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
Jlin, Assuming that the "RMS" specification is made, you are correct, but over my lifetime of looking at cartridge specs, I am not sure I can say I have regularly seen that. Nevertheless, good point.

Raul, That AT looks like an exciting combination of "vintage" ideas translated using the most modern materials. I will be interested to read your opinion of it. However, as to ruby vs sapphire, I have been given to believe by others here and elsewhere that that is