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.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Harold, Fleib et al -
This saga is a guessing game to no avail.
We need Harold to describe what he is hearing in order to identify possible causes. If he has sibilance but the cartridge tracks fine then .... . If he has mistracking as well as sibilance, then it is more likely the cartridge is rooted.
In my vocabulary sibilance is the accentuation of SSSSSSS's. It may or may not be accompanied by missttttttttracking, which is a separate issue.
It never ceases to amaze me how people will shag around with rooted cartridges.
As far as I know, once missttttttttttracking has occurred once ( the first time ), then the record has been permanently damaged.
OMG down goes another $400 Lyrita pressing I cant get any more.
No worries, I'll throw on the only copy I've got of Manoug Parikian/LSO/Vernon Handley "Elizabeth Maconchy" TAS Lyrita SRCS 116 and see if I can screw that one too.
Harold - sorry I posted at the same time as you. I would expect a cracked diamond to misstrack - probably on one channel only. This is not sibilance.
Brightness is not sibilance either. You can have sibilance ( my definition SSSSSS's ) without brightness. You can have brightness ( sharp, unnatural or rising upper frequencies in my language ) without sibilance. Most records have been cut with non standard cutting angles, and most records have RIAA errors in them. Virtually all cutting heads dont conform to RIAA, but some were corrected by compensation in the cutterhead amplifiers, some not. I have access to a phono amplifier that has a flat mid ( no RIAA through the midrange ) and it sounds more harmonically complete than most RIAA phonos. RIAA's of +-0.1db etc dont mean jack really. It's a bit like those fancy direct drives with an accuracy of 33+-0.0000**1% - because if you are running a pivot arm with an overhang then rotational speed needs to be adjusted for the changing overhang as the arm transverses the record. Now if they were really smart they could program this into the speed controller.
Regards, Harold n-t-b: Were I in the market, this one looks 100% correct:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/150955609685?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

On pg. 161, this thread, Grbluen2 discussed a problem with a rotated AT stylus, see his 09-09-'12 post. There were several suggestions made & the problem was resolved. AT styli are fairly sturdy assemblages. If rotated they can be (sometimes, a la Grbluen2) "tweezed" back into a usable azimuth. If off-axis and unlistenable, you might try pushing against the compliance donut at the base of the cantilever with a blunt rod. A wooden matchstick comes to mind. This should be done with due deliberation. Of course.

If loaded above 200pF the 20SS tends towards brightness. With a VTF in the 1.3-1.4gm range and aligned by the cantilever, should the response still seems grainy or etched then it seems likely the stylus assembly is defective.

As an alternative, consider an ATN-15XE stylus. Elliptical on aluminum, slightly diminished detail & apparent extension but a capable performer with a slightly warmer character.

Good luck!

Peace,
Harold, if you can't return the stylus maybe you could fix it. If the tip is in good shape it's worth a try. First remove the stylus and inspect. To quote Timeltel, "If inspection of the "V" magnets proves them to be in the correct 45* position relative to the pole pieces but the stylus is not vertical then replacement/repair should be considered."

If the magnets are rotated the cantilever can be turned by using the compliance screw on the inside of the plug, which is the part that fits inside the body. This screw is painted over and must be scraped away. Once loosened, the whole cantilever can be rotated. If you don't feel you're able to do this (it often takes four or five tries), then send it to Axel for a nominal fee. Look for magnets out of alignment. This will tell you if it's repairable.
Regards,
Hello all been awhile but have kept up with the thread. I just pulled the trigger for a 20 ss nos replacement from stereoneedles for my at15sa body. The price was fair and lower than a few others i found. I bought a at 160ml using it with a 155lc body and it sounds so good i haven't taken it out of service for months now from them so it seams there legit.

I received Axels repair of my p100le awhile back but had a acutex 320 short noise mounted on my micro sheiki 505 and and can't get enough of it. Seams the suspension is loosing its grip. Think i will send to Washington for repair. Anyhow mounted the le have 10 hrs on it and from jump it is seductive and pretty much sounds like Rauls description in his review.

Just picked up a stanton 881s mk2 from the description by the seller might be close to nos piece. I've been unlucky when it comes to this cartridge with 2 prior ones. It has such good write ups and reviews gotta be another winner for the mm fans. Has any of you enjoyed or not this one.
Mike
Hi Mike, great minds think alike. I also picked up a AT 20ss replacement. The sources are getting slim, and after Harold's situation, I was thinking how close I was to not hearing the beryllium 20ss.

