Dear Fleib, Empirically, I would recommend against the ERS cloth and in favor of the TI Shield. For one thing, ERS cloth can be kind of lumpy; the platter sheet might not sit perfectly level on it. For another, the ERS cloth would tend to decouple the platter sheet/mat from the platter and thereby abrogate the designer's intent as regards dissipation of energy from the LP. But most importantly, TI Shield just measures way better for both EMI and RFI rejection than does ERS cloth. However, I have not compared one to the other. TI Shield needs to be grounded for optimal effect. I figure that is achieved via the large contact area between TI Shield and both the platter (below) and the platter sheet (above).
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.
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.
13,665 responses Add your response
Thank you Timeltel, I started investigating the differences in tips a few years back. This necessitated using MM/MI carts for obvious reasons. Although I wanted to approach from a standpoint of "no preconceived notions", it's impossible to put aside what you already know. The AT micro line is the same as a micro ridge. These are cut in the same facility in Japan. There are only a handful of places in the world that cut diamonds for tips. The shibata was the first extended contact shape, invented for 4-ch reproduction. It sits near the bottom of the groove. Even if a record is cleaned well, it might reveal some noise when deburring parts of the groove previously unplayed. Because the facets are different on front compared to back, the contact with record spinning is curved rather than straight. I believe this is what gives the shibata the uniquely sweet high frequency sound. From a technical viewpoint it could be seen as a flaw. I suspect the delay is less than the difference in transient response between some cart designs. I admit I never tried to calculate. I think this invention is more of a stroke of artistic genius. Like it or not, it is or was unique. Some approach this as calculating the trajectory of a rocket. I try to approach as how does it sound? Of course the side dimension is the detail extraction aspect. I tend to go for very detailed. It seems that many prefer musicality or overall coherence over detail. AT offered a great way for me to learn the something about the art of cart design. Once you can do stylus/plug transplants, you're not limited to body style type substitutions. Choice of tip, cantilever and compliance applies to all carts, not just MMs. Another Agoner, Glrickaby, seemed to discover the Clearaudio/AT relationship, and post in on VE and Audio Circle with me. There are other things you can do as well. I have a potted AT-95 with an aluminum top plate. It sounds pretty damn good. Right now I have an AT-7V tip on there. I keep it in the same plug and can swap with my Virtuoso. But don't think the Clearaudios are the same as a AT-95 body. They're not. They have different generators. There's no such thing as 47K being the standard for terminating a MM/MI. It's only there by default. "They" perpetuate this mentality to sell carts for thousands of dollars. Those carts are fine if that's what you're into, but offering no options for the rest of the people is a conspiracy of indifference or greed. Regards, |
Lewm, Lucky you. I've seen a couple of 7Ds sold here on Agon for ridiculously low price lately. ERS cloth is a great idea. You can get it with adhesive backing. Put it under a delrin mat and you'd have the ultimate interface? Built in constrained layer damping sounds appealing. Perhaps a contact points interface would be the only competition, but that's for belt drives. I used to have a Studietto w/zeta. That was my fav. The suspension was the weak part, but I was in the biz and had all kinds of extra springs. My ex partner had a Reference. That one was fun. One thing I learned was how to goose decent performance from even a modest deck. It's a lot easier if it spins at the right speed. Some of the entry decks are like a money pit of a house. If you're on a budget, who wants to spend a grand or whatever, on a box to make it run at speed? I'm thinking of making some videos on modifying tables. But like my Sapphire/Teres rim drive project, it sits on the floor barely touched. I have tweeters to install, an open baffle project and a full range driver idea is formulating that might really take the cake. This is a hobby for me now, if only I could squeeze a few more hours in each day..... Regards, |
Regards, Fleib: Good post, a lot said with an economy of words. As there are some who are detail oriented, the VE cart. database does show three 981's, two HZ's and one LZ. The stylus contact area for the stereohedrons is given as 8um (minor radius) x 71um (major radius), consistent with Shibata but according to it's "inventor", a Huges Diagmatics Inc., it has two additional front facets, intended perhaps to either reduce tip mass or to avoid infringment of the Shibata patents. As a comparison, engagment for a .7mil conical or standard .3 x .7 elliptical is frequently given as 18um (major raidus), a microline at 75um. These are AT figures, they also state their Shibata as 6um (minor) x 71um (major). Reflection on these figures and it's relation to groove modulation might give one insight into the noted hf response of the Stereohedron stylus. "One who truly knows---can never be impoverished". Sun-tzu. Peace, |
