartridges with a reputation for warmth. A Japaneese oak headshell by Orto. is on the way from Wm. Thakker. The Orto. LH-8000 weighs in at 8.5gm and I anticipate it will be a good match up for a Signet TK7SU on an EPA-250 arm as the TK7 has a rewarding fullness in it's presentation that, on my rig, leads to the need for better control in the bass.

Mounted on an ADC 6.5gm mag. HS, a Signet TK9LCa/ATN25 stylus is offering a sparkling performance whereas the same headshell "kills" the very attractive presence of a recently acquired Acutex 420.

My AT20SLa/ATN20SS has been moved to the carbon fiber/fixed headshell EPA-500H armwand, Cardas wired. Low bass is improved and listening to the exceptionally well recorded drum/cymbol kit on Van Morrison's "Saint Dominic's Preview" (1972) is illustrative of the need to spend a little time in setting up for best results. Re: "St. Dom.", Morrison's vocals are somewhat constrained but the insturmentals are of near reference quality, great definition to be heard and the compositions are interesting, too. IMHO, YMMV & all the usual etc's.

Peace,
Dear Jorsan: I forgot, that " Bingo " came from here not by me:http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&openflup&4890&4#4890

I'm sure that Griffithds will share his experience with you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Jorsan: Yes, positive. Only slightly. This is a patience work that gives you a worth rewards.
As I said in the review the Virtuoso never performs " bad " at any VTA/SRA set up and this characteristic is what makes that find out the sweet spot takes more time.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,
On 08-19 you mention: "BINGO'...I found the sweet spot on the Virtuoso. Man, is it up in the back", that means positive VTA right? and if yes, how much?... thanks
Timeltel,

I've heard that the Black Widow with the original (ridiculously high compliance)ADC XLM 1/supra is sublime: assuming the vtf can be set accurately (and, of course, the sun is at the equinox.)
Regards, John Gordon: If comparisons are to be made of a TT/TA to a musical insturment, my antique Black Widow tonearm with an ADC XLM-11 Imp. cart is so succeptable to resonance/EMI it can be played like a Theremin. But, when there are no sunspots AND if the BW's in a good mood--- ;-).

Peace,
Hi Raul/John_gordon,

I just has another quick thought on the materials and sympathetic resonances issue.

I've tried a host of clamps and mats on different tt's and spent much time experimenting with these. It turns out that I can get the best performance (neutrality and detail) when using a SAEC SS300 metalic mat with a Michell record clamp - whose vinyl material is said to be very similar to that employed in producing LPs. However, the clamp only gives of its best when I replaced its original foam o-ring with a self made composite of industrial viscoelastic sheeting and glued two of the same sized rings (cut out from the two distinct sheets of foam inserts that are provided by Ringmat for use with their cork mat on the Xerxes tt). I had to cut the three sheets to the same diameter as the original Michell foam ring and bore the spindle hole through the centre of the assembly but on replacing them and fitting everything together, the sum of the parts are far exceeded by the whole. It means that 'any' record is pressed completely flat against the inert SAEC mat and vibration and colouration is completely managed. Marvellous!!

Just in keeping with your useful points and to reiterate my agreement.
Hi John_gordon,

We all seem to agree that its not so much what you've got as how you use it! I'm not really affected by the armboard debate as I'm now using an independent arm tower but it does make for interesting discussion.

Thanks for your thoughts and advice.
Dear John_gordon: Yes, the way it is utilised and where I can add is important.

I feel that there is not to much research ( scientific one. ) on build materials/mix for TT/tonearms or cartridges other than what experiences on " playback " told us.

Same materials in a different product " configuration "/mix sounds different as you said.
The resonant beahvior between tonearm and cartridge is something complex for say the least but those resonances are the ones that put on the signature on that couple and this means its quality performance level ( everything the same. ).
There are many ( other. ) factors/parameters involve there that " shows " its influence in that mechanical/electrical " circuit ".

I think that some of us ( me by sure. ) have to learn several " things " on the whole subject.

Many of the persons that posted here knows the importance on cartridge performance with which headshell performs better and said " headshell " means ( between other things. ): headshell build materials, same cartridge with different build material headshells ( even with the same headshell weight. ) performs different.

As I said we have continue to learn.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Hi Dgob, Raul,

Regarding different woods, I would think that the material is less important than the way it is utilised, whether in a cartridge, arm or deck. Similar materials are used for most arms for example, but have different outcomes.