I think the Stanton 881s is very good. Stylus are hard to come by.

Glad you got the p100le going. Let us know how it progresses.

Glad to hear things are good.
Hello Harold, the AT 20ss on the terminator is really special. Good luck on getting it fixed. Not even a hint of sibilance.

As Professor Timeltel mentioned the 15xe is surprisingly good. I modified an Akai RS180 shibata to work on the body and it is close to the 20ss. The AT 14 should also work if similarly modded. It is I think the same as a 15sla. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Best of luck!
Dear Dover, You wrote, "rotational speed needs to be adjusted for the changing overhang as the arm transverses the record". I think what you refer to is the fact that the cutter head is like a straight-line tonearm. Thus when one is playing an LP with a pivoted tonearm, there is effectively a tiny speed error as the LP revolves and the stylus tip describes its arc across the LP, moving from one groove to the next inner one. But this error is VERY tiny from one groove to the next, is very regular in nature and so less likely to be disturbing to one's sense of pitch, and reaches its worst extreme in the central part of the record surface, gradually correcting itself as the stylus reaches the innermost grooves. I just cannot believe anyone can hear it. Do you really think you can? I think this effect is trivial compared to irregular speed variations due to stylus drag or turntable mechanism idiosyncracies.
Hi Mike, The Stanton 881S seems to be better then Mk 2
version. You should check on the net first. I have a spare
881 S stylus (D 81) but don't believe the stylus is the
cause.
Hello Acman, Exactly, very special with the Tomahawk wand, you and other owners know that this combination is a terrific, even "winner" performer.
The AKAI RS180 looks exactly like the stylus/cantilever ass´y that was originally on my cart. Mine has the AT logo and "20SLa" printed on bottom. These cantilevers are quite bulky compared to much thinner beryllium on my ATN20SS which looks exactly like the Pfanstielh 203-DQX currently on auction on eBay. These beryllium cantilevers have only the logo on bottom.
However, the AKAI stylus may very well sound excellent with the SLa body.
I agree that the 881s MK II seems to have some negative "press" on the web. I wonder if it might be due to quality control issues with the MK II stylus, which have also been chronicled.

Clouding the picture, at least one member of the 881 design team has written that the MK II stylus represented a step forward. So several months ago when an opportunity to acquire a MK II presented itself I decided to enter a bloody battle to get it lol. I considered it an expensive gamble but got "lucky" and received a NOS stylus that sounds at least as good as my two D81 styli that also were acquired NOS.

I haven't read about any differences between the two 881 bodies, but I stopped researching the thing after getting that last stylus. Is anyone aware of differences between the two bodies?
Dear Stltrains: Your 15Sa with the 20SS certainly is a " winner " and almost the 20SS. We have to remember that the main difference between the 15 and the 20 model is because this one measured better due that the the stylus tip was more " perfect " than the similar one of the 15 models.

I have on hand two other 320 short nose samples other that the one I sold. I don't tested yet but for what I remember in my first sample the 320 quality level performance is second to almost none. I don't like how the cartridge looks but I like its performance level.

Good to know that your AKG P100LE is back now, you will enjoy it. I think that after my review I did not give a listening any more.
IMHO this AKG is in a different " league " that many of the well regarded cartridges we usually talk about. I don't post very often on the P100LE because people have no reference because they never had the opportunity to heard it not even once. I think that you and me are living alone in the AKG " island " a unique island I have to say.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Raul yes unfortunately i have not been able to get my hands on a 20ss body/cartridge as of yet. I did get lucky enough to grab the 15sa and really looking forward to the combo. If it delivers anywhere near the musical satisfaction my 155lc 160ml give i will be a happy music lover.

Yes 320 short noise is not pretty but as you say boy can it sing. It was not easy removing 320 to mount p100le. It seems the suspension is getting a little weak. I was considering giving the fellow in Washington a try. Has any of you done any business with northwest.

I now have nearly 25 hrs on my akg and have not been disappointed at all in what i am hearing. Layered and spread out music to behold.
Mike
To all,

Great buy on what is a rebranded Ortofon Digitrac OM 20.

Ebay number=== 271116407270

Regards,
Don
Hi All,

"Just when I think I'm out, they drag me back in".

Axel has revamped an Acutex 420 STR and sent it to me. When put on an Audio Technica MG-10 magnesium headshell on my AC3300 LB, it is simply a great cartridge. I recommend anyone who already owns this cartridge to consider sending it to Axel for changes.