No. I've got a full-up L07D cum L07J tonearm that I like very much, not just the tonearm. I found that the table itself sounded much better after I installed an EMI/RFI shield under the platter mat (termed a "platter sheet" by Kenwood). I used TI Shield available from Mike Percy. I have been meaning to try it with my other dd turntables, but for sure it is a must-do for the L07D. The idea was not mine, came from reading the L07D owners website. The leader of that group uses ERS cloth. If you still have your Kenwood, you might give it a try too. |
Dear Lewm, Yes, a couple of years ago I was visiting the KAB site and happened to go to the cart section. Kevin was selling the 980 in both hi and low. I didn't need Desktop's recommendation to choose the low. BTW, he thinks the 980LZS might be the world's finest MM. I don't know about all that. I know that I like it. For around $100 I got the body and for an additional $80? I got a Pickering D3001. That's a .2 x .7 ellip. I also have a Jico D81 bonded shibata. The Pickering has more finesse. Kevin at KAB told me that the Stanton is the finest tracker he ever had on a 1200. It was the only cart he tested that could complete his torture test record. That's a wonderful table you have there. I have a couple of Kenwood DD, but not an LO-7D. Maybe you're just using the arm? I suspect your termination, tranny or load, might have more to do with the character of the sound. It was very strange for me when I first played the cart. I have an AHT prototype phono stage. I loaded it at 100 ohms, 67dB gain and got only midrange. It was the best midrange I ever heard. Funny, as I changed the load and broke in the cart, that same midrange wasn't quite as spectacular any more. Glorious by default? I took it up to around 2.4K. After it loosened up, somewhere around 270 ohms does the trick. Like some LOMC it gets more dynamic with higher value load and more focus with lower. This seems to vary a lot with preamp and system. Manufactures could make it easier on MM/MI users by providing options. Hi out carts would be much more desirable if users could load and tune to their system. They think everybody is looking for the holy grail. Most times I just want to play a record and have it sound really nice. If Raul prefers the hi out, I don't see a problem. We all get different results to some extent. If someone likes a TK-7_ does that make it wrong? There's really no morality involved in all this. Maybe the one who likes the Signet will try a 20SS and like that more. Maybe not. Regards, |
Dear Fleib, I assume then that you own a 980LZS. Yes? I am listening to mine in the L07J tonearm which is the installed tonearm on the Kenwood L07D turntable. It does sound a bit reticent in the highs, but I cannot tell whether that might be due to the old (Litz) wiring in the L07J and the connectors in the signal path. To me Litz wire typically sounds a bit that way per se. In any case, I have no complaints with the treble performance. I am waiting for an eruption from Raul, to your remark about the hi vs lo output versions of the 980. I have never heard an HZS, so I have no opinion about how the two compare. |
The 980 and 981 are the same cart. The 981, if there was one, came with a matched stylus. I'm told that the low output is far superior. I don't doubt it. This came from as guy called desktop, a pro who used to post on VE. I suspect that any who prefer the high out have inferior hi gain capability. The 7500 is the Pickering counterpart to the 980. The specs are identical. The stereohedron is said to be similar to a shibata. The whole stylus assembly is the weak link imo. That's seems to be true with virtually all carts with removable stylus. Fixing the assembly to the body is mandatory for optimum performance. With an output of 0.3mV, there is virtually no inductance. Mine will eventually go to Soundsmith for a ruby/micro LC. The only saving grace of the orig alum cantilever is the short length. Shibatas sound soft in the extreme high end. That can sound nice but it's all in what you like. ATs seem to sound better with the plastic stylus holder removed like a Clearaudio. All the voodoo and witchcraft gets a little tiring. It's not all that hard to figure out what does what. Deciding what you like is much harder I think. Most of us have a wealth of good stuff. One of the main advantages of a MC is the cantilever is fixed. That's also cause for concern. It makes the mounting and arm more critical with respect to vibration and energy dissipation. The MC is the ultimate cart as far as dealers are concerned cause it demands much more high dollar sales. Many do think the MC is the ultimate. At this point I really don't care. Even though 99% of my listening is jazz, I can hear a difference between a good and a better cart. Is forgiving a trait of compromised performance? If so then I think we need different sounds for different records. My records are all over the place and unless you're one of those guys who play a few audiophile records, yours are too. Regards, |
