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
Hey guys, let's all agree to refer to the PC 440 as the cartridge which shall remain nameless. I had my heart broken a couple of weeks ago when some "sniper" stole the 440 from my waiting arms with a last second bid. I learned a valuable lesson that day, but it doesn't lessen my disappointment.

Don
Dear nandric: All those cartridges you name it belongs to the same league ( NGC ) but in that league exist gradation on its overall performance/presentation of music.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: If the serial number is the one that comes in the round metal back plate then my 13D samples serial numbers are: 6 and 25.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
There is of course no sense in hunting for the unicorns but
it will be helpful to know if we need to hunt for 13 D +
which model and /or 17 D?
I was not able to find a single Ortofon 2000 since
Raul recommended this cart but there are many of those
Dynavectors on ebay. Raul and Dover which one is the
'tallest' according to you?

Regards,
Dear Dover: I have the answer to my 13D question to you: 99 Karat Nova 13D samples.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: I don't have the opportunity yet to hear the Karat Nova 17D so I can't speak about.

What is a must to hear and IMHO a must to have is the 13D.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
The best cartridge is always the one that got away or that you cannot find at all. There is a reason for this, but if I divulge it you will think I am a cynic.
Who is Phillip Holmes?
Are you as sick and tired as I am, of reading the same shallow, uninformed drivel that masquerade as 'Reviews' by the majority of audio writers today?

I was browsing through Dagogo last night...and stumbled upon a reviewer I'd never heard of before......but one who, not only can write.....but appears to have a knowledge and experience and passion, sorely lacking in the current mainstream crop?

His name.....Phillip Holmes.
Just read this Review of the AT150MLX he has written and see if you agree?
He also goes some way to explaining why those people with some valve electronics.....do not 'get' the benefits of MM cartridges?
I have never seen this mentioned before?

This man seems to know his 'onions'?
Grbluen2,
That 440 went cheap. After bidding ended, I had that sick feeling in my stomach. You know, that one you get when you tell yourself, damn, I should have bid on that. There will be others but the buyer will be paying top price now that Raul has let the cat out of the bag. Even Comrade Nadric is interested. Do I smell feeding frenzy!
Dear Henry, Raison d'etre of our forum is the fact that
we do not trust any HIFI Magazine. That is to say that we
all know what their primary income source is. Then it is
not , I would think, the competence of the writers that we
are sceptical about, but their lack of objectivity. The only
usable function is to inform us of 'what there is'.
To search for our self we need the reference (aka names).
You are obviously suprised with Phillip Holmes and this may
explain your praise but we have our own experts among which
you are also 'counted'.

Dear Dover, Speaking of 'names'. Raul was alas not able to
enlighten the difference between the 13 D and 17 D but I hope you are?

Regards,
Dear Nikola,
My mother told me not to trust Serbs who attempt flattery?
So I have a dilemma.......she told me to trust only the Aussies and the Dutch?! :-)

Regards
Henry
Dear Henry, Your mother would be right if she mentioned the French and/or the Italians but the brave Serbians? However the Dutch invluence should not be neglected. But, you know, I really trust your judgments. This of course may say more about me than you. So why should you feel flattered (grin)?

Regards,
Dear comrade Don, This Mexican make us poor and miserable.
So we must have some inclination for masochism. We should,
I think, consult a shrink. As you of course know comrads Lenin
and Stalin exploit this peculiar property of the Russian people
(aka 'soul') in full.

Regards,
Dear Halcro: I know personaly P.Holmes, I meet him in one of my USA audio tours.

Now, you need to remember that Dlaloum exposed in this thread almost all what we have to know about inductance, impedance, capacitance on MM/MI and its effectes in between with different values and how the FR could change even he made live research with live measures ( something as what you did about TT speed stylus drag changes. ). In the other side that reviewer does not explkain how to fix it when our Dlaloum did it.

IMHO there is nothing in that review that almost all of us do not know: cartridge set up, tonearm/cartridge match, VTA/SRA and the like. Yes, at least this reviewer " touch " some subjects that for other reviewers are not in their " agenda ".

