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
I have been searching the web for DC resistance values for the AT95...

As measured by Fleib the DC resistance is 408ohm - so the difference between resistance and impedance is less extreme than I expected.

It would be interesting to find out whether the CA's in fact are AT95 bodies with mods.... (not that there is anything negative about that!)

With regards to retipping services (such as SoundSmith) - if the bodies are the same, one can purchase a CA Aurum Classic - Satine wood - for $300 at retail... fitting a ruby cantilever with TOTL needle is $400 - is the result therefore superior to the Maestro?

I am not being flippant, if the bodies are in fact the same ... then this approach could be used to upgrade a basic model.

Also worth asking - what are the differences between the different woods, and the aluminium bodies?

Are these differences "absolute" or "relative" - what I mean by that is, will one body work better with a particular headshell/arm and a different one with a differing headshell/arm? And therefore it is not a question of which is "king" put how to work out which is king for your specific combination!

Also if the AT95 body is confirmed as the same specification as the CA bodies - then it opens up the possibilities of wide ranging mod's and great flexibility....

The possibilities of an AT20ss stylus in an AT95 body... (as per http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=88878.20 )

And if the differences are really generated by the body damping variance (rather than the generator itself) - how much more potential is there in some of our existing favourites?

The AT95 was sold alongside the AT24/25 & TK9/10.... what potential is there is a hot-rodded TK10 as opposed to a Hot Rodded AT95?

I was in touch a while back with someone who had had a SS Ruby cantilever fitted to his V15V - he was not totally satisfied with the result... But there is a wide variety of excellent generators/bodies out there- and once we have a favourite, one that best combines with our arm/headshell/table - would we be better off organising a custom stylus/cantilever for it, rather than experimenting all over again with a new body...?

Possibly the CA range (if shown to be the AT95...) is the ultimate demonstration of what I have been saying in the past: 1) The stylus defines the sound, and especially the cantilever 2) the generator is of lesser importance 3) Vibration control is critica... headshell, arm, modifications to the body for vibration control...

I do not own an AT95 - anyone care to measure a few and post their data?

thanks

bye for now

David
If not already snapped up by one of us, there are two Virtuoso's for sale only a few clicks away on this website for $650; one of them seems to be NOS. But photos show that neither is sporting a "black" wood top, the wood is reddish brown. What's up with black wood? I don't mean to be flippant; if the wood is playing an important role in resonance control or damping, then the type of wood might be very important, and the difference in color might suggest that two different woods were used. Of course, the interaction of whatever headshell Raul is using against the wood contact area might be as important as anything else to his good results.
Hi Raul, more time spent with the Supex 100MKIII and I like it very much. Mine has a Red stylus with SMM/100E marked on the front.

The Nagatron highs did not improve with more hours so you are right that the Nagatron with the cheap stylus has too much distortions. The highs are just not refined and detailed, but the cartridge can be pleasent/fun to listen to. I may send my spare Nagatron for stylus/cantilever upgrade some time.
Hello Timeltel/Halcro, Do you think Soundsmith could put one of his Line contact styli in the funky Signet/AT stylus holders? Which one would you recommend to replicate the TK7LCA if possible. Just thinking out loud.
It is good to know that a cartridge that some may think is the "king of kings" is easily available. The Clearaudio Virtuoso Wood is $950.00 from Audio Advisor. I wonder if it is available cheaper from another source? I thought of trying the Maestro a while back but I guess the Virtuoso is better even though it is cheaper?
Dear Dlaloum/Timeltel/Fleib: +++++ " This is quite exceptional - I know of not other cartridges that achieve a resistance that remarkably low for a substantial midrange inductance.

Given the wide disparity between original AT specifications and the Clearaudio specifications... in combination with the rumours of their own cartridge making equipment, it is perhaps not so far fetched to assume that there is some form of arrangement with AT, which includes AT supplying bodies, and some of the parts, but that CA perhaps manufacture their own coils? " ++++++

well, IMHO CA has the skills and tools for design and build MC cartridges and the skills to design MM ones but maybe not the tools to do it. Let me explain a little:

as I posted time ago we are on the design and get our own cartridge but due that we have not the skill/tools to make it in " house " I contacted with three-four cartridge manufacturer ( OEM. ) options out there. The very first was VdH due that I have very good relationship with Dr. VdH and his answer was that even that he marketed MM cartridges he does not has the " tools " ( whole infraestructure. ) for build our MM/MI cartridge but he can help me if I decide for MC one.
I can't say if this could make sense to J.Carr ( for example. ) or to any other cartridge expert but that was the answer.