Dear Lew, Some added info about 'your' Sartre. He was also accused by the French C.P. to be a 'petit bourgeois'. I am familiar with the communist terminology and even with Marx 'surpuls value' theory but I was never able to understand the importance of the prefix 'little' before 'bourgeois'. I always thought that the communist were only interested in 'huge undertakings' so this little bugger caused much trouble .''Whay deed they not used 'huge bourgeois' in stead '' , I thougt. Then by, say, comparition with a 'huge capitalist swine' one would be able to explain what the fuss is about? But what can you do with an comparition with an 'little capitalist'? But you know Sartre has luck to live in France. Even de Gaulle defended him and stated something like: 'the French will never arrest our Voltaire'. In the East bloc however the situations was very different. The (dis)qualification 'petit borgeois' was worst then the death penalty. Ie if you were 'normaly' death then there was a at least the chance that someone would talk about you. But no chance that anybody would talk about you if you were 'petit bourgeois'. So,dear Lew, with your public admission regarding Sartre you may be in trouble. I hope that there are no real communist among you friends. Regards, |
Standards Aplenty Flashed all their experience with care Flashed all splitting the philosophers' hair Laying before all their thoughts with care Speaking audio truths where others only wondered Plauged by Hegel's intermnable pen stroke Disdainful of the ancients, of Kant they spoke Of tubes and proven vintage and where cascoded blundered Measurment or implementation They charged forth and back You must fix said each What the other had sundered. The 980 your kidding pray tell The pragmatist with shock, it fell? You SOLD it, a thought from hell FOOL what were you thinking the blues O well Get pickering D3000 through 7500 and hold fast you rue replacement cost as the day you were born. no that doesn't make sense. said the gipper send it to the tipper and maybe dog nipper will bark his approval to you forget not the goo fix the tip in lieu of gooey super glue Its solvent will take out the plastic and you will no longer fake for heritage sake the sound of the one not half bake. Methodology one and all the cart did fall a wheel broken is now a plough The cart pushed the horse as it got loud and loud to fill the hall said one and all we are having a ball even though we Kant hear I know not what said but please pass me a beer. |
Regards all: The best thing about standards, there's so many of them. Flashed all their experience with care Flashed all splitting the philosophers' hair Laying before all their thoughts with care Speaking audio truths where others only wondered Plauged by Hegel's intermnable pen stroke Disdainful of the ancients, of Kant they spoke Of tubes and proven vintage and where cascoded blundered Measurment or implementation They charged forth and back You must fix said each What the other had sundered. Five verses remain, need fresh material ;-). Peace, |
Dear Lew, You are a scientist and are supposed to care only about the truth and nothing else but 'the truth' ( aka the 'objective kind'). I am alas not familiar with Kierkegard but think to know that Sartre was an Hegelian. He spend some time in Germany to study German philosophy. Do you need more warnings? Besides he was never accepted by the French communist party as a member. Probable because he was regarded as a 'class enemy' (aka ' the proletarian class'). I don't really belive that you want to be seen as a 'class enemy'. Regards, Regards, |
Dear Nandric, this is helpful for me. Of course you are questioning my motivation. But may I return the question when stating: maybe the need is the same: I need companions in mind -looks not so bad... and this means not necessarily myself doubled or trippled. No, different people with many interests - maybe not at all audio oriented but of course yes! I know this is no simple answer but you may get along... best & fun only - Thuchan |
Dear Thuchan, Yes I am informed about your 'model of the world'. You told me this yourself and assuming that you are not a funny man as some Balkanes I thought that American pragamatism ( Dewey, Mead, Quine, etc) should 'cover' your life philosophy. But I obviously forget our own European tradition. Hume and Benthan and you are free to choose among different names for this phylosophy: hedonism, egocentric or narcissistic. As far as I understand this philosophy you don't need anyone else except you yourself. What do you need us for then? German regards, |
Dear Nandric, you are definitely the better lawyer than me and maybe you also stick more to rules than me although I met lawyers in my real life who do not! You are also better in finding arguments when you need a solution on the "old stuff topic". What I meant when stating I don`t care about others do like my stuff or not is that it is obviously without any relevance for my listening enjoyment when I get to know opinions - positive or negative - about the system or some parts of the system. It matters to my relation to the person and if I regard him as serious talking and discussing with him (in the future). I enjoy exchanging ideas and opinions and I go after recommendations if I assess them as valuable. You know I have my own "model of the world" or let`s say a certain philosophical way also dealing with independence from other people`s ideas, whether they are referring to religious, political or any other related topics. In this understanding I really don`t care when e.g. you don`t like my old stuff or not. Why did I answer your post? I thought it was a statement being made to help you not dealing with this matter, nothing else. And this is a pitty! I cannot accept your excuse because I cannot deal with excuses :-) Anyway whenever you have the chance to dig into a vintage adventure pls. do it. And if I can be of help give me a sign. I promise not to implement more than the "10 rules of Thuchan". I understood from Raul`s short comment that he is already working with them... :-) Lewm`s illustration is nice! You put the finger in the wound, so why are we communicating in writings? ... best & fun only - Thuchan |