Maybe what could be interesting is that AHEE is taking more seriously the MM/MI alternative and that's good. More and more we can read around more MM/MI cartridge refrences/reviews/posts/threads or whatever. The alternative is alive and growing up along the LOMC alternative.

Btw, the last Dyna 13D I bought to a seller in Australia. Maybe you can find another sample down there, of course if you are interested on it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: +++++ " not able to
enlighten the difference between the 13 D and 17 D but I hope you are? " +++++

well, between the Dover posts and the ones from me you have almost all what you need to know on those cartridges and its differnecs but how each one performs.

I think that is very dificulkt to ffind out a person that owns both cartridges in original condition and that can comes here to share his listening experiences.

There is nothing that today could " move " me to start a hunting for the 17D when IMHO the Dyna pinnacle is the 13D.

Btw, the first Karat Nova Dyna denomination model was in 1981 the today venerable DV Karat 23R that's in its times had the smaller cantilever length in any catilevered cartridge. That was followed by the Karat 17DS in 1983 that was the same year where appeared the Karat Nova 13D along the " lesser " Karat 19A and was in 1984 when appeared the Karat 17D2 and the Karat Nova 17D2.
All these cartridges came with metal body but the Karat Nova 13D ( exist both versions: wood/metal. ) and the Karat Nova 17D2 that shares wood cartridge body. Mines are wood body samples.

Nandric, which Karat Nova do you own: the 13D or the 17D2?, because I think that your question is not made it at " random ". Could you share your experiences with?

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
I would like to ask the question of some of our cognoscenti, why is it that by far the majority of LOMC cartridges tend to be low in compliance? Compliance should have a lot to do with moving mass. MM carts tend to have higher moving mass than MCs, yet the former are much higher in compliance, in general. On the other hand, MI carts tend to have lower moving mass than MC carts and frequently do exhibit high compliance. I guess it has something to do with differences in the design of the suspension systems that are used with MCs vs the other two.

I do think it's not coincidental that Raul has found two of his favorite LOMC carts to be relatively high in compliance compared to their brethren of the same type. We should seek out and audition more of such LOMCs.
Dear Raul, I am really sorry if I offended you but you
stated that you have no experience with the 17 D. That is why I asked Dover for his comment. My own 13 D is alas not relevant because I bought this one without the stylus and posted to Axel who retipped the cart with an aluminum cantilever and nude line stylus. This cantilever is of cource much longer so the original intention of this cart
is lost. BTW I was not impressed and sold the cart for much less than the cart cost me. There is a NOS 17 D on the German ebay so before I make any bid I would like to know what I am bidding for.

Regards,
Lewm,

"Raul not only lets cats out of bags regularly, he also farms kittens."

Well put!

Regards,
Don
So our audiophile guru has decided to not only liberate bagged cats, but to farm kittens too? This is a matter requiring some thought. Planting kittens either too deep or too close together does not result in anticipated levels of productivity. The cats too, I'm pretty sure, would prefer the more traditional methods of feline propagation. ;)

JVC TT-71 is singing nicely. The Bluejeans low cap. cables are a marked improvement over the OEM EPA-500 ICs. Who'd 'a thunk it? Midrange resonances moved well upwards resulting in a welcome translucent, airy response with the current AT ML150 OCC/Soundsmith Ruby-optimized LC stylus. Low resistance has cleaned up bass response. Instruments in the lower registers are heard as distinct. Percussive elements are rendered with all anticipated character, vibratory resonance of the heads of bass drum and tympani are heard with accuracy. Attack and decay, tone and layering much improved. With the Shure ML140 HE, foot pedal notes pressurize even the adjacent room. Spectacular bass & I'm not a bass fiend. Total cap. for a 3' patch cord, 36.6pF. A $45 investigation, well rewarded.

Halcro/Henry, I enjoyed the Holmes AT 150MLx review. Peter Ledermann warmed me, the ML150 OCC/opt. LC combination is mercilessly revealing of the slightest alignment error. I could appreciate Mr. Holmes' apparent frustration in dialing the cart in.