Now, we can't know for sure ( only CA and AT. ) what happened and is happening on the subject. We only can speculate that I don't really like it but this time I could get the " risk ".

It is clear to me that the cartridge body ( wood top plate ) was and is a CA idea and that I think they make it in house, I think too that ( Lewm, you could be right: the Suchy's don't take their value time where the money is not but where the money is: LOMC products. ) the cartridge tunning was made for CA people and could be too that AT build the motor/generator and CA not only fine tunned but assembly on its own facilities.
Even could be that today CA, as Timeltel posted, makes the whole cartridge with a licensed AT agreement.

I think that the main merit on the Virtuoso great quality performance belongs to CA. This guys someway or the other found out how kill ( almost eliminate. ) cartridge own resonances. I posted in the review something similar of what Fleib posted in this thread: cartridge body free of resonances, no stylus guard ( removable one. ), non-user removable stylus assembly, matched cantilever/stylus with those electrical characteristics, etc, etc.

All these made it that the cartridge shows a distortion-free behavior that no other cartridge I know has at this level. Because what we are hearing in the Virtuoso Black wood IMHO is not what is done/doing but mainly what it does not done/doing that all the other cartridges ( till today ) are doing.

What we are hearing through other cartridges ( any ) are distortions/colorations ( different levels. ) that the Virtuoso does not shares or that I can't detect it.

Btw, Fleib I don't think that the stylus/cantilever on my sample goes on the " exotic " side ( boron, line contact, ruby and the like. ), the cartridge is that good by design/build execution. J. Carr posted: if you are re-tipping your cartridge and you want to preserve the nearest to its original performance level it is important that the cantilever construction and build material be the same. In my sample the cantilever is similar to the aluminum in the original one.

Other thing that is clear to me because all what we posted here and in the review is that that AT-95 ( that I own and that I heard it a few moment ago is a TOTALLY different performer and for the people that could think that can change/convert the 95 in a Virtuoso are in mistake: NO WAY.
Fleib was ( twice ) very clear on this " misunderstood " subject.

IMHO and with out heared/tested in deep other today cartridges my take is that the cartridge history could be write: before and after the Virtuoso Black Wood!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Lew, I never heard a Maestro. I'm basing my conjecture on Raul's impressions, which seem reliable. All the CA MMs share the same basic generator. There might be some internal differences with the least expensive ones, but a Maestro is a Virtuoso in a wood overcoat rather than a top hat. It has a micro tip and a boron cantilever. The voicing of a cart is the sum of the contributions of these parts. Perhaps the wood Maestro has a little too much wood. I've only heard my 15/20SS with a SS tip. The beryllium/shibata is controlled, detailed. The shibata is a little sweet on the high end and gives it a seductive sound. I think I'm in agreement that the CA has just a little better motor. It seems slightly more open and real. I have a spare SS stylus. Maybe I'll transplant it when I'm feeling brave. I think the 2 bodies might be pretty close. It seems like specs win out with the CAs.
Regards,
Dear Griffithds: ++++ " BINGO!
I found the sweet spot on the Virtuoso. Man, is it up in the back. You would think I was plowing for potatoes. My Vandersteen's have never disappeared before in my room. What a difference. I have to figure out a way to mark this setting or my days of rotating cartridges would be over. This is true heaven. " ++++++

good that was my same experience. Now, don't give up on the subject, mark it as you suggest and try tiny additional VTA/SRA looking if the performance is degraded or you can hear more forceful, sonority or solidity in the sound.

As I posted in the review this was a " hard " worth time and even that I swear taht's was the right VTA/SRA at least two times I re-check and found out " something " even better: less colored ( if you could find any coloration in this CA low low colored cartridge as any I heard before. ) with lower distortions.