Thucan @ 06-13-11, Just to ensure that I am not listed amongst those "audiophiles engaged in philosophy", I will clarify my contributions. I have argued that the search for 'a truth' behind what we can call 'good' or (both discriminately and subsumingly) 'better' regarding any hifi component is a question of "vindicating our judgements". In this endeavour, I have argued that methodological consideration of substantiating any such judgement is greatly enhanced by the critique of judgement power that was produced by Immanuel Kant. Others, such as Nandric, have offered views that I believe to fall well short of the problematic established therein and have opted for more convenient views. This is not because I am engaging in philosophy to browbeat anyone into accepting my criteria of cartridge/hifi component evaluations. It is more a case of my pointing to the real complexity and historical web of scientific and philosophical reflection that points to the real difficulties (aporias) that we ALL face in substantiating any such evaluations. Sorry to bring up a subject that I still maintain is done little to no service by willy-nilly dragging caricatures of it into the current discourse. I will of course attempt to be true to this view and avoid such acts of violence in the future. |
Lew& T_bone, I, the moron, sold my 981 LZS(NOS) for $250 because I have read somewhere that 981 HZS is much better. As Lew mentioned the Pickering D 7500 should fit the 981 model. I have seen both kinds on the German ebay. As soon I see one again I will inform you T_bone. Lew, if this frog had got some hearing aid would he jump? Regards, |
Dear T_bone: IMHO the best you can do is to send it to VDH for a re-tip or to that German guy that I linked for B&O cartridge re-tipping. No I don't think that through a good re-tip could lose its " magic ". I prefer the H against the L but both are really good and I think a little better than the selected 100. regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear T, I bought the 980LZS (not 981; that was a mistype) from eBay in what appeared to be well-used condition. I therefore concluded before listening to it that the stylus must be worn or near to worn out. Right then, I could have bought an NOS D98S stylus for near $300 from a business in the Netherlands, thanks to Raul letting me know about it. I balked at the price, and within one week someone else bought it out from under me. The dealer had none left. Then I started listening to the 980, and it sounded just fine after some initial teething problems. The stylus assembly is a rather loose fit to the cartridge body, so I use a tiny elastic band to bind them together more firmly and probably to damp some resonances (an added benefit of the elastic band IMO). I am told that this loose fit is a typical problem with Stantons and can be rectified by tricky surgery. In any case, since then I have become quite happy with the stylus I've got, and I have never seen another true NOS D98S stylus for sale anywhere. Recently I was able to buy an NOS Pickering D7500S stylus, which I am told will work as well as the D98S on the 980. In Japan, you might have better luck. Nandric and Thuchan, You guys might enjoy this "scientist joke": The scientist wants to investigate the frog. He has trained the frog to jump upon the command "Jump!". Now he cuts off one front leg and gives the command to jump, and the frog jumps. Next, he cuts off the other front let and gives the command to jump, and the frog jumps. He then cuts off one of the hind legs and gives the command to jump. The frog makes a real effort and is able to manage a facsimile of a jump. Finally, he cuts off the one remaining leg and gives the command to jump. The frog remains motionless. From this, the scientist concludes that if you cut off all four legs of the frog, it becomes deaf. This happens in science and is often a type of problem with our thinking in audio world. |
Dear Thuchan, And I thought that I am a lawyer. No wonder the Germans have the best and the most modern legislation in the whole world. Thy are obviously born with legislative talents. But I need first to correct my statement that I was not impressed with your 'old stuff'. There are two reasons for that. First because you stated to have never noticed my inclination to tease the Germans. The second was your own conviction that you don' care what other think about your gear. Well I don't believe that any of both statements is actualy true. On the other hand it is true that nobody can or should comment on components which he has never heard or has no idea about them. I deed thought to add 'smile' in parenthesis after your 'old stuff' but then the teasing intention will be lost. So herewith my apology to your 'old stuff'. I also promise never ever to say anything about your 'stuff' that can be seen or experienced as 'negative'. Otherwise I fear some more corrective rules regarding correct behaviour. However as a critical reader I need to mention that by all those rules about 'deafness' you overlooked that we usualy communicate in our forum in writing. Shout at some peculiar persom may be of some help even while we know that nobody will hear us. With German greetings, |