MC cartridges generally transfer more vibrations than MMs into the headshell and arm, which then have to deal with it somehow, and in dealing with it will themselves have resonances. In this regard, MMs have the advantage.

In musical instruments, there are a range of materials used, woods and metals, which illustrate how different materials affect the sound.

In my opinion, using different tonewoods, in hifi items, whether cartridges, armboards, or plinths, just adds their own signature, in the same way they do in guitars. Woods are known for being good for musical instruments, because of their resonant characteristics. None of them can be neutral, whatever that means in this context, though they may be preferable.

Some woods are less resonant than others, and some non-woods and resins less resonant still, so that would appear to be the route to go down if one is looking for neutrality, if by that is meant no added coloration.
Hi Raul,

When I actually think about it, my question need not really apply to armboards as it is difficult to say that one size fits all here or that a secured wooden armboard has to produce any more colourations than a metalic one. My own experiences also testify to that fact. I suppose I was just thinking aloud.

Thanks for the response
Dear Dgob: I'm not sure if we are trying in specific to equalize the sound of the signal cartridge, seems to me that we are trying ( at least me. ) to " surround " the cartridge and the cartridge signal with the most " neutral/accurate " environment for we listen the cartridge signal with the lower added " distortions/colorations " and with minimum loosign information on the original cartridge signal.

Build materials on TT and tonearm are critical to achieve those targets or to be nearest to. Of course that there are other factors with influence about but the build materials subject is IMHO a main factor.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dlaloum,
Interesting website. Thanks.

Raul,
Fernambuk is probably Pernambuco, also known as 'brazilwood' (which, perhaps unsurprisingly, comes from Brazil). Any wood with that combination of grain structure and color almost has to come from a warmer area.
Hi Raul, That's interesting about the wood. The fernambuco tree, native to Brazil, yields Pernambuco wood used in violin bows. Of course ebony is used in fingerboards. However, I believe that a few yrs ago CA said they used satine wood. Satin wood is a hardwood native to S India and Sri Lanka. Whichever it is, it might not differ much in the damping properties or transmission of vibrations, from ebony.
Regards,
Just a quick tip for anyone using the Moerch DP6. The best protractor is the cheap and cheerful Geodisc. You can then fine check with the DB Protractor - assuming a square sided cartridge (for the latter). This really brings the best out of the tonearm, and surpasses other more renowned and/or expensive protractors such as the DB, Feikert etc on this particular application, IME.

Highly recommended.
Hi Folks

With regards to damping, vibrations and materials,"Cat's Squirrel"'s website http://qualia.webs.com/ has a lot of good information.

He has put a lot of effort into measuring the inherent damping properties of different materials with accelerometers, and also worked on modelling different combinations of materials.

The focus of his efforts was material selection for plinths, but would be just as applicable for armboards.

My favourite material is a resin/kitty litter hybrid, which is apparently incredibly effective - and of course like most resins it is moldable...

Some of the combinations are not obvious at all, yet very effective - If I recall correctly plywood with thin Aluminium facings is a very good three layer damping material... and quite thin at the same time.

In any case, a worthwhile resource

bye for now

David
Hi Raul,

"Arm board build material resonances has an influence in what we heard/hear in any audio system but due to the multiple inter-relationship between so many different factros with influence in the quality performance of TT/tonearm/cartidge is not easy to indentify with no place to doubt which arm board material is the best one."

Would that not mean that we are trying to use other materials/components to "equalize" the sound of the critical part of the chain: the 'cartridge'?
Dear In_shore: In the Clearaudio site there is no wood specification. Through some Virtuoso review I read that the orange/red is made from Fernambuk that's a German tree but I can't confirm it.
Yes, the black one seems as ebony with a Clearaudio " treatment " but again : who really knows.

Btw, that you abandoned metal for wood on arm board could say a lot against metal material on arm boards. I have a mix/mixture of experiences with arm board with no clear " winner ". Arm board build material resonances has an influence in what we heard/hear in any audio system but due to the multiple inter-relationship between so many different factros with influence in the quality performance of TT/tonearm/cartidge is not easy to indentify with no place to doubt which arm board material is the best one. We can find out that in an specific set-up this or that material works but in a different environment things could change.
Experimenting is the name of the game in this arm board build material subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Lewm: The Neumann correction is a lot more complex than only " solder a resistor ", I can't disclose our Essential circuit design on this subject but I think we did it " proper ".