Yes, agree with you: this is a true heaven!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi timeltel and Halcro,

Am I understanding the both of you correctly? If I put a #3 Signet stylus with a AT15xe, I would then have at TK7SU? I'm asking because I have all the parts, just never thought of reassembling them this way.
Thanks, Fleib. My brief search among a few US dealers' websites did not show those optional alu types. So did you say you like the alu Maestro best? Can you share any ideas about how it compares to a top line vintage MM or MI, for example the AT20SS?
To whom it may concern, The AT-95 and CA MMs are NOT the same. I own both. My modified 95 isn't nearly as good, but a big improvement over a stock 95. Your sarcasm misses the mark. AT might not have the snob appeal of some high end companies, but is a logical choice to produce a superior cartridge. The style of the moving system and generator are the same as a 20SS, 155LC, etc etc etc. Here's what they look like w/o the wood.
http://www.clearaudio.de/_en/Tonabnehmer.php

Regards,
Hi Travbrow,

Yes, I knew you were joking. Many of us have been looking along time for one of these. There are many Kings. You happen to own one of them. Your a lucky man.
Dear Raul,
I was mostly kidding. I have many cartridges still to audition for the first time, so I am not a buyer. I was just referring to the fact that this thread (and this group of Audiogon members) must be in large part responsible for the increase in value and rarity of the best vintage MM and MI cartridges. If this ship changes course, it is quite likely to have an economic effect. Travbrow made the same observation in a different way.

Anyway, is there a consensus among you and the others who have already heard the Virtuoso as to which version is "the one" to get? What is a Maestro with a non-wooden body? (I think Fleib brought that up.) Is it still called "Maestro"? I have seen no mention of such a product on websites that sell CA cartridges.
Hi Griffithds, I would never sell the Technics. It is my favorite model and a true reference quality cartridge IMO. And since it can be rebuilt and retiped when needed, it wouldn't make sense for me to sell it. I was just joking about selling it, because it is hard for me to believe the CA AT 95 is better.
Regards, Raul: First, a clarification: NEVER heard either the AT95 or the Virt. However. When considering the AT95 relative to the Clearaudio it might be remembered that we all share 98% (sometimes more, it seems) of chromosones with a gorilla. Look it up. ;-). There are Corvettes, then there's the Z-06. Calloway 'Vette, anyone? Roush Mustang? Saleen? 550/Spyder? James Dean, James Dean, BaRoooom!

But then, there's very little of the rational about this hobby. Autos, that is. Everyone knows an audiophiles' involvement is purely intellectual.

Raul, there's a Virt. offered on Canuckaudio, a SSmith ruby cant./LC stylus, said to have had no use since done and priced at little more than the re-tip. There's reason to suspect this one could possibly be an improvment over your present example. Regretably no association, disclaimers apply.

(David, that one is most certainly not your Uncle Bob's AT95.)

Rear-wheel drive and a six speed waiting impatiently in the shed for this 98% gorilla---- if you ever see a big ape on a Schwinn--- :).

Peace,
The King is dead , Long live the king.

Raul's findings with the Clearaudio are both a game changer and a non event. It is a game changer for those seeking the best of the best. It opens new arenas to explore. But now the cost of entry and possible failure are increased. Do we have to send them to Soundsmiths for better materials ect..? To the lucky ones who have been able to get great sound at a low cost it is possibly a non event. Do my cartridges sound worse today than yesterday?

It is all part of the search for the grail which some of us cannot chase due do to money, time constraints or both. In this thread we could take a chance on others ears at a low cost. When people ask about new cartridges in this thread we were normally unable to respond to them due to our not having heard them and the cost of being experienced in so many modern carts.

However I do look forward to learning about modern cartridges if this thread is able to make that transition.

Thanks to all,
Danny
Dear Lewm: The ? in your post means that you are asking for opinions?, I hope so, this is mine:

if the Technics is the MK4 and stand alone carrtridge ( not headshell integrated. ) and in good operational condition then go a head if, too, your pocket is fat enough to get the Virtuoso is not then go for the CA.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Amazing. The AT-95 is now Raul's best ever cartridge this month.
Just put an aftermarket wood body on it, like the denon 103 and you have the world's best cartridge.

Must admit, the linn k9 ( another dressed up at95) sounds pretty good. Raul, please review this cartridge

Anyone sent Raul's review to clearaudio? Peter Suchy no longer needs to make his Goldfinger or any other lomc's.

I guess this really does prove that your systems tonal abilities and hearing really do drive one's choices of neutrality and musicality
This is somewhat disconcerting: Peter: +++++ " The original cantilever was aluminum with a very low cost bonded elliptical stylus. +++++

I guess it really doesn't make much difference but I doubt if CA makes these "in house". The cart is AT through and through. The generator and suspension, even the plug is classic AT. Impedance and DC resistance terms are often used interchangeably, but the DC resistance of mine is 408 ohms in 1 ch and 409 in the other. CA chose parameters that meet their high performance goals. The fact that the CA line use an AT 3400 series plug is also a cleaver choice. There are no high performance 3400 series styli available. CA's charge for re-tip is excessive. Not all CA MM have a wood top. Maybe they make the tops or finish the body work in house. I suspect Peter Ledermann will be getting many more of these.