The modest TT-71 is an engaging performer. Dynamic and capable of revealing ambience and nuance, timbre and texture do seem -enhanced. Various applications of neoprene, live rubber, sorbothane and hard point isolation "devices" were implemented, best results (to my ear) were obtained with the unit firmly mounted to the plinth, a sheet of cork underlaying the JVC mat. One from Herbie's or Boston Audio may be better, auditioning anything more sophisticated than an iPod is, in this area, not likely. A spare AT-605 anti-resonant foot under the center of the basket housing the motor provided an additional tightening of resolution, the TT-71 is very sensitive to resonance control. A faint but disturbing hiss was determined to be the brake pad rubbing the platter. Usage has re-compressed the fibrous surface of the device and the deck is now performing quietly.

The TT-81 shares the 24 pole motor of the TT-71 but the 81 is upgraded through incorporating the eddy current braking and dual phase servo speed control of the TT-101. The cordless, slotless 101 motor (JVC specs, Henry) has a startup time of 0.6 seconds, 0.02% W. & F. Load characteristics are maintained at 0% deviation at 120gm load, thermal drift 0.00003%/*C. The dual phase servo is integrated to a 180 pole disc positioned to face a circuit board with 180 printed coil elements resulting in 180 pulses averaged at any instant. It would require a keen ear to detect any cogging.

In terms of engaging this listeners' involvement, the TT-71 trounces the more damped character of either of the two DD Technics decks I'm intimate with. The JVC relays an impression of expanded soundstage and *enhancement* of detail lacking in either of the heavily damped Technics. With the TT-71, bass is well balanced but lacks the grip that's especially evident with the SP-15. In comparison to either the Exclusive PL-70L 11 or Dual CS-5000, both a coreless motor design, the unpreturbed speed stability of the more stable drives is heard as an improvement but both are unfortunately less capable of illustrating dynamic range. There is a strong suspicion that the application of graphite in tonearm construction and heavily damped platters with either the Pio. or Dual contribute.

Having dipped into the JVC DD waters and found them warmly welcoming, the little TT-71 will remain front & center until a TT-101 can be obtained. Hopefully, In_Shore will remember his kind offer, considering a Panzerholst/aluminum CLD plinth for the yet-to-be-found TT-101, positive comments concerning the MA-505 (not so well thought of "back in the day") continue to be offered. Meanwhile, the EPA-250 with the Bluejeans ICs has taken to the TT-71 like Nikola's duck to water.

BTW, Tap Plastics (Google it) fabricated a 16 1/2 x 20" clear acrylic dust cover in under a week. Packaged to survive the ravages of the UPS decedents of the hordes of Attila the Hun, $94 & shipping. Those in need, direct inquires to Russ Miller; "I've fabricated 100's of turntable covers over the past 33 years here at TAP Plastics. Not as many in the last decade though as turntables kind of disappeared but lately we've been making more and more."

And, a question for all. TA grounding while setting the deck up was patched in through an existing length. When finalized with a dedicated, direct and shorter ground, midrange clarity and hf glare both seemed improved. Curious, is it possible the cartridge sees capacitance through earthing too?

Peace,
Dear Nandric: +++++ " retipped the cart with an aluminum cantilever and nude line stylus " +++++

++++ " I was not impressed and sold the cart for much less than the cart cost me... " ++++

of course you was not impressed when not only changed the cantilever lenght and stylus but the cantilever build material: diamond for aluminum!!!!! God, help me.

My advise is that you have to take care alittle more when you are working with that kind of unique top cartridges. This is not your G800 or an AT/Acutex ones. We have to have more respect for that kind of cartridges.

Anyway, no you did not offend me because Dover already posted that ( at least seems what I understand. ) he heard and listening today to the 13D and not the 17D even he posted that he has an opportunity to put his hands on anew and original 13D.
No, I'm not offended. In the other side we are and ask audio subjects in this kind of thread to learn and I'm always willing to learn from every one.