A seriously worthy contender

As always...
Hi Dgob,

I have 2 of the 420's. One never taken out of the box. Did he say what was revamped? I would asume a cantilever/stylus change but to what. Would I just ask for Dgob's conversion?
Regards,
Don
Dear comrade Don, With all those MM carts I was forced to 'invent' some 'exit strategy'. In my case this strategy consist of hypothetical assumptions regarding the resell
possibilities of each cart I buy. While I like Axel very much he gets from me only carts with broken styli or cantilevers.It is not my intention to provide him with
'healthy' cantilevers/styli combos as a kind of solidarity contribution.

Regards,
Hi Griffithds,

So as not to repeat myself or bore the largely uninterested, might I suggest that you look at my Glanz thread as I have discussed these points with others on there.

I hope that helps

As always...
Gentlemen, Many thanks for your very informative guidance and taking care of my problem.
The further The Tale of the Sibilant AT20SLa proceeds, the more professors appear in the scene.
Let me repeat the facts:
The ATN20SS never misstracked or, to say more precisely, I never heard misstracked/distorted sound, but it suffered from sibilance and over brightness. Under magnification the stylus/cantilever itself seems to be OK. Also the "V" magnets proved to be correctly oriented to the pole pieces. Only the cantilever was slightly bent. This proves the otherwise pure sound. Logical ?
For me it really has been a challenge to try to solve this interesting problem. Following Timeltel´s instructions by pushing against the compliance donut very gently using a wooden stick I have managed to straighten the cantilever much ! Now it´s only a few degrees off-axis. But I don´t dare to push more, I probably would cause damage to fragile suspension. So I will leave it for more capable hands...
I have adjusted the cart slightly to the right on the headshell (from viewing above) to compensate the now very slightly bent cantilever so that it will track correctly.
And I need to buy this: Tomahawk 2 with rotating headshell.
Carts with off-axis cantilevers can easily and correctly adjusted , another wonder of the TERMINATOR.
Also the azimuth seems OK under magnification.
And following Timeltel´s suggestion I´m running lower VTF at 1.4 g and I have got rid of over brightness, just a hint left !
But the sibilance is still, a bit lower though.
Logical conclusion: the AT20SS must be 100 % perfectly adjusted to a certain, very narrow range of values to avoid sibilance, no compromises ?

To confirm the stylus´ condition I have bought this stereo microscope:

http://www.villenkello.fi/shop/kauppa4/products.php?&action=show&id=3944&show=all

The magnets of the original "SLa" stylus are rotated and I didn´t manage to loosen the cantilever screw. But this is not important, I can try it again later.

Without your help I wouldn´t have succeeded alone.
I thank you all.

The Tale will be continued...
My dear Balkan friend,

I for one also have a "exit strategy". The problem is I am finding it quite difficult to control the "just one more desire". I must admit, it is a capitalist consumption curse. My cartridge resell will be a complete failure as far as selling for profit is concerned. Loss control is where I am at now. I'm at a point where every M/M cartridge I do a cantilever/stylus change on, will only raises that cartridge up to the level of several other cartridges I already have at best. Just "burning money" is an old saying that comes to mind. Yes, I do have a spare 420 that I could offer to Axel for the "Dgob transformation". Do I really need another also ran? But then I ask myself, what if the cartridge (in its new configuration), actually raises the bar? Lets find out just what Axel did to the Acutex 420. Then, well, lets see how strong my "exit strategy" really is.
Deepest Regards Comrade
Don
After 75 hours of break-in it is time for an update on the Soundsmith Grace F-9 Ruby OCL stylus assembly. To get this out of the way: Peter gets a poor grade for unresponsiveness to emails. No reply to my request for set-up advice or specs on the stylus, and no documentation with the purchase except for the recommendation of a minimum VTF of 1.5gm. This is at par with Soundsmith's silence during the eight months that it took for me to receive their retip of a Lyra Helikon in the 2009 timeframe. However, given the esoterica of custom styli, I don't care much about communication as long as the product acquits itself with honor. In fact, in an age of super-saturated networking, one may even take perverse pleasure in an eccentric hobby in which a service provider remains subbornly uncommunicative for months or years, only to resurface with something truly extraordinary.