It is probably the combination of body damping and cantilever/tip type, that determines whether it's optimally damped. The Maestro has more extensive use of wood. An aluminum cantilever is livelier. The greater excursions provide a more robust sound. A more rigid cantilever is more detailed and refined, all else being equal. More extended contact tips extract more High Freq info and tend to be brighter. I haven't tried an exotic stylus on my Virtuoso yet, but I suspect, going on Raul's impression, that the black wood Virtuoso or a non wood Maestro is the one to get. I also suspect that cu/arm match up might have something to do with with results.
Regards,
Hi Raul,

I know a number of the cartridges we are interested in were originally specified for 100k, but I believe many of these had a dual specification.
100pf for CD4 and 40k for stereo.

When you think about it this makes sense:
CD4 has a low pass filter set at 15kHz - the 100k setting provides a more neutral frequency response up to 15kHz - and what is happening after 15kHz is irrelevant (for the front channels)
The rear channels are FM Modulated - so the main requirement is that there be minimal phase variation, and level is still above -15db at 50kHz.... flatness of response is not so important.

In Stereo mode, those same cartridge roll off the high end, providing a flatter response 20-20kHz, (eliminating or reducing the LCR resonance) - but response falls off relatively rapidly after 20kHz, and will be dramatically below -15db at 50kHz making it unusable for CD4.

I certainly understand the compromise you are making... and there is a very strong case to be made for the midrange and lower high end being far more important than the HF extreme.... and therefore 100k providing better results.

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 (from 13kHz onwards the curve starts to diverge from standard RIAA - initially by around 0.1db, at 20k by 0.67db, 30k 1.7db - not totally critical for listening, but it does have an impact when measuring...

Bye for now

David
Maybe the prices of vintage cartridges will drop now since this current made Clearaudio is the new Raul endorsed "best" cartridge? I didn't trust buying the Clearaudio a couple years ago thinking it was just another overpriced cartridge made today. People who move on from the Clearaudio AT 95 to high end MC models must have defective ears because if the Clearaudio is so great why would anyone want or need to upgrade to something better? I am confused now.

Anyone want to buy a Technics EPC P100C MKIV, so I can buy the latest best cartridge ever made? I could sell off all my vintage "gems" and buy this Clearaudio model and be done? Hopefully the value of my "gems" doesn't depreciate too much.

The clearaudio AT 95 is a low compliance model, there goes the theory of high compliance cartridges being mostly better trackers with less distortions, right?
Hi Raul, thanks for sharing your Supex experience. The Supex sounded cleaner than my Nagatron, but the midrange was too bright and forward and overall sounded "boring" . I will give it more time and try to get it set up better, you say it competes with the AT 180 and other great cartridges so that means a lot, well worth what I paid for it then.

I can't adjust capacitance loading though unless I modify my preamp, how important is capacitance loading to hear the Supex sound that good? Other models I have sound great without added capacitance. I think my tonearms are good enough to hear the Supex potential.
I just visited the Miller Audio website and pulled down the data from their testing of the Aurum Beta cartridge...

Based on those results... one observation is that the cantilever resonance is up past 20kHz (it peaks at 18k - no way of knowing whether it continues rising thereafter from that data... to me it looks like a peak between 21k and 23k)

Based on the test data, I estimate that Miller Audio are using a C load of around 400pf.

Now for the real kicker - the core response of stylus cantilever from 200Hz to 6kHz is the most linear that I have seen measured on any MM - they all tend to drop a bit, the best I've measured so far is the TK9... this is substantially better - I can only assume that this is related to the very low impedance.... reduced losses?
That the results in a reduced droop between 8k and 15k (which is filled out by LCR resonance).

Looks like I will need to hunt down a stylussless Clearaudio MM for further experiments!

Looks to me like a very sophisticated body - with relatively ordinary styli.. (in a range of stylus qualities and materials).

This is not your grandads AT95!

bye for now

David
Mea culpa - I was not paying attention... that 660ohm is impedance and not resistance... that should imply a resistance of less than 200ohm for a inductance of 420mH

This is quite exceptional - I know of not other cartridges that achieve a resistance that remarkably low for a substantial midrange inductance.