About Dartzeel I think you have to hear it but if not suffice is to say that it has +1.8 db at 20 khz deviation using the Neumann correction.

Of course you already has that resistor then use it, hear and decide.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul,
I have no opinion on this Neumann issue, only curiosity. Many years ago, Ralph Karsten told me where to install a resistor in the RIAA section of my MP1 preamp so as to introduce the Neumann correction. I purchased a nude Vishay for the purpose, installed it where Ralph suggested, and never again thought about it. It's just one more thing that is worth re-examining.

By the way, what is the difference between "proper" and improper employment of the Neumann correction? I have never heard the DarTzeel, but what do you not like about it's Neumann correction circuit? I could install a switch to bypass that resistor and find out for myself.
Dear Lewm: As Mab33 posted ( thank's. ) it is user switchable and yes I readed too that ST article about and yes there could be " problems " if the designer does not knows how implement it with out side effects, not an easy task but we did it.

You could take note of those Neumann " problems " when you hear the Dartzeel Phonolinepreamp that came with this Neumann characteristic that's not switchable in the Dartzeel.

In the other side, don't you think that if the LPs were recorded with that Neumann correction ( or something similar. ) the best way to reproduce those LPs is through a Phonolinepreamp with a GOOD implemented Neumann correction?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dlaloum: Reading through the links you posted the information is " severe " questionable in many ways other than what D. Rife made it.
This kind of tests could be almost always " controversial " and almost always not " conclusive ".
Anyway, gives us an idea about and like Freib posted: that persons that detected 80khz say something.

Now, IMD exist inside the 20 to 20 frequency range and on the UHF, it is an intrinsec " ingredient " in the music reproduction. That exist does not help for " our " purpose but as you point out it is not an easy task to know for sure how many of what we are " hearing " over 15 khz is IMD and how many is real frequency signal in the recording, too many factors/parameters to measure before we can even determine the strategy/model to find out that.

I have on hand 4-5 cartridge manufacturers specs on the cartridge IM measures ( inside the 20 to 20 frequency range not beyond it. ) and the values are between: 0.3% to 0.5% that seems to me a " good " low number that I think is not easy to detect and more than this not easy to know first how to know what is and how it sounds IMD.

I have no doubt that we can hear/feel ( through our body . ) on the UHF range ( say to 50 khz. ) but the point on the recording/playback proccess there are so many factors that could impede that we can detect ( and we need to have/pass a deep training to do it. ) UHF recorded if these high frequencies did not came at the " right " SPL where our " body " could detect it.

In the other side I think there is no information out there that could tell us how that 0.3% IMD ( inside 20 to 20 frequency range. ) changed beyond 20 khz: how much increment or not.

I have a lot of questions on the whole subject and no answers but only speculations that does not help.

My system goes beyond 50khz and I can detect when the supertweeters are " on or off " what I can say for sure is if that " I can detect " is 60% sound and 40% IMD or whatever.
In any case I prefer my system performance with ST " on ". Yes, I know that that more " airy/open " sound could be charged of IMD but I can't tell exactly.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
very often I put the Neumann correction on. But I have not switch I do select between 7 hf curves.

best & fun only
Lew,
From my (admittedly received, rather than self-taught) understanding, at that frequency, it could very well be that the difference between the cuttoff and lack thereof was a result of MM cart reactance causing an electrical distortion peak which the amplifier could not handle well, thereby causing issues back at the phono stage (or otherwise impacting its own output).
Raul's Essential has a switch inside that that can turn the Neumann correction on or off.
Allen Wright claimed in his "Tube Preamp Cookbook" that he or his listeners could hear a difference when his RTP3 preamp was configured so as to roll off at 750kHz, vs no roll-off! Go figure.

Raul, I cannot tell from what you wrote; does your own Phonolinepreamp incorporate the Neumann correction or not? A few years ago there was a fairly erudite article in Stereophile, complete with data, which suggested that the Neumann correction should not be done. I cannot recall the argument made against it.
Hi Fleib

Yes indeed - many have noted that Cartridges with drop off after 15kHz sound a bit dull, or cartridges with a rise above 15kHz have more "air"....

So we are sensing a difference - my point is that the question has not been asked as to whether that difference is a distortion or a reproduction of the original sonic event as mastered.

ie: are we detecting the intermodulation distortion of those high frequencies (the distortion products themselves being within the standard hearing range)... or are we actually hearing the high frequencies themselves?