It was only necessary to say this to unbruise my ego over the Helikon retip and as caveat emptor to any audiophile who expects coddling by customer service. To close on the point, the Ruby OCL assembly arrived inside of three weeks from order. Unlike the broken OEM stylus that came with my used F9, it fits snuggly in the cartridge body. Had the stock stylus holder fit better I might have sent it to Axel for a retip. However, it was too tempting to hear the F9 with a Ruby cantilever consistent with construction of Grace's original TOTL offer. Finally, in favor of working with Soundsmith, I felt it was worth the sporting bet of $500 to hear a fully finished product in which Peter had full control over the integrated assembly of SS holder, suspension, ruby cantilever, and diamond.

It is physically well-made, with a properly alligned cantilever requiring minimal azimuth adjustment. Consistent with his claim for the OCL diamond, there is a narrow range of VTA and VTF to get it right-- so far tail slightly up and VTF of 1.6gm on Trans-Fi linear arm.

It took 50-75 hours to reveal refinement in detail, expanded soundstage, concussive dynamic envelope, and full embodiment of well articulated LF. It is impressive in all of these and other respects, over-turning any preconception of yin-yang dichotomy between MM/MI and MC. It's right up there with the short-nosed Acutex M320III STR. The Ruby OCL may be a bit more resolving and perhaps a bit less enveloping. I need to revisit the Acutex to see if there is really any meaningfully difference between these two beyond confirmation bias that tends to favor the last mount in the saddle. Unfortunately I don't have an OEM Grace stylus to compare it to.

It's great that Soundsmith has an off-the-shelf turn-key TOTL stylus replacement for F9 that is generally available for instant gratification. This one changes the rules of acquisition for MM/MI. Had I started at this point I could easily have limited at least several diversions into vintage cartridges.
Terrific post, thanks.

****In fact, in an age of super-saturated networking, one may even take perverse pleasure in an eccentric hobby in which a service provider remains subbornly uncommunicative for months or years, only to resurface with something truly extraordinary. ****

I like the way you think. As with music, how boring the hobby would be without the "characters".
-------------
Zoot Sims, when asked what he thought about Stan Getz:

"Stan, he's a great bunch of guys"
Dave, You wrote, "Peter gets a poor grade for unresponsiveness to emails." This is exactly why SS does not (yet) have my broken Ruby stylus assembly for repair. As you know, on their website they advise communicating by email. Thus far, I have sent two, both last spring, about 6 months ago at least. As of this date, no response. I guess, when the mood strikes, I will use the phone.
Dear Griffithds: If you like the OM20 then you need to hear the =M40 that's even better performer. Ortofon is warranty of high quality performer products and the OM is no exception.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Lew, circa '09 I never had any luck by phone either. If you succeed in reaching Peter it would interesting to know if he thinks that the performance of his $500 turn-key assembly will exceed the performance of a $350 Ruby/OCL retip to your OEM Ruby holder. I imagine that the performance would be the similar-- assuming that he replaces your aged suspension as part of the deal.
Re: Peter unresponsive to Emails.

As I understand things, his business is almost a "one man show", meaning he personally does the inspection, repair, and replacement work. If true, no wonder he doesn't have time to send additional messages, his line up of work is already long enough.

I sent him a van den Hul I'd purchased that came with the cantilever out of alignment by 15-20 degrees. Peter was able to "refresh" (sorry Raul, I couldn't resist!) the alignment and verify the suspension so a cantilever/stylus replacement was not necessary. I was pleased with the work but never received any documentation. I guess that is simply his business method.
Pryso, I was chiefly interested in compliance, output, and tracking angle specs-- mostly to compare to published Grace specifications. At this level of price and performance it is reasonable to expect such info from a manufacturer of finished goods-- though irrelevant to routine inspection & servicing of other manufacturers' cartridges. However, a degree of mysteriousness is inevitable in high-end audio, and after 8000+ posts hereabouts I suspect we all grownups when it comes to "blind" set-up.
Hi Dgob,
Would never have thought to look in the Glanz thread to read about the 420. Thanks,
Regards,
Don
Dgob, thanks for sharing your experiences with the revamped 420. It has been pointed out that the only difference between the 420 and it's "lesser" cousins, the 415/412, is the stylus/cantilever. Are you aware of anything that Axel did as part of the revamp that would preclude having him revamp a 415 or 412 and result with the exact same cartridge as a revamped 420? If he replaces the cantilever/stylus, unless the rubber suspension is different for the 420, I see no reason why this would not be the case.