Now, if you can get an original in good condition 13D seems to me that the 17D is a very good second option. So you can go a head for the one you already see it and please if needs the Axel touch forget about that aluminum material that seems to me you are still sticked to. Think on the word: evolution, can help you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Timeltel: I already posted and certainly you can try. I compared the 71 against the 101/81 and can't detect any advantage on the big brothers but better 71 overall dynamics and posted too that all these JVCs are bested by the Denons Dp-80/75 in my system as was the SP-10MK2.

Maybe the Thechnics MK3 ( Lewm could enlighted about because owns both units and the top Kenwood. ) bested my Denon's but then exist the Denon DP-100 for the MK3 and to any other TT.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul, Your reprimand is not, uh, totally justifiable
because I mentioned that my 13 D was without the stylus.
As you should know Axel has no diamond cantilevers by his
offerings, not even the very short kind as are used by the
13 D. Besides I am not willing to pay more for a retip than
175 euro. Only the last mentioned circumstance may
deserve some reprimand but not a strong one.

Regards,
Dear Raul,
Of course Dlaloum and others have contributed greatly on this Thread, to our discussion and knowledge about MM cartridges....and cartridges in general.
But let's face it....this is a rather esoteric Thread (albeit the largest in A'Gon history) and rarely have MM cartridges....let alone their technical proclivities...been seriously examined in recent times.....by mainstream audio reviewers?

It is precisely the POINT of my reference to this review of Phillip Holmes.
Did you not get that?
Dear Raul,
Can you remember from whom in Australia you purchased the Dyna 13D?
I'd certainly be interested in one?

Incidentally......when you met Phillip Holmes....was he an audio reviewer?
And if so.....for which publications?

Regards
Greetings Professor (Timeltel),
Glad you enjoyed the review.
I enjoyed reading yours....of the Victor TT-71. A very thorough and even-handed description.
Ignore Raul's preferences for the TT-71 over the TT-81 and TT-101.
The TT-81 is simply better than the TT-71......but when I replaced the TT-81 in my system with the TT-101......there was an immediate tightening of rhythm discernible as well as....at the same time....a seemingly more relaxed presentation.
The bass appeared deeper and more controlled whilst the convincing transparency of the TT-81 became even more ethereal with the TT-101.
Perhaps Raul prefers the added distortions of the lesser unit.
Not that there's anything wrong with that?! :-)
But be aware of the dangers of seeking out a TT-101?
They are far more complicated than either TT-81 and especially the TT-71.....and are almost impossible to find in full working order....let alone in fine cosmetic condition AND working order?

As for the Micro Seiki MA-505s......mine is currently making the Signet AM-10/155LC sing tunefully on the TT-101.......but the silver-wired version is becoming quite scarce. I haven't seen one for sale for perhaps 6 months?

Good luck.
Regards
Henry
Raul/Nandric/Henry
Dynavector Karat Nova 13/17
My advice would be to only buy one that is in good working condition, because they cannot be rebuilt. As far as retipping goes, the diamond cantilever has a very fragile yoke into which the stylus is glued. You would need to discuss with Axel the possibility dissolving the glue, as I would imagine that trying to remove the stylus without fracturing the yoke would be difficult. On a Karat Nova 17, you might possibly be able to use a donor diamond cantilever & tip off a standard Karat 17D2.
My first Nova 13 went 15 years before I got it rebuilt. I have no idea whether the diamond was worn, it still sounded good, and no problems with the suspension. I simply decided to get it rebuilt to keep it in top condition. Unfortunately I dropped it ( Naim Aro, no arm lift ) and broke the yoke at the end of the cantilever. Dynavector rebuilt it a second time for me.
The other one is still original, has been used off and on, and sounds fine.

Hope this helps.

PS Raul - yes the serial nos are on the metal plate, so you have 2 original 13's.
If one has a higher output then it has probably been rebuilt with a Nova 17 motor.
Regards, Halcro: "with the TT-101......there was an immediate tightening of rhythm discernible as well as....at the same time....a seemingly more relaxed presentation.
The bass appeared deeper and more controlled whilst the convincing transparency of the TT-81 became even more ethereal with the TT-101."