The question is just as relevant for 15kHz to 20kHz as for wideband ultra high frequencies beyond 20kHz, in fact much more relevant, as most speakers and electronics WILL reproduce these frequencies... and recordings definitely include them.

If we are hearing the IM products - we are hearing a form of colouration of the sound - whether pleasant or not, it is a form of distortion.

Cartridegs like the Shure M97xE produce excellent sound up to around 15kHz - and if adjusted for optimum frequency response flatness up to 15kHz, end up with a very steep droppoff after 15kHz - which would result in less stuff above 15kHz to intermodulate with. (and yes I am ignoring phase...)

An argument can be put that for purposes of reproduction, the less extraneous frequencies you reproduce, the purer (more IM distortion free) the remaining frequencies will be.
And therefore an argument could be put that highest fidelity would be achieved with as restricted a frequency bandwidth as possible while meeting the needs of human hearing.

Translated in design terms as, make sure each piece of kit is wideband capable to maximise linearity in the desired frequencies... but try to ensure that frequencies outside the desired band are not fed into that wideband system...
is 16/44 digital doing us a favour by limiting the frequencies?

bye for now

David
Hi David, ***Then they made recordings of live occurences in the street - trees in the breeze etc... and had people listen to them with various Lo-Pass filters in or out - testing for the point at which people no longer heard the difference.... Double Blind fashion - results were statistically analysed.

Interestingly in this analysis at least one person could detect the presence or absence of the 80kHz filter - and as the frequencies came down from there many could hear the lower filters.

There was however no analysis to the best of my knowledge of whether they were hearing the high frequency or its intermodulations which are within the 20-20kHz range.... (both of which would have resulted in the exact same results in the tests...)***

I think one of the problems with listening tests is that you often wind up with the lowest common denominator. If one person could consistently hear a 80K filter, that speaks volumes. That's quite a few octaves from the range of human hearing. If a cart has a rising high end from 15K on up, it seems like people can hear it. That's above the range of hearing for most adults.
Regards,
Well in that case let me open with a fundamental question which has not been answered by any of the tests that have shown a difference in the presence of frequencies above 20kHz.

Are we sensing the ultrasonics (by whatever means) or are we sensing the intermodulation of those ultrasonics, which intermodulation is within the normal hearing range?

If the first - we can sense UHF - then we should all be trying to get wideband speakers, amps, cartridges & recordings.

If the secoond - we cannot sense UHF but we can sense its intermodulations, then the original IM is already on the recording within the 20-20k range, and frequencies above that will re-IM causing an additional level of distortion - and it is therefore undesirable.

None of the experiments I have read information on, have eliminated this possibility. It may in fact be extremely difficult to eliminate IM in this way as it may be happening anywhere along the chain from cartridge/cantilever right through to speaker/room.

But the current concensus is that we cannot hear/sense above 20kHz - and this has been established using various quite reasonable and repeatable tests...
From the two options above, occams razor would tend to point us to the simpler solution - we sense the IM, rather than the more complex one, we sense UHF.

Also from a posting I made earlier on Audiocircle

I don't know if you people have read this:

Summary - double blind testing shows no difference between 16/44 and higher res formats....

the AES Link:

https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?ID=2

And further details of the test:
http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/explanation.htm

Further - this follows on some tests that were done much much earlier in which the AES set up a set of wideband speakers (going up to and beyond 80kHz!) and went to a lot of bother to make sure they had the linear amplitude as well as phase required to make the test valid (something the above test did not do!).

Then they made recordings of live occurences in the street - trees in the breeze etc... and had people listen to them with various Lo-Pass filters in or out - testing for the point at which people no longer heard the difference.... Double Blind fashion - results were statistically analysed.

Interestingly in this analysis at least one person could detect the presence or absence of the 80kHz filter - and as the frequencies came down from there many could hear the lower filters.

There was however no analysis to the best of my knowledge of whether they were hearing the high frequency or its intermodulations which are within the 20-20kHz range.... (both of which would have resulted in the exact same results in the tests...)

So :
1) The first test is showing that for the majority of people 16/44 is indistinguishable from HiRez Audio. (mind you the women in the test had a better differentiation rate at 35% than the men at 50%.... the women had a statistically significant ability to tell the difference - the men didn't)
2) The 2nd test implies the ability to hear well beyond 20kHz - and therefore a requirement for HiRez audio.... but it doesn't differentiate between IMD and the recording.... (very tricky that!) - however it does make the point that many/most people (even audio pro's) cannot hear beyond 20kHz....