Dear Nandric, interesting observation. As I understand it Raul got deaf when experimenting in his laboratory and I got deaf when spending too much money. It seems to me we all got punished not doing the right thing. hmm... so what I learned is maybe this: Rule No 1: there is always communication even if two deaf man meet on Audiogon. Rule No 2: Audiophiles communicate like deaf man cause the only want to convince themselves that they are doing the right thing. Rule No 3: deaf audiophiles tend to repeat messages they have sent to the world cause the lost control about their communication memory. Rule No 4: the more audiophiles are engaged in vinyl the quicker they become deaf. Rule No 5: there is a north / south deviation on deafness rather than east/ west. The more you are located north on the planet the more you may become a risk patient ( South Africa or Australia could be the safest place). some people say this is due to the higher sound level audiophiles use or are confronted with in the northern world. Rule No 6: audiophiles who enjoy their hobby in a special room ( labratory, listening room etc.) which may be also seperated from the "real world" will presumably leave the room as a deaf man some day. Rule No 7: audiophiles engaged in philosophy have a tendency to audiophile deafness cause they believe looking on the topic from a higher perspective in contrary to laboratory workers struggling every day with new test schemes - this way engaged in day to day business. Rule No 8: cultural implications have no impact on the degree of deafness ( with the exception of the MM field). Rule No 9: audiophiles do need a communication platform like Audiogon to show themselves they are needed somehow. Please don't forget to give some applause every day rather than critisize deaf people's lifestyle. Rule No 10: if you are owning more than 50 MM carts you have a better chance not becoming deaf. While you are engaged in the decision process which cart you may use or prepare for usage you spend a lot of time with the object itself rather than listening to music... best & fun only - Thuchan |
Dear Halcro: I think that you still don't understand the whole meaning on my test process and I understand why. A tracking distortion LP ( real music recorded. ) test ( not a test tone test LP. ) where two different cartridges performs different, between other things, tell you that the cartridge that performs better in that test will has lower tracking distortions through playback in any other LPs. Of course this " sole " parameter can't tell you if you will like it or not that when you add it to other objective and subjective parameters then that tracking distortion test result will have a true meani8ng for you and if could be that that test result has influence in what you are hearing. The cartridge tracking distortion subject IMHO is very important/critical with quality performance level because if a cartridge has microscopic problems to follow LP grooves then will generate tracking distortions that degrade the final quality performance level. Cartridge tracking habilities IMHO is one of the main targets in a cartridge design because IMHO we are trying to hear what is in the recording and first than all we can have what's in the recording primarily if the cartridge can track in clean way the LP grooves with the lower tracking distortions that can achieve. When the cartridge stylus " hit " the LP tracking grooves ( during playback ) we first than all are in " hands " of that tracking cartridge habilities. We need, first than all, that the stylus stay always in the grooves, this is a subject that not only I posted in the main page on this thread but that I posted several times. TAS on the Montepilot link-review talked exactly on this subject and its importance. What we heard is a set of parameters where each one of them has influence in the quality performance level: there is a inter-relationship in between. I said it several times: on my approach what you like it or not is almost non-important. What IMHO is important is that what you/we like is " CORRECT " ( I don't have other word. ) and with out an overall audio items test precise process you can't do it because what you don't be aware you don't know that exist in what you are hearing. The process is a hybrid one: objective/subjective. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Timeltel, I must confess I am a troglodyte in these matters. When I am enjoying a cartridge I tend to keep listening to it. So, yes, I have not yet tried the 315 or the MMC1 or etc. I do not much care for the pursuit of perfection in lieu of happiness. I have not been doing much listening these days, for one reason. |