Nice description of what I've observed concerning the fluidity of coreless drives. Haven't heard a LO7D, would anticipate it also exhibits the same qualities.

Also in the "collection" is a Denon DL-60L, eddy current/dual phase motor. If one desired a model for packaging resonances, the Denon plinth would make a good prototype. In terms of clarity and dynamic swing, the TT-71 beats the Denon, as is, pretty handily. Even though there is an edgy undercurrent it complements the R & R listened to with most frequency, Neil Young's "Harvest" is endowed with more presence than previously experienced.

Henry my friend, under no delusions concerning the JVC-71. In the pool of available TTs it's in the shallow end but still a most entertaining device. Just finished listening to a propulsive rendering of U2s "Rattle and Hum". No rattle, no hum.

A bungee cord around the basket (and the AT-605 foot underneath) did provide some additional resolution. It's not difficult to anticipate a nude approach with the damn ringy basket being mass damped by the weight of the TT itself as being beneficial. No question that the Pio. Exclusive is ultimately the superior rig but the overachieving TT-71 conveys an emotional quality not found with the more refined deck. JVC is reputed to have had some involvement in supplying parts for some of the Denons, one of the TOTL Denons perhaps will one day find it's way here?

Don't be too hard on Raul, our thread founder's purist expectations are irreproachable, his dedication commendable. Possibly, it's my good fortune to be so easily entertained, a matter I'll about which I've no pretensions. ;)

There's a TT-81 available but with the valuable experience encountered with the 71, I suspect the 81 wouldn't present a significant enough advantage over the 71 to distract from pursuit of the 101. A QL-10 in any configuration would be a welcome addition.

For the would-be builder, Yamaha and Sansui (among others) also offered coreless drives, several with counter-rotating sub-weights. Even the plastic plinthed entry level Pio. PL-4, 5 and 7 offered Hall device coreless motors. So many carts on headshells now I could listen to a different one every day for two months, apprehensive that I'll end up with a turntable matched to each.

Sounds like your Signet AM-10 has already appropriated it's own TA. Quite a hobby we have here. The musical pleasures do justify our distraction, don't they.

Don't they?

Peace,
Raul,
I found the dealer who sold you the 13D in Australia.
David Le......my favourite dealer also.
He will try to get one for me?
Thanks
Yes indeed Professor!
Tell me......how do the tracks 'Alabama' and 'Words' on the 'Harvest' album sound on your rig?
Does the turntable make a difference do you think?
Regards
Henry
Dear Halcro,
the AT150 MLX runs perfectly via my TUBE EMT JPA66 phono pre. I guess John Holmes contribution to this part of the amplification might be a bit misleading if we interpret him prefering solid state rather than tubes for this AT cart. On the other hand Holmes is right mentioning the Shure V15III as one of his favourite MMs.

Dear Raul,
I am very happy that you regard MIs as a serious alternative. Coming down a long way on this special designs and owning the most prominent ones I recently discovered the immense holographic sound picture of a well preserved Decca FFSS MKI. My god what kind of insights you get here. I was very happy to find a Mono one, too.
Dear nandric: I'm sorry that you took my post as a " reprimand ", far away from there. My intention was only to show that each cartridge could be treated according to its pedigree and that's all. IMHO you left go a truly " beauty " a fenomenal audio history piece of " art ".

Yes, I know that even Dynavector can't today rebuild the cartridge at original status ( tha's what Dover posted. ) but the cartridge motor , that's different from the 17D, is still unique and the saphire or berylium cantilever Axel handle could works or the Ruby ones on that retip England source and even SS.

Of course that if you already fix it for you a limit on what to invest in a cartridge retip then there is nothing more to add on the subject.

Good luck with your 17D hunting.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Daer Halcro: Yes, I got that and made a comment about.

In the other side I meet him when was already Dagogo reviewer. He has a good knoledge level ( as he showed in that review. ), in those times liked tubes and the 103 cartridge.