Interesting isn't it?!?

Getting back to vinyl, although it has theoretically wideband performance, you can mathematically calculate the distortion generated by tracking error, as well as the needle width.... to achieve acceptable performance (in distortion terms) at 15kHz requires a Micro Ridge type stylus (side/minor radius of less than 0.35um).
To do the same at 20kHz requires ?? - not sure ... But I don't think any needle can provide an accurate distortion free picture of what is happening beyond 20kHz. (yes I know about CD4 but that was FM encoded and therefore not as subject to normal distortion.... but more subject to phase)

Further - to protect the cutter heads, the high end was frequently EQ'd downwards.... Shure did some studies analysing the spectral profile of hundreds of recordings.... on average 15kHz is more than 15db down.... and as the frequency rises, the amount of information continues to drop.

So even if you can properly reproduce it.... there is very little there to reproduce by the time you get past 25kHz and further up. (and we have not debated whether what is there is actual sound or distortion/intermodulation)

There you go.... an opening shot in the wideband discussion....

bye for now

David
Dear Dlaloum: Well I agree that's difficult to pin down but in many ways this is a " land " that exist and is not discussed yet or at least not enough.

We have on hand the Pryso link:
http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm
that speaks of our brain/ears, we have cartrridges with a really wide frequency response starting as low as 6 hz and goes over 100 khz and my speakers as several others goes beyond 50 khz.
Now, the topic is a wide one because involves that turnover on the RIAA inverse eq., recording proccess and microphone specs, room treatment, live music frequency response, etc, etc. Maybe too wide and asking for a wide and specific knowledge at each different " level ".

We could try to analize. Then if it is ok, waiting for your " approach " on the subject: choose where to start with.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Are you planning on opening up the "wideband" debate here Raul....

The topic is both heated, and difficult to pin down... not just from the cartridge end but also from the speaker end...
Dear Dlaloum: +++++ " Sounds like your Phono stage implements the so called "neumann turnover" sometimes also called the "enhanced RIAA" EQ....
The JLTI I use does the same - I have implemented a calibration adjustment for when I do measurements, as the additional HF EQ does in fact have an impact on the high end ...." +++++

if normally during recording proccess the LPs came with this " additional turnover " to stop high frequency decay to infinite to 50 khz then common sense tell me that if we want to be truer to the recording then it is better to use it that way ( enhanced RIAA eq. ) but only a few phono stages have this option. Even that you posted " not critical on listening " ( because this happen on high frequencies away from our normal hearing sensitivity. ) my experiences about were that I can't hear differences, we have to remember that harmonics helps to modulate the whole music ears perception and if not for other " thing " we have to remember that link by Pryso that speaks of hearing ability even way over 50 khz " down " to 102.4 khz!

I think is time to test more in deep this recorded option on playback. I will try to find out some time in the future.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Timeltel, Dlaloum, Fleib - can someone tell me if there is a mechanical difference between the Empire 4000 DIII and the 4000 DIII Gold. They do differ in appearance. Is it just cosmetic ? Much appreciated Chris
Dear David, You could say that at any frequency, impedance is the sum of DC resistance plus reactance. "Reactance" is a AC resistance due to inductance or capacitance and is usually a complex function of both. I know you must know this; I just wanted to clarify for others.
While my search for the Holy Grail is over my addiction to ebay is still there. My excuse: I am now searching for others. Assuming that the most members never look at the
German ebay (www.ebay.de) my find may be of interest to some. Clearaudio Aurum Classic ,Alu or wood for 174 Euro. If needed I will be glad to help.

Regards,
For the transplant procedure Fleib is the man.... I ruined a possibly ok AT20sla needle trying it....

So right now I am in shell shocked state.... I will come back to this experiment later... (when I've recovered from snapping a good cantilever)

Fleib the thing to look out for is that strictly speaking resistance is a DC measurement and Impedance is an AC measurement and varies with frequency...
To properly measure impedance requires an LCR bridge and a variable frequency signal generator....

kconnor on Audiokarma did that for several Shure carts:

_________ M97-HE________V15RS____VI5xMR
50 Hz____ 824.6 ________479.5_____475.6
500 Hz____800.1 ________459.0_____454.7
1.0 kHz___773.2 ________429.9_____427.8
2.5 kHz___718.8 ________385.4_____385.3
5.0 kHz___663.2 ________350.3_____349.6
10 kHz___ 609.0 ________307.3_____306.9
15 khz____594.0 ________282.9_____283.4
20 kHz____597.7 ________269.2_____269.5

Which shows how the impedance varies with frequency.