Lew, and others interested in stylus shape, back in the last days when Gordon Holt was still at the helm of the good ship Stereophile, his preferred cartridge was a Shure V-15 something-or-other with a conical (spherical) stylus. As I recall he wrote up his comparison with the elliptical version and found the conical to better replicate his master tapes. Since Gordon was so much into Fulton products (speakers, wire) at the time, that might also relate to Raul's comment. As for the Denon 103 (basic conical version), I appreciate that Raul may not favor it but there remain a good many hobbyists who do. Like EVERYTHING in this hobby, we can take guidance for others who we respect but ultimately we must listen for ourselves. |
Two deaf, but able to speak , man meet each other and have the following conversation. A: Hi John, are you taking a stroll? John: No, no I am taking a stroll. A: Uh, sorry, I thought you was taking a stroll. Raul is convinced that there is an 'objective' correlation between the 'technical propertys' of the components he is experimenting with and the quality performance of them. He is searching like a scientist for the explanation of what he hears in the process. Thuchan is interested in in some components depending on his own taste or preferences. He can buy what he like. He does not care about 'technicalitys' nor about what the other think about his gear. There is nothing against one approach nor the other. Everyone is free to spend his own money as he prefer. But if our dramatis personae are not aware of the difference between those two approaches they will communicate as those deaf man. As I see their 'communication' Raul has difficulty to understand what Thuchan is talking about and Thuchan is a priori skeptical about Rauls undertaking. To my mind there is no communicatione at all between them. Regards, |
Dear Raul, if we all would be a peer group knowing each other personally and also having had the chance to listen to each other system we might get closer to your objective parameters. I understand your approach finding comparable preconditions and to counterbalance them over the distance. Only I doubt it will work. Regarding the EMT JPA 66, which is a pre-amp as well as a complex phono stage, I am in good neighbourhood with some Japanese and German afficinados that this is the ultimate machine. What I like is not only the sound and the variations you may play with, especially when it comes to MM cartridges. No, technologically the two output transformers (which phono stage does carry them) enable a different sound experience you may have with the EMT 139st too. Also the 6 inbuilt SUTs are of such good quality you will throw away most of the contenders... This is first accurate and best performance. Some poeple told me this cannot be possible wihout special elements on the circuit etc. Forget this bullshit talking. It is the overall concept and the implementation which leads to this wonderful result even when the design is not the most attractive. subjectivity is no free ticket for telling results on an item which most other audiogoners cannot share. the crest for objectivity nevertheless is a good attempt limiting extreme assessments e.g on the abilities of a MM cart. I will not disencourage you doing so. I am only trying to show some of the obstacles... best & fun only - Thuchan |
Dear Halcro, In Thuchan's thread your complaint was:'who has done ...any scientific testing of' i.a. headshells. Why should this be relevant for any 'subjective approach'? If I don't like it...what good is your objective evidence?' If this is your opinion then you can't have it both ways. Those are contradictory statemens. For Thuchan who thinks that he has no need for any 'phylosophy' I will mention American pragmatism . My point was that we all use those '3 levels' of thinking in our discussion. We are talking about physical things which can be described in physical terms. We also 'value' those things (say carts) and can see different opinions about the same cart. Are those opinions contradictory? Yes. But if we add the subjective context of individual valuation then there is no contradiction because this is not about the thruth -values (true or false ; tertium non datur). I mentioned 'anti skate', VTF, compliance and can add cantilever materials and stylus shapes. We my call the knowledge about those 'inter-subjective' but the problem then is that there are so many people who have never heard about those terms. So I prefer 'objective knowledge' to which we all refer one way or the other. Ie it is not possible to choose between 'subjective' versus 'objective'. We need both for our discussion and use them continual. That some of us are not aware of this fact is another question. Regards, |
A great article from the past that was just posted on Vinyl Asylum MM vs MC |
Rationalists to the right of them Objectivists to the left of them Purists in front of them The subjectivist said If it pleases me, I will Impact and definition It suits me quite well Boldly I wandered Into audiophile hell Fleib: And you read Sun-tzu! Lew, Raul, regarding styli, a thought: It's where the rubber meets the road. Diminishing it's importance is in itself revealing. Ya'll carry on. Peace, |
Dear Raul, I think that maybe Thuchan's 'subjective' proposition relies on the fact that no matter how many 'objective' measurements you care to supply........if 'I don't like it' is the net response........what good is your objective evidence? To put it more bluntly........the cartridge that tracks your 'torture test' may still sound inferior to me, than the one which cannot manage that feat? |