Given the wide disparity between original AT specifications and the Clearaudio specifications... in combination with the rumours of their own cartridge making equipment, it is perhaps not so far fetched to assume that there is some form of arrangement with AT, which includes AT supplying bodies, and some of the parts, but that CA perhaps manufacture their own coils?

An interesting cartridge....

Thank you Raul for raising its profile...

bye for now

David
Dear Dlaloum: Always are trade-offs. Mines on the 100k impedance subject is more for convenience due that in my Phonolinepreamp to change impedance means solder/unsolder resistors and I really can't take all that time when I'm testing so many cartridges. I can tell you that differences are not huge but I want to remember you that several vintage cartridges were designed to " see " 100k.

My Phonolinepreamp has an interesting option, I can choose between the RIAA inverse eq. with its decay on the high frequencies to infinite or stop that HF decay at 50k where with this option I can have a more " open " sound on the highs ( with out phase shift. ), as a fact I understand that in the recordings this is exactly what is done because the cut heads goes so hot over 50k that you have to cut at no more than 50khz. Several recordings came in this way.
This is an option that I can use along 47k on impedance, I remember years ago I tested but for some reason I choosed ( maybe to conform exactly with the RIAA with out take in count what happened during recording proccess. ) 100k on impedance.

Anyway, trade-offs are part of audio.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Don: +++++ " I'm trying to get my hands on one of the Black Virtuoso's but the only web site that I have found that pictured it was in German. " +++++

almost all these people speak English so my advise is that just contact them and that's all. I'm sure you will have an answer in english too.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Nandric: Well those " masters " knows a lot more than you and me.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Now that Fleib posted about his Clearaudio I remember where my sample came and in what condition.

I bought it through ebay Italy at very good price, seller/owner said that the cartridge was near mint condition but he thought there was a problem on cartriudge suspension and that's why the price.

I bougth it and ask him to send directly to Soundsmith ( I did not choose VdH as usually because VdH refuse to use aluminum cantilever and my thought was that if for any reason the CA need it a cantilever change VdH will use boron one and I don't want it that way. ). I let know to Peter about and he told me that needs repair, this are the emails between him and I:

+++++ " The Clearaudio can be rebuild with aluminum, or either of the two diamond Contact Line varieties with Ruby cantilever. The paperwork says “aluminum/elliptical” but it also said that you want advice. " +++++

mine: ++++++ " About to fix a cartridge I always think and want that the cartridge “ return “ to original condition, in the similar way that was designed. So I prefer that the Clearaudio be fixed with out the Ruby/contact line but in the way that could be nearest to the original. " +++++

Peter: +++++ " The original cantilever was aluminum with a very low cost bonded elliptical stylus.

The Ruby with either of my contact line styli will give far better performance than the original parts. The Aluminum/Elliptical is also better than the original parts " +++++

Mine: +++++ " This can be fine: “Aluminum/Nude elliptical. " +++++

and this is what I have. That Peter " low cost bonded stylus " could have a little " weight " trying that I decide for the other two higher price options but I stay with the aluminum/elliptical option.

A friend of mine owns a fresh Virtuoso Red wood and I think that in the next days I could have on hand for a few hours to give it a listen. I think that if not for other thing both cartridges could sound different because different kind of wood that resonate and damp different.

After several weeks I received it but never mounted till a few days ago. Sometimes we have a " mine of gold " in front of us and we just don't see it.

Btw, through Internet I can't find Virtuoso's on sale by its owners, this could means that there are not many out there or that their owners are satisfied as Griffithds posted and whom I think goes for its third sample!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,

BINGO!
I found the sweet spot on the Virtuoso. Man, is it up in the back. You would think I was plowing for potatoes. My Vandersteen's have never disappeared before in my room. What a difference. I have to figure out a way to mark this setting or my days of rotating cartridges would be over. This is true heaven.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " to think that Peter Suchy sat around "tuning" this cartridge which he had made for his product line by AT, apparently. However, my guess is that there was a large dollop of luck involved.... " ++++++

that could be, whom knows for sure, but that does not change the fact that thank's to that great luck or voicing surged that great cartridge performer.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Siniy123: Well, the 170 performs different from the 180 , I own both.