Regards.
Hi Frogman,

I really have no idea about exactly what he did, apart from the bits I've pointed out on the Glanz thread. In fact, I had given up on the 420 altogether and so was genuinely surprised when the package arrived. I think I posed a tempting challenge to Axel with my claims about the seemingly insurmountable limitations of the cartridge's ability (even after his initial attempts to adjust it). Well now I have to eat my words because the only thing I know for certain is that he has elevated this cartridge to a very high performance level. That might mean that he can do the same with its lesser siblings but I would of course want to check that the motor/magnets and everything else is the same before assuming that the change would bring about the same outcome.

I'd say the revamped 420 makes some other great performers seem coloured in many areas but wouldn't want to go down the 'abandoned' (by me and many others) road of 'it is the best' at anything in particular. But it is very good and a marked improvement on the original that I owned.

Leaving me with the reflection: 'you live and you learn'!

As always...
Dear Frogman: You are right. We don't need the 420 but the 415/412 to arrive to the modified 420 as the Dgob one.

This is what I experienced with my 315/320 ( long nose ). I revamped through VDH the 315 that now performs a little better than the stock top of the line 320.

My experiences through a cartridge ! refresh ! till today always was and is worth to do it with rewards on quality performance improvements. Is the same experiences that Griffithds shared in his last post.

I can't remember any other people experiences contrary to that statements.

Will I send my 420 to be revamped?, no I don't because I already have the 315 VDH and the 320 flat nose that in stock form are better than the stock 420. What I will send to a VDH " refresh " is my second sample of the 320 flat nose that I'm sure not only will beat the Desmond's " refreshed " 420 but the 315 VDH too.

Not all of you owns all these cartridges so the one of you that only owns the 420 or 415/412 could be a good idea to try the 420 " refresh ".

Well, there is no doubt that Acutex made it its " job ", great job.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi All,

My post is still in moderation and I see that Raul has responded in the mean time. I hope nothing I say in that (actually it might still arrive ahead of this - no doubt - also to be moderated) post offends.

As always...
Dear Dgob: Your 420 experience came at random because that was something you was not looking for. Several times things happen by " accident "/at random and happen great things like the 420 improvements. Remember: Newton?

I always say that every single day is a learning one, no exeption.

As Frogman posted thank you to share here your Acutex 420 experiences.

Could be a good thing that some of you that will revamp your 420 could choose a different fixing source than Axel to have another comparison level that can help to all of us. Obviously is up to each one of you if try a different source.

What I maybe will do trhough Axel is to look if one of my 315 stylus samples can fit on the 420 with the help of Axel's wwork. We will see.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul and anyone else, In addition to my newly acquired NOS M320 (flat nose), I also own a used M312 of unknown provenance. Is the M312 body identical to the M320 one? Could I therefore hope to benefit from an Axel "refresh"? Here I define the term "benefit" to mean would the resulting cartridge be competitive with some of these other top ranked ones? Like someone else wrote here recently, I have no desire to acquire yet another "good" or "OK" also-ran; I am only interested in pushing the envelope.
Dear Raul,I understand your passion although my is of a different kind . Something to do with the upbringing. The Balkan kind is more bloodthirtsty: revenge at any cost for
the rest homo economicus. Since the (considerable)price incrise by Axel his only attractive proposition is the line contact stylus pressure fitted in a aluminum cantilever (+/- 160 Euro). The 'exotic kinds'are above 350 Euro. Well I never bought any MM cart for such kind of money. Even my AT 180, Signet TK 9 LC, Glanz 5, Glanz 31 L, Astatic MF 200, etc.,etc. I got for less. One of my Virtuoso's black got the boron/super elliptical but for the old price (170E).
At present the same upgrade is 359 Euro. I deed try to compare the retip prices and was suprised to discover that Axel is still the cheapest alternative. His only 'shortcoming' is the fact that he is not able to provide ruby (sapphire) cantilevers and micro ridge styli.
This is strange because Peter as well as Dominic (Northwest Analogue) can provide both. Axel and I deed try to find a supplier but ,alas, without succes. I hope some of our members has a good suggestion. Depending on the supplier prices this may become an attractive proposition. I myself have no intetion whatever to pay such amount for a MM retip.

Regards,
Dear Nandric: I agree with you. Today cartridge fixing price is higher than the price we paid for the cartridge it self so we have two think twice before that " refresh " be justified but this fact is something good because today we will send to " refresh " only what is worth to do it and not like in the past that we send it everything with a " happy " attitude where" cost was no object ".

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: For the Acutex " hystory " all things seems to me that those cartridges share the same motor. According with the Acutex manual impedance and DC resistance is the same and the only difference between the 315/312 and 320 is that the 320 has an output level of 3.8mv against 4.00mv of its brothers.