Dear Thuchan: +++++ " in the end it is all subjective " +++++ maybe you are right in your " Assessment Scheme " but in mine exist a specific " objective weight " along some subjective " charge ". Let me understand your opinion or better: please explain me what is the specific subjective weight when you are testing cartridge tracking distortion in a real music LP and one cartridge track perfectly that " torture test " and other can't. Where is the " all is subjective "?, a cartridge can track that track or not: this is an objective fact not subjective, this is only an example and are several of them. I think we are talking of different whole subjects. I understand that you can't understand what you don't know what you don't ever experienced and that was one of the reasons of my proposal here. No, I'm not willing to go on that road any more. IMHO, inside the " full subjective road " hide 99% of the mediocrity ( I'm not talking of you. ) because that " I like it " has no argument against it. In the other side IMHO the " subjective road " not only hide gross errors/distortions ( because we are unaware of them. ) but preclude growing-up in a better direction, that's why the high-end is where it is after all these years: almost no advance and we prefer that way that put under scrutiny our system and our music-audio knowledge level. This scrutiny is not important because all of us will be under same circumstances, what is important is to be better audiophiles. With the " subjective road " each one of us are " alone " like in a desert with no help around instead through the objective road IMHO we are surrounded by several tools that gives us " water " when in the desert. Is dificult for me try to explain the whole meaning, sorry. You own a new phonolinepreamp and it's out of my mind ( other than flexibility. ) why some one like you that are looking for the Nirvana took that choice, I know perfectly all the EMT " problems " that preclude first rate accurate and neutral performance. Of course the " subjective road " defend it against any argument but this is not what I'm talking about: I'm talking about to achieve true Nirvana and even beyond it. Anyway, my advise is that we need the " objective weight " in our each one audio item tests and audio item opinions, why not? where are the obstacles that preclude some " objective weight " ? whom told us we can't? whom told us is useless? maybe the AHEE? and please don't answer: a subjectivist!. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Lewm: Spherical, I own the 103 that neves was my cup of tea, I own the Supex S-100 that comes with two stylus one of them spherical but I don't tested yet and the Fulton High Performance that's a great performer including in the bass. There are not many top cartridges with spherical stylus shape and I have to admit that I don't remember reviews on that kind of cartridges. So I really can't argue on precise way about, our self cartridge design is not taking in count a spherical stylus for it. I'm only an amateur but I can't understand why all those reports you readed about. Anyway, good that you agree on the overall post subject. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Raul, It's been awhile since I was last here. My apologies if I am repeating something already said. I realized that you asked my opinion about inductance and I failed to comment. In general, I consider 400mH to be the line of demarcation. That is not to say that a value of 450 or 500 is hopelessly compromised, but 600mH or above is a dis-qualifier imo. Some popular carts have as much as 900mH. Oh how we like our mellow colorations. Sweet - maybe, clear and articulate - not a chance. Inductance as a property of the output voltage is probably the greatest compromising factor of the MM/MI carts. Increasing resistive loading does virtually nothing to address this. Keep shunt capacitance as low as the cart will allow. Look for high frequency resonance as high as possible. Here is your defensive interceptor missile: Actual measured MM vs MC comparisons (Ortofon at VE, AES summery) show that electrical resonance is near meaningless. Hagerman and Ellison are dead wrong. All phase nonlinearities hinge on high frequency resonance regardless of design. It is only damping of the moving system that tames the rising high end of a MC cart. That damping also causes phase divergence. The thing that makes the MC listenable also compromises imaging and clarity. The same is true for a MM, but the presence of capacitance combined with the cart inductance will lower the high frequency resonance. Some MM carts have a very high resonance, as much as 50KHz. These are often 4-ch designs. They will exhibit better phase linearity than many MCs. Some might come on your thread with a hidden agenda. I believe that the truth will set everyone free. "All warfare is based on deception" - Sun Tzu BTW, a little rust on the magnets is no problem. Carefully remove with some sandpaper or mini file. These magnets do not degrade with time. The rubber dampers don't either. 30 year old dampers work as good as new in vast majority. It's the suspension wire that usually goes. Old rusted Decca carts are worthless - cheaply made and another overpriced POS imo. Regards, |