I don't trust in his " ears ", maybe today he improved about. Why am I expressing in that way of those " ears "?:

well it happen that in that home place audio meeting we were making some comparisons between phonolinepreamps. We were there around 6-7 persons listening to a very good audio system ( at least by the names of the audio item links. ) and happened something unexpected for that kind of audio system and unexpected for what I thought were the audiophile grade levl of all the persons in that meeting that including that reviewer and obviously the audio system home place owner.

Things were that the phonoline preamp of that system had a problem with the left channel: at least 1.5db lower SPL against the right channel when both channel volume selectors were at the same position. After around 20 minutes no one of those gentlemans even the system's owner detected absolutely nothing till I left to know about that " problem ". No one but me detected under comparison circumstances. We were listening digital and analog and no we were not relaxed as if that was a party no we were taking serious what we were doing.

Anyway, your message took it.

Btw, let me check my emails and let you know a bout the seller of that 13D.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Halcro: Great!

Now, yes it's posible that I like more the 71 distortions but let me to tell you this: I did not pass for any of the little " troubles " Timeltel detected in his 71. In the other side the 81/101 came to me from audio friends and I had it for two days and in that time I prefered overall the 71 distortions that IMHO makes less harm, at least with my 71 sample.

Anyway, try to find out a Denon DP80 or DP75, are still around and not high price for it. Of course that if you find out a DP-100 and you can invest on it I think that you should do it.

Every one talks on the Technics, Kenwood, Yamaha, Pioneer Elite and the like and almost no one speaks on the Denon DP-100 that IMHO not only compete with the best of the best but that even came in the " right " plinth.

Please take a look whom is Denon, here five Denon catalogues:

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/denon/direct-drive-turntables.shtml

http://www.thevintageknob.org/denon-DP-100M.html

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Raul, I think nearly all the DP100s and their ilk (there is at least one other huge studio type Denon, maybe DP308) were sold and used in Japan. Hifido has them once in a while but the cost of shipping across the Pacific or across Asia to Europe would be huge. Also, there would be a risk; if such a turntable needs repairs, one might be out of luck unless one lives in Tokyo. This is why, I think, you don't read much about them. Travis Lundy once owned two of them while he was living in Tokyo; I don't know if he still has them. He now lives in HK. He seemed to like them a lot, but I do not recall his making a comparison between the DP100 and, for example, the Exclusive P3 (of which he also had two) and the SP10 Mk3, which Travis may not have owned at all.

Timel, I think you were the victim of autocorrect when you wrote, "The cordless, slotless 101 motor (JVC specs, Henry) has a startup time of 0.6 seconds, 0.02% W. & F." You obviously meant "coreless", not cordless. My computer has now learned to accept that word without protest. Yes, based only on my L07D, there does seem to be a certain fluidity perhaps attributable to coreless motor drive. When I first fired up my L07D, I was quite enchanted; I had never really heard ANY turntable that did what it does. That was before I heard the SP10 Mk3, which sounds different but also exceptional in its own way. I was not heretofore sure about the kind of motor in the TT101. We also know that the Exclusive P3 sports a coreless motor, and there are the venerable Dual turntables. As you may know, Dual started it all. Kenwood got in a bit of legal trouble copying the Dual motor for use in the L07D, or so the story goes.
Regards, Lew/Raul: Lew, I find myself spending more time correcting auto-correct than if I'd just edited for myself. An amusing site, "Dang Auto-correct", Google it for a hearty laugh.

Raul: Please don't think I find any "problems" with the JVC. Just a few things I wished to address for my own satisfaction. Trying to avoid hyperbole, I'm very happy with the TT-71. A longer post to follow, & then time to move on. Blame it on Halcro!

Peace
Regards, Henry: Just caught your question, a good one. Easy answer is yes.

First impression related to the improvement in mounting the TA directly to the plinth. Eliminating the intermediate armboard and coupling the TA and TT rigidly to the plinth increased harmonic apparency.