So, I think that is probable that after the Axel or other source " refresh " that cartridge will perform " even better " than the stock 320 one. I think is worth to try it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: When an unfortunate home audio system event/accident was at the same time a fortunate one?????

well I just had that kind of experience that I want to share with all of you:

for the last two weeks I was testing two formidable and unexpected great vintage tonearms, the Sony PUA-237 and the JVC UA-7045:

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/sony/pua-237.shtml

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/jvc/ua-7045.shtml

at the same time Iwas and am testing several " new " cartridges that I bought in the last months ( you can read it to have an idea which cartridges are on my virtual Agon system : LOMC and MM/MI. ).

well, when I was testing my " new " Stanton 981 HZS/2 ( mounted in the Sony PUA-237 ) and after made it a comparison with its low output brother ( the 981 LZS. Btw, no contest in almost any way, IMHO the high output 981 Stanton is a better performer than the low output version. Lewm is you like it your LO 981 then I'm sure that you " will die " for the HO 981 after heard it. ) I started a comparison against the the Clearaudio Virtuoso black wood ( mounted in the JVC UA.7045. ) and the Astatic MF-200.

As you know in all my tonearms I use as " internal tonearm wiring " the Audio Note Silver that is so tiny that could be broke is you " see it in a bad way ". This Audio Note cable I'm using in external way in all my tonearms so it is exposed to anything.

Suddenly when I took my wood clamp from a TT to use it in the other TT I hit ( by accident ) with the clamp the JVC tonearm and the clamp " flight " alone and hit the Sony tonearm where the Stanton was mounted and with no stylus guard on place because I was playing with.

The hit to the Sony tonearm was " abrupt " and the Stanton crash against the in place LP. Obviously that original in mint condition Stanton stylus/cantilever bent and the " terrifc " 981 HZS stay out of work.
Even with the cantilever bent I tested and one channel had no sound. After this I checked the Clearaudio for sound and when the stylus hit the LP there was no single sound from both channels and the first thing that came to my brain was that because " something " my Phonolinepreamp " was damaged as soemthing different but not so different happened with the Halcro electronics. That night was a nightmare for me because I even can't dream because I was rally worried on the whole concecuences of that accident.

Next day I analysed if the Essential could be damaged for that " something " and my conclusion was that can't be damaged ( our design is bullet proof. ). So, I change the cartridges for other different models with out success, at this moment my stress level was at the top. Then I checked both interconnect cables that were fine.

The Audio Note silver wire is so tiny that you can be aware if was broken and this exactly is what happened. In the JVC tonearm 3 of the four wires were broken and in the Sony tonearm one wire was broken ( that's why the Stanton had sound only in one channel. ).
With this " discovery " calm return to my mind and what I did was try to fix both tonearm wires but I recovery only one because the other ( the one that suffer the three broken wires ) was broken almost at the half length of the wire so I can't use it any more ( and I have to say that this cable is an expensive one. ).

Now, I sstill was truly disapointed because the Stanton 981 HZS was out of work but then I remembered that I own/have the Pickering XVS 5000/2 that in theory came with the same stylus than the 981 HZS. The stylus holder in the Picckering and Stanton are way different but for my luck each one fits in precise way in between. Now, I', safe!!!and started to make a Stanton set up ( the Pickering stylus/cantilever/holder is more weighty than the Stanton one. ) again and what I " discovery " was astonished::

the original Stanton stylus was in mint condition as the Pickering one. I made the Stanton set up in the same Sony tonearm and nothing changed but the original Pickering XVS 5000/2 stylus replacement.

What a fortunate accident because the Stanton quality performance level that already been extraordinary improves overall in an unpected way. Why? what happen here?, I could not say it for sure because both stylus assembles were in mint condition but even that both stylus did not track the grooves with similar " applomb ".
Example, in the Telarc 1812 recording the original Stanton can't track in clean way all the cannon shots, against that the Pickering one tracks all the shots inpristine way and this difference made and make the diffrence in the Stanton cartridge quality performance level. This fact is a confirmation of what I posted sevral times: that in even circumstances the cartridge with better tracking habilities is always the best performer.

Any one of you need to hear the Telarc 1812 cannon shots through my Stanton is just an amazing and unique experience. Well maybe you can approach that experience because FIM recording label just put on sale a new recording direct from the original Telarc mastering where FIM forms a team for that recording where were the same team that recorded the original one but using the today digital technology. I had on hand this FIM 1812 LP and is really fine.