No, I don't think we are so different because the 20SS goes up to the 160 as you I think the main difference is with the 155 in the other side there are different 160's I don't know if yours is the same that mine. You can check on the cartridge top plate and compare model with mine.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
I have posted as a reply on Rauls review, the differences between the specifications of his cartridge, and the specifications right off the manual that came with my older cartridge. There were differences to be sure.
I have just found my copy of the original review by Robert J. Reina Posted Dec 22, 2002 in Stereophile. I don't understand why, but the specs. he reports are the same as what Rauls are? Concidering the date, it should have been the same as what is printed in my Clearaudio Virtuoso Wood manual,(my 2 cartridges were bought one in early 2003 and the other in 2007).
Raul, did you get a manual with your cartridge, and were the specs. that you posted from the manual or from what is being printed on the web sites? I do not understand why my manual for my cartridge from Clearaudio would be any different than what got reported in the press or on the web? Up until this discovery, I thought perhaps there has been 2 versions of the cartridge. Now I'm not so sure?
Dlaloum, Dean_man, Indeed you can improve the performance of most AT carts, but a 95 is not a Virtuoso and you won't get (IMO) a TOTL performance. I don't think the 95 even has OCC wire. The generators are different. The impedance of the 95 is 3.2K. My 95 is potted internally and has an aluminum top plate. It sounds really good but doesn't seem to have the finesse of the Virtuoso. The Jico shibata stylus for the 95 will fit the Clearaudios if the plastic wings are cut off. It too is outperformed by a high quality orig AT stylus transplanted in an appropriate plug. All the Jico styli for these are bonded with a straight alum cantilever. For those interested in transplanting, the link above (AudioCircle thread) has pics and discussion about it. I'll check the pics and maybe add some more.
Regards,
Regards, Raul: You're correct. The first place I should have looked for info. concerning the CA Virt. was right here on A'gon. Nice review. The 5 x 80um figure was given elsewhere but as the earlier 4 x 40 contact area figure was provided by an unquestionably "knowledgable" source it was quoted. So, heads up!, revisions have been made.

There is a lot of interesting and sometimes heated speculation about the cart and it's paternity on other forums. Without direct info from CA or AT, the important thing to consider is that it's tuned by Clearaudio and equipped with a stylus assembly designed by and unique to the Virt. There is a reference to CA having purchaced Elac's cartridge mfg. equipment circa 1991, CA should be capable of producing these entirely in-house, as stated. IMHO the four-pole generator/V-magnet design is a very good one, performance rather than patents and liscencing agreements are this thread's concern. It does appear that this isn't your father's AT.

Peace,
Dlaloum/David,

Regarding your comment--
"one does wonder how much potential there might be in a basic AT95....Perhaps with the HE or Shibata stylus mounted..."

I feel the same way but haven't yet taken advantage of these options that are indeed available. LP Gear is marketing the AT95 upgraded with those two stylus choices, reasonably priced. They can be found in the "LP Gear cartridges" link on the cartridge page of their website. The Shibata version got a great review in Stereo Times if I recall.

Best,
Jim
Raul,
In my playbook AT24, AT155LC, AT15SS outperform ATLM170 and AT160ML with more visceral and tactile sound. ATLM170 and AT160ML are better (gripper) trackers, but more subdued, thinner and less enjoyable. if I would transfer LP to digital I would use ATLM170 and AT160ML as more accurate, but for pure enjoyment with not a single problem during playback I'll pick first group.

Nowadays I'm not listening very ofter, may be once a week. So, when I seat down and listen I want instant gratification.

I guess our sound priorities are different.