Mechanical transmission of resonances being considered, the application of damping alternatives to the deck itself was comparable to implementing tone control. There was a point at which musicality was sacrificed for more analytical qualities. This was especially apparent with a neoprene gasket totally isolating the TT from the plinth, overly damped was the impression. "Floating" the deck with three bearings at the 12, 4 and 8 o'clock locations strengthened bass but when screwed to the plinth mids gained an unwanted brilliance.

Rings, gaskets and washers of various compliant materials were tried. Ultimately, a simple sheet of thin cork adhered to the platter, both bottom and underneath the mat improved focus without restricting dynamics and ambience. Attention to the motor basket also improved resolution, the anti-resonant footer under the center had more impact than wrapping the circumference with an elastic cord.

This is all redundant but it gets me here: As a stand-alone unit, it became evident that JVC knew (better than I) what they were doing. The fumble-some experience was valuable and such was the sole purpose of the exercise.

Henry, eight TTs here. In order of preference, Dual 1225. Dual 1219. Technics SP-25. Denon DP-60L. Dual CS-5000. Technics SP-15. Although I'm finding the TT-71 more attractive to the ear, there's a reluctant admission the Pio. Exclusive is the superior instrument. Among that assortment, there are seventeen available interchanges of tonearms and arm pipes. Twenty electives total.

Introduced in 1980, the QL-A7 retailed for $750. It's not a cheap deck. As stand-alone units, the TT-71/81/101 remained on the market for eight years. The QL-7/8/10 assembled were marked with 71/81/101, the stand-alone units had an additional embossed Victor/Nipper logo. This fun little TT-71 has not so much a quality as an engaging character that, independent of associated elements, encourages my attention.

As to Raul's reference to the better Denon decks, consider the 801. Clamied to have 1000 magnetic pulses per rev. and supplied with a vacuum mat. It would be difficult to dismiss, unheard, as an "also ran". The JVC QL-7 can be found in the $200(+) range, this is a ridiculous price for a drive of that quality. Raul also finds the accompanying 5045 arm to have merit. Mine was obtained as an experiment, armless and in a wrecked plinth, $125. For those with a spare TA & an idle saw, a little further up the line:
http://www.topclassaudio.com/web/eng/used_product_details.jsp?gid=6848

Think I'll hold out for the TT-101, this one's a little more than I want to take on:
http://www.topclassaudio.com/web/eng/used_product_details.jsp?gid=6361.
Your endorsement of the MA-505 has influence too.

I'll have to do some "critical" listening to the Neil Young later but for now, yes, the easy answer is IMHO, the TT makes a difference.

Peace,
Dear halcro: I realy did not have any single intention to bought a JVC DD TT because I just did not need other TT but when I saw it along the JVC tonearm I just can't refuse. I was interested in the JVC tonearm that I have now for " free " because the seller put the price on the TT with out care about the tonearm.

http://www.topclassaudio.com/web/eng/used_product_details.jsp?gid=4790

works fine and this is the tonearm were is seated the marvelous Precept PC440. I tested with other cartrridges and is just fine, better than the TTs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Not really, my first encounter with the Denon DP-100 was at the show room of a " humble " Denon distributor in Laredo,TX, was here where I bought my DP-80 and DP-75.

I never had the money to buy the DP-100 even that the dealer offer me near its " cost ". I remember that he made a " show " with the DP-100 where he demoe that the TT was imperturbable by any internal/external " force/vibration ": what he did it is while a LP playback one of his employees seat/stand up in the metal platter surrounded area making some kind of " movements " and well the music goes on with no awareness disturbance!!!! can you believe it?

IMHO the DP-100 is second to none, in the mean time I'm satisfied with my 80/75 Denon's TTs.

As a fact there is a lot of fabolous audio items out there, name it and you could find out. Sometimes we need money, time and " land "/space to own more audio " toys ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: Thank you all because no one said: " hey I want to buy from you that Audiocraft TS-26 SUT. "

stupid of me to think to put on sale that unit, that's what an audio " rockie " made it because ignorance: my ignorance.