It is better this transfer than the original? , not really: in some ways it is and in other the original is better. In some of the cannon shots the original beats this FIM re-issue but even that and due that the original Telarc is dificult and expensive to have the FIM recording can gives you a very good " touch " of what " has on hand " your audio system. Btw, with the FIM you have to crank-up the volume because was recorded at lower level than the original.

Ok, where put I this Stanton 981 HZS/2 against other cartridge stars?, obviously at the very top even better than the Clearaudio. I like it a lot even with its original Stanton stylus but with this Pickering one is just formidable!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Raul,

Are you still running your phono stage at 100K?
The Pickering XVS 5000 was a CD4 Quad cartridge. Pickering probably use the top (cherry picked), stylus to extent the fequency responce flat out to 50K for CD4 playback. The Stanton 981s only needed a stylus that would play flat out to 20K. You got yourself the best of the best as far as stylus profile. Simply as that!
Regards,
Don
Does Axel always request pick up of his mail from his post office then leave it sit there several days? I sent my Technics P100C MKIV cartridge plus a NOS stylus to him for check and refresh suspensions. After tracking my cartridge it's been sitting at his post office at least four days. Sent email to him no reply.
Hallo, ist es Eva hier. Ich bin Axel Sekretärin und ich habe damit beschäftigt meine vchristmas Einkaufen in den letzten Tagen.
Hi , I am Eva , Axel's secretary. I am sorry but I was busy
lately with Christmas shopping.
( kindly translated by Nandric for all those who are not
Germans or from New Zealand).
Dear Raul, I've got Pickering XVS4500 and 7500. In the latter case, it may be that I have just an NOS XVS7500 stylus, which I purchased as a future replacement for the unobtainable D98S Stanton stylus in my 980LZS. You might also try your XVS4500 stylus in the LZS version of the Stanton. (I assume you have one, since you have such a strong opinion of it.) Also, have you tried the all-Pickering version of the XVS5000? One could do just fine with only Stanton and/or Pickering products of yesteryear. Great stuff.

Don or anyone, where does the XVS5000 fit in the scheme of the 4500 and 7500 cartridges? Was it a special model specifically for 4-channel LPs? I guess I can look that up somewhere.

I tend to agree with your generalization about tracking ability as a correlate of performance excellence, but then why is it that the MC has reigned supreme for so long, and remains supreme among most? Pavlovian conditioning of the buying public, perhaps?

I long ago spotted the Victor tonearms as stone cold bargains in today's market, but I've never bought one, because I don't "need" it. The quality of construction is obviously top level.
Dear travbrow: I think now Axel is aware of that post office problem because I had it too and told him about.

In the other side remember that Axel is " one man show " for everythinng and we at Agon give him a lot of work where he was not prepared and can't be prepared till he has other persons that can help him.

Btw, please let us know your source for that NOS P100CMK4 stylus?, appreciated.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Griffithds: Yes, I'm still loading my MM/MI cartridges with 100kohms that with the Pickering 5000 is what Pickering recomended for that CD-4/50K extended frequency but the same is for the 981 HZS.

The 981 are calibrated cartridge models ( the 5000 it is not, from Pickering I understand that only the 7500 is calibrated but I'm not totally sure. ) and through its specs runs to 50khz.

The 981 specs on the operation manual say that all the 981 came with this values: DC resistance 850 ohms and Inductance 450 mH. Well, my 981 calibrated cartridge comes with this values that are in the cartridge calibration chart signed by the man that made the cartridge calibration: DC resistance 616 ohms and Inductance 248 mH. Obviously that that cartridge calibration gives real advantages against no cartridge calibration.
Only the 981 models are calibrated ones.

Now, about the 5000 and 981 stylus in my cartridge samples both are the same: Nude Stereohedron II.

Perhaps the one from the 5000 was polished in a better way I can't be sure why with this one tracking improves over the 981 original stylus.

What is a true is that IMHO the Stanton 981 HZ MK2 series is a real top winner and a must to own over other of our " stars ". The 881 is no challenger for the 981, is this one the one to go.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Hi Lewm,

"where does the XVS5000 fit in the scheme of the 4500 and 7500 cartridges? Was it a special model specifically for 4-channel LPs?"