Thanks
Hi Raul, Yes I own a Virtuoso, one with a red wood top. Unlike you, I bought it with a broken cantilever. I was curious about these carts and when I learned that AT was the OEM, I picked it up for experimentation. It shares the same stylus plug as the AT-95 but is a much more sophisticated cartridge. I'm sure Clearaudio worked with AT in developing the generator and voicing the cartridge. It seems to have about the lowest compliance of any AT MM. It's similar to an AT-95 or 7V. That would be around 6 or 7cu @ 100Hz. This was probably chosen for greater compatibility with heavier arms and necessitates relatively heavy VTF. I disagree with you about the voicing of the stylus/cantilever. Although the top carts have the best stylus etc, the generators seem to be identical with all Clearaudio MM. If you broke in a Maestro and then put the stylus on the Virtuoso, you might not be able to tell them apart. Indeed, if you sent out your Virtuoso for an exotic tip/cantilever, it might outperform a Maestro. We are in agreement about the Clearaudio MM though. They are excellent. I have a 7V stylus on mine and it sounds considerably better than my modified 95. The textures, detail and natural presentation are really outstanding. I'm looking forward to hearing it with a better stylus.
Regards,
Lewm,
My version of the Virtuoso is the original one. Reviewed by Stereophile back in 2002. I bought my 1st one in 2003, after reading that review. Bought the 2nd one in about 2007 after unplanned sugery to the cantiliver. I had several M/C's at the time and my only M/M was a Ortofon M20FL. I had not heard how great the M20FL could be because of the unknown (on my part), tipped SRA requirement for this jewel. So to me, until the Virtuoso, M/C's rule the day. My top M/C is th Benz Micro Ruby III. I seldom use it because I truthfully, can not readily identify when it is in my system or when the Virtuoso in the system. They sound so similiar that I had to actually get up off my a-s and look to determine which on was playing. When one cost $3000, and the other $700, which one to use to me became a no brainer. Currently, thanks to this thread, my favorite is the Audio Technica 15sa with the 20ss stylus. This is by the slightest of margins I assure you. All three are so close, I would be hard pressed to rate then be 1,2,3. Rauls report has convince my that the new version of the Virtuoso is truly an improvment over my model. My model I think of as a vintage Virtuoso. Perhaps, there is truly a new King. I'm trying to get my hands on one of the Black Virtuoso's but the only web site that I have found that pictured it was in German. I do not speak German so ?????????. If someone has a lead on where to buy one (in English), please post.
Dear friends: If any of you are interested this is a trusty source with good price:

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1317543188&/Clearaudio-Virtuoso-wood-

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: That was the stylus shape in 2001 not today that is a little different as you can read in the review.

My experiences with the Virtuoso and Maestro shows me that as good the Maestro is the Virtuoso is IMHO bettter performer with out that added warm in the full wood body in the Maestro. Please go to the posts in the review where you can read something about.

Anyway, Clearaudio done with those two MM cartridges.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Halcro, That's just the way AT designates their carts. The complete model # is on top. Unlike Fidelity Research, AT has produced hundreds of models over the years. There is even a duplication or two. When the Signet line was redesigned, if there was just a TK7 on top the new version would not have a stylus interchangeable with the older ones anyway. The stylus/plug is different on the LCA and I think the Ea. The older ones use the same stylus as an AT-15/20 and the newer ones - the 120. At that time AT started using the modern 440/120 style plug on the TOTL. BTW, I think if you cut away the plastic wings from any AT stylus and use it like a Clearaudio plug, you can get better performance. I put a little bit of tack around the plug at the bottom of the body. Sometimes the fit isn't quite as tight as I like. Here's a thread on the subject with pics etc.
www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=88878.0

Regards,
Hi Folks,

I am very interested in the links between the ClearAudio's and the very very basic budget AT's

They point to the huge potential of these generators, and the fact that the limitations are NOT related to the generators but are related to the stylus and the resonance control - ie the generator mounting - shell around the generator - and the headshell/generator interface, as well as the resonance control between generator and stylus - in this case with the stylus permanently adhered to the generator.

The Clearaudio is "Clearly" a custom hot-rodded Audio Technica. And the results are apparently appropriately high end.

Given that the Virtuoso is using an Aluminium cantilever - one does wonder how much potential there might be in a basic AT95....
Perhaps with the HE or Shibata stylus mounted...

Getting top results might of course require hand picking a body from 10 or 20 of them for the best balanced channels in both inductance and resistance domains.

I don't know how tight production tolerances are, so I don't know whether you would need 5, 10 or 50 to get a single one that is sufficiently tightly specced.
Then there is the custom body to be built of anti-resonant materials (whether wood, metal or otherwise...)

When a professional company like ClearAudio produce something like this, they provide an excellent product for the well heeled - and the obsessive - but they also shine a light on a direction in which the ardent tweaker can head.

I also find it interesting Raul, that as per your usual practice, you listened to the Virtuoso at 100k ohm loading.

So I would like to point out, that regardless of the designers voicing intent - you re-voiced it to your personal preference.

After testing a lot of cartridges, I am finding that 100k seldom provides a neutral response across the frequency range, it almost invariably provides a substantially rising high end.

On the other hand it does tend to fill in the lower high end trough which appears to be common to all the MM's I have tested. (between about 8k and 13k or thereabouts)
So you trade off boosted highs (13kHz +) in exchange for improved neutrality in the 8k to 13k range.