Impedance specs are therefore only valid if quoted along with the relevant frequency at which they are measured.

DC resistance is what is measured by a multimeter... so one does expect a difference between the two.

My AT110 reads 517ohm and 603mH
My AT105 reads 516ohm and 575mH

(inductance also tends to vary with frequency... so there are some other gotchas in there....)

bye for now

David
Regards, Griffithds: If you're thinking of transplanting the stylus be sure to take a look at the link Dlaloum posted yesterday. This is an effective visual aid. It is imperative that as much of the thread sealing paint, lacquer, whatever, is removed first. Gently scrape out as much as possible and clear the slot of the screw head as best you can. Ensure that the screwdriver fits the head of the screw precisely and exert no more than a modest force when loosening the compliance screw or you'll strip the slot. Should this occur, then you have a fine stylus for an AT15/20Sa-SLa, this requiring a minimum of modification as described earlier.

Dlaloum and Flieb are also familiar with the transplant proceedure and they both give good information. Like a teen's first romantic encounter, once done it seems fairly straightforward. I practiced first on a ruined model (stylus, a ruined stylus) and found it helpful to visually inspect for azimuth by viewing the assembly from the rear, sighting the level of the magnets relative to the horizontal plane of the stylus grip. Compliance is somewhat determined by the pressure of the round pivot block against the plastic grip so you'll need to apply force with a fingertip as the compliance screw is tightend. Too little and the pivot block will be inadequately supported and the magnets will ground against the pole peices when VTF is applied. It won't damage anything but you'll definitely hear it & don't be surprised if it takes more than one effort to get it right.

Peace,
Dear Travbrow: That were my experiences with the Nagatron and the ones from you I had with the Supex that's as I posted is way better tracker than the Nagatron with that cheap stylus.

Good that you are enjoying the Supex, very good indeed.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Thank you Timeltel,

I ordered one of the Akai's. For $100, it will make a great doner. I'll let you know who it turns out.
Thanks again,

Don Griffith
Regards, Griffithds: Thanks for the kind words. The transplant operation is not for the faint of heart and also your reluctance to significantly modify the scarce TK7SU Signet grip is understandable.

For a simpler and cost effective means of accomplishing the same, an Akai RS-180 (Replacement Stylus-180) can be modified with a very easily done (hobby knife) clip of approx. 2.5-3mm of plastic at the rear, the sides only. The high quality high compliance (28x10-6cm dyne) RS-180 stylus is available for a relatively reasonable price and is a substantial upgrade from the elliptical ATN15XE. Search Conus Audio and click on "Accessories". The RS-180 is a rebadge of AT's square shank Shibata, nude mount on their TOTL alloy thin wall tapered cantilever and is just slightly less articulate than the beryllium cantilevered ATN20SS. Effectively an ATN15SA, no jagged edges to catch one's ear.

The Shibata's extended hf's, harmonious mids and solid, well defined bass match up well enough to have dedicated an EPA-500H arm to the AT15/RS-180 combo. Small modification aside, this is a technically correct replacement stylus and the suggestion is made with confidence. The RS-180 stylus assembly is also an excellent (!) donor candidate for the TK7SU.

The ATN155LC will not fit the AT15/20 body.

Peace,
David, I get 401 and 409 as the resistance of the 95. They list the impedance as 2.8K. I don't get it. Maybe there's something wrong with my Chinese meter, LOL. As I said previously, you can get a very nice performance out of a modded 95. Take off the top piece, fill the spaces with mortite and seal it with epoxy. Because it's not an up-line cart and doesn't even have the OCC wire and whatever else they do internally for TOTL carts, I don't think it will compete with a CA or 20SS etc. BTW, the bodies are not the same, just the plug that holds the cantilever. I think I mentioned earlier 3.2K as the impedance. I got it mixed up with the 440/120. If you're looking for a budget model that might have greater potential, look into the 110E. It has the OCC wire but I don't know the specs. The inductance of the 95 is 400pF.