Your statement is a somewhat loaded question. I conceder this cartridge line (the XSV), "a special" line of cartridges. The 2nd part of your question can be answered this way. There was no cartridge manufactured "just" for Quad. They would all play and was designed to play standard 2 cannel stereo but in addition would play the extended frequency 4 channel tracks.
I believe there was only one additional XSV above your 4500 and it was the 5000. Your 7500 IIRC is a XLZ. The XSV line started at 3000 and went up as the stylus profiles improved. The 5000 being the best. There is a guy by the name of Richard Steinfeld (ex Stanton employee), who has written a handbook titled "The Handbook for Stanton and Pickering Phonograph Cartridges and Styli who can be contacted at rsteinbook@sonic.net
The handbook is full of information about the history of the 2 cartridge manufacturers and all the various cartridges and styli that was provided to the public during the Golden Years of analog. Amazing read if you are a Stanton/Pickering fan which I certainly am one of! Highly recommend you get yourself a copy.
Regards,
Don
Dear Lewm: Lucky you are to bought that NOS 7500 stylus replacement, well this is the same one in the 5000 and 981 ( both versions ): nude streohedron II.

No, I don't try it yet my Pickering XSV 5000 but obviously I will in the sort time. Btw, I like it more the gold shiny 5000 metal cartridge body that the " plain " Stanton silver.

The 5000 is a step down the 7500 and the 100komhs to loading is to have success with not only the CD-4 but in general because frequency is extended almost flat to 50khz.

LOMC is a different design than the MM/MI, both with is own advantages and disadvantages. Yes the LOMC ones are really good and today my reference cartridges belongs to LOMC cartridges with high compliance that gives it a lot better tracking habilities. Btw, my Stanton , I think , I could put on that " cartridge reference " niche.

+++++ " I long ago spotted the Victor tonearms as stone cold bargains in today's market, but I've never bought one, because I don't "need" it. " +++++

I can tell you for sure that you need that JVC UA-7045 tonearm, is really good and handle with accuracy/neutrality and applomb almost any cartridge, it makes that the cartridges shows improvements that you did not aware were there.

It is not so very good looking and wow factor as the SAEC 8000 or 506 but its performance put on shame those good looking SAEC tonearms. Well, I like the JVC and Sony look and love its quality performance and as you said today we can get by " penauts " both of these " stars ".

I bought a JVC TT ( TT 71 ) not because the TT ( I don't need another TT. ) but because it came with the UA-7045 tonearm. I bought for almost nothing, the tonearm was " free " of charge.

Btw, I tested the TT 71 in naked fashion and compare it against the 81 and 101 and my Denons and for my surprise the 71 outperforms overall the 101 and compete almost bis a bis to the Denon 75/80. I still prefer the Denon but this JVC is a lot lot better that what we could think. Nice discovery by " accident ".
I think that between other things ( specs for example ) the Denon double-construction platter help a lot to makes a difference against the JVC ones that are very good performers too. No, the Denons's are not perfect but very hard to beat even for the Technics SP10MK2. Yes, I like the Denons, I don't use ( for now ) any more my Technics because gives me no advantages against the Denon.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Raul,

I own both the 981s. The LZS and the HZS. I also own the Stanton Epoch II LZ8S. It's also a contender. I only have 1 D98s styli. It came mounted on the NOS LZS. I bought a D3500E styli (XSV) and mounted "it" on the HZS. I must admit, I have never tried the D98s styli on the HZS. Your findings have got me thinking.
Your calibrated numbers compared to the published numbers are kind of surprising. I need to look at mine.
After hearing the 981s, and owning a 881s many years ago, I do agree with you. No comparison between the two. Not even close.
Regards,
Don
Thanks Raul, I don't want to rush Axel, just was a little concerned. I bought the P100ED4 from a private seller on line, this was his only sample. All but impossible to find them now.
But Don, between HZS and LZS, which do you prefer? The phono stage plays a role in this comparison, as the LZS requires a lot more gain, which got me to wondering whether Raul is listening to LZS via the hi-gain (LOMC) section of his phono stage and the HZS via the lo-gain (MM) one. (As I understand it Raul's Phonolinepreamp has two completely discrete phono circuits built in.)

Raul, Last year I passed up the chance to buy an NOS D98S stylus for one week after I found out about, because of cost. When I finally decided to buy it, it had been sold. I could not find another anywhere in the world, so I bought the XSV7500 stylus as soon as I saw it for sale. (Thanks, Don, for correcting my acronym.) Then later came the opportunity to buy the NOS 981LZS, and I grabbed it, as a few others here did. Now I own both XSV7500 stylus and NOS 981LZS cartridge, but I am still listening to the used 980LZS I originally bought cheaply off eBay. Obviously, and at my age, I am set for life.