This will artificially boost those frequencies that the older ones among us are less sensitive to (perhaps why it is popular?) - in addition to providing neutrality in a frequency range that we can all hear.

But I do wonder whether we can have our cake and eat it too - achieve both goals and a flat f-r across the range - using a hybrid digital/analogye system with digital EQ....

bye for now

David
It's a very romantic notion, to think that Peter Suchy sat around "tuning" this cartridge which he had made for his product line by AT, apparently. However, my guess is that there was a large dollop of luck involved, if the Virtuoso is as good as Raul says it is.

Dgriffiths, You were not with us from the beginning. (I don't think I was, either, but I came in a year or two before you.) In any case, and in contrast to what you write above, this thread HAS been about vintage MM and MI cartridges, on the premise that "they don't make them like they used to". So Raul's review of the Virtuoso is a bombshell of sorts, a teeny tiny bombshell perhaps.
Raul, Don't misunderstand me; I do admire your honesty, and I know you've exposed yourself to criticism by changing your tune so dramatically. That takes some courage. If you read back among these more than 4000 posts, you will see that once in a while in the early phases I raised the specter of the current crop of MM and MI cartridges, not to say that I knew they would be good but only to say that I wondered out loud about how some of them could compare to the vintage ones. At that point, you already had good things to say about a few of them (Nagaoka, Grado Amber The Tribute, and at least one or two more), and you delegated some to second tier status (SoundSmith's lesser offerings). I was then and am still interested in the top line Grados. New generation Garrott Bros. cartridges may be of interest as well. Also, top line SoundSmith. But it costs a lot more to experiment with those.

Have you thought about building a special edition of your phonolinepreamp with MM-only gain that woould include selectable resistive and capacitative loading? I think there is a niche market for that, especially now.
Dear Raul, I can confirm your hypothesis reg.the 'tuning' or the 'voicing' of an cart by the 'master'. A former technician by Benz was my guest in Holland for a week.We compared 6 different carts while I was in particular interested in two of them: the LP and the Ruby 3S. According to the 'technician' both carts have the same 'motor' and the only difference is the wood-kind for the corpus. Well they sounded different to me qua 'tonality' and I preferd the Ruby as more 'neutral'. So deed my Swiss guest. But I am still confused because of this so called 'burn in period'. The 'master' in casu must also possess some extraordinary capability to be able to know how the same, already 'tuned' cart, will sound after, say, 40 hours of actual use.

Regards,
Regards, Raul: Your opinions are never disregarded. Consequent to a small amount of seeking info. online.

ClearAudio Virtuoso:
Description: Moving-magnet phono cartridge.
Stylus profile: Not specified. (See below)
Frequency range: 20Hz-20kHz.
Output voltage (1kHz, 5cm/s): 3.6mV.
Channel separation (1kHz): >30dB.
Channel balance (1kHz): <0.2dB.
Trackability: >90µm.
Recommended tracking force: 2.0-2.5gm.
Electrical impedance (1kHz): 660 ohms.
Coil inductivity: 0.42mH.
Load resistance 47k ohms.
Load capacitance: 100pF.
Cantilever: aluminum.
Weight: 6.0gm.

Stylus contact area is given as 4 x 40 micrometers in this quote from Robert Weaver, "The Stereo Times", Aug 1, 2001: "This shape dates back to a late 1960’s Japanese design purchased by Peter Suchy" (father of ClearAudio's Robert Suchy, Robert was Weaver's source). This is consistent with a parabolic stylus. The electrical configuration would indicate the generator compares with the AT15, AT20, Shure Ultra VST-111, V15-V, Tech. EPC-207 and Nagoaka 200/300, some very good company and the extended cantilever is an interesting approach to MM cartridge design.

Raul, the only comment I found resembling even the slightest criticism was a single comment that one listener found the ClearAudio Maestro even better than the Virt.

P.S.: Thank you, Griffithds.

Peace,
Dear Halcro: Please do it.

I'm trying to get a 2M Black to give a full listen in my system hopping to find out a trend on the great performance road build by the Clearaudio Virtuoso. Good that Lyra take that " lower price " road in favor of gives their customers high quality for a reasonable price.

About reviewers I can't trust in them any more. The Stereophile people gives B rank to the Virtuoso when the SS SG the SMMC1 and the Voice received all an A. IMHO my Virtuoso outperforms easy all them. I don't want to follow speaking on ST reviewers.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.