Two-three days ago asked my self: why that high price of 80K Yens for a SUT in its times?. So, I made on it " usual " modifications for the better: hard wired output with Harmonics Technology Silver IC and WBT Silver/Ag Nexgen input RCA connectors.

What achieved with?, for a SUT an incredible performer even better than the regarded and modified Denon AU-340.
The Audiocraft transformers are " something " and " something " great. I'm learning on the whole subject and waiting for my other SUTs. We will see where this exiting adventure arrive. Yes, I'm like when I startted with the MM/MI alternative: " a bambino with a new toy. The week's toy. "

I'm enjoying again the LOMC alternative that's by its own " rights " a very good alternative.

Some of you that don't care about maybe is time to retjink on that subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: No, I don't think so but certainly I can't be sure. I think is the 13D because its tiny cantilever and because does not like it the 40 ohms SUT position but the 3 ohms.
Now, I don't have on hand yet my second sample to compare it and in the other side I can't know which reference took Dynavector to rate its output level: 3.54 or 5 cm/sg that always makes a difference and create some confusion in the same way that normaly are confusions in the AT compliance cartridge numbers because AT choosed to measuresat 100 hz.

Anyway, I'm realy happy with this Karat Nova 13D .

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
I have been giving the audio forums a brake over the weekends catching up on Monday mornings with a fresh cup of community coffee. I have to say that today was one of the better reads thus far here, thanks to all. I don't know what it was in particular, maybe it was the Halcro snipet about the TT71 that was taken gracefully :).
Dear Lewm: In 2010 you had the Precept 440 on sight and don't pulled the triger:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&openflup&3161&4#3161

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul,
I had totally forgotten that post and the Precept 440 along with it. Good work on your part to quote me.

If I may say so, the fact that you saw and heard a DP100 in Laredo, TX, in whatever year does not mean that they are not scarce in the US and Europe. You were just in the right place at the right time. I used to haunt the high end audio salons of New York City, and I never saw a DP100 (or an Exclusive P3 or a Kenwood L07D or etc) in all that time.
Dear friends: PRECEPT cartridge good news for all of you.

I tested my NOS Precept 220 stylus in my Precept 440 and performs almost at the same level that the 440 stylus, differences are only at the frequency extremes but you only can be aware under comparison and with a high resolution system.

Now, we know that the PC440 and PC220 cartridge motor is exactly the same. Well you not only can own the PC440 right now but even a better option the: PRECEPT PC550ML that was the top of the Precept line.

How ?: buy through this ebay seller ( he has some on stock. ) the Precept PC220 with original 220 stylus ( the same I own. ):

http://www.ebay.com/itm/AUDIO-TECHNICA-PRECEPT-PC220-CARTRIDGE-PLUS-GENUINE-PCN220-STYLUS-EXCELLENT-COND-/160965286917?ssPageName=ADME:X:RTQ:US:1123

and here you buy the Original Precept 550ML stylus replacement:

http://www.lpgear.com/product/PCN550ML.html

and then you now own an Original top of the line PRECEPT PC550ML !!!!!!!!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Btw, I just bought the 550ML stylus replacement, maybe today will be shipped to my place.

The ones of you that take the Prcept unique opportunity will know what I mean when I said that these kind of cartridges belong to a " NEW CARTRIDGE GENERATION " ( NCG ).

R.
Dear Raul,
I found the 550ML stylus at LP Gear and the Precept 220s on eBay last week, but I hesitated (and continue to hesitate) to pull the trigger, because I am quite confident that there will be another "game-changing" cartridge within a month. Either that or you will audition the 550 and find it to be not quite as good as the 440. You have a perfect right to do that, and indeed we know you will do that, it's in your nature. But it does give one pause as regards spending money. In this case, the Precept is relatively cheap so not much of a gamble I guess.

Can you put your current adoration in perspective? For example, how does the 440 stack up with your Astatic, or the Clearaudio Virtuoso, or your Technics 100Mk4 (anyone remember that one?), or the AKG P100LE (which I guess you've sold), or the DV Karat Nova and the MC2000, for that matter. Thanks.