Can you explain the discrepancy between the resistance and impedance?
Regards,
Hi Timeltel,

Thank you for answering my question. If it had been just a plug in operation, I would give it a try. I would have no problem attempting the surgery on the stylus housing, but that stylus would then only have limited use to me. You and a few others seem to have so much knowledge about things related to analog, asking this helps to improve mine.
If the 20SLa will work, then would the ultimate replacement be to 20ss? Concidering the cost of the styluses at this lever (including the 155LC), are all within a few dollars of each other.
Raul,
Just out of curiosity regarding these Clearaudio wood body cartridges.
Clearaudio makes reference to satine wood which to my knowledge is a tropical wood species known as bloodwood to me.
Satine wood varies in colour from orange, as seen with the Virtuos recently up for sale from the Netherlands,to shades of deep red.
A very dense and hard to work with, I have some heart wood samples.

Your black bodied Virtious looks to be African black ebony which I have samples of too, however just viewing a picture it could be something else that is stained.

It would be interesting to compare the two wood bodies direct. Perhaps someone here could donate their bloodwood sample to Raul just for comparisons.

Lately I've been experimenting with arm boards and have on hand a wide range of material.

I have abandoned metals for wood species and wood products such as B-25 panzerholz.

Twelve select species and counting laminated to panzerholz is revealing some great results, one that currently stands out is some very old rosewood laminated to panzerholz.
Changes I did so far to the Supex 100MKIII set up that helped. Positive VTA vs level that I started with, tracking at 1.35g for now, replaced cheap poor quality headshell wires with better quality ones and removed stylus guard. It has plenty of "WOW" factor now, a tight powerful controlled bass response, the highs are clean and detailed, the bright midrange I heard at first is tamed a lot and has nice definition and tone quality.

Raul you mentioned when playing the Nagatron at high volume levels distortions are easily heard, and I experienced it too. At lower volume levels the distortions are not as easily heard. The Supex sounds great at high volume levels. Just shows that first impressions are not always impressive, but a little patience with set up can show the potential of a cartridge and some models are more "picky" and take more tweaking to show that potential.
Another alternative for the Signet is the ATN152LP... that is the p-mount version of the AT155LC (AT152LP) stylus - identical in every way to the ATN155LC with the following exceptions: 1)no stylus guard, 2) slightly lighter plastic surround, 3) Slightly lower compliance - overall for a TK7 replacement stylus this might be superior to the ATN155LC - the lower compliance will work better with a heavier arm (which most people are using)... and the loss of the stylus guard removes a source of vibration, finally the reduced mass again is usually an advantage for a high compliance design like this one!

Going back to my request for data on the AT95.... I just woke up to the fact that the AT92 family (and all the various different names and numbers they go by) are the exact same engine... in a p-mount, and with a slightly different stylus surround, but the exact same plug.

So here is the data from a series of these that I have personally measured and own...

Cart. R ohm Z mH Z Bal R Bal
AT3472 403 435 0.0% 2.2%
MG-44J 424 442 0.9% 0.5%
AT3482P 403 428 2.3% 1.0%
DR250 395 457 2.8% 1.5%
DR200E 409 421 3.3% 0.2%
AT101P 409 428 3.4% 0.7%
Black? 411 465 5.4% 3.4%
PC-35 412 465 5.4% 1.0%

I have also included the variation between the Left/Right Channels in % terms for both R & Z.

I have no means for measurement of Impedance @ 1kHz

But this appears to confirm that the AT92/3600/95 family are the underlying generator in the CA MM family.

I have a plethora of these cartridges - and no decent styli for them !

Perhaps it is time for me to investigate their potential....

bye for now

David
Regards, Griff: #3 stylus grip won't physically fit the 15xe cart, closest compatible replacement would be an ATN20SLa. One can transplant the #3 stylus to the xe's grip but no coffee less than two hours before the operation. The AT15xe is a good listen with it's proprietary needle but to answer your question: Theoretically(!) the AT15 generator with the #3 stylus is performance-wise a TK7SU.

Acman3: The SSmith ruby cantilever/line contact stylus on the TK7?a might be a stunning combo. Do it Danny ;] and let us know. His line contact or a svelt Shibata with it's even sweeter hf's? Jico undoubtably has something but IIRC the boron cantilever is available only with the SAS.

The ATN155LC is good-to-go with this Signet. If you're not immediately drawn to the cart, after a side or two you should find yourself appreciative of the performance. Suggest arm level, maybe a hint of tail up on VTA. 1.15-1.2gm VTF, 47k-150pF total. IMHO, old rig & etc.

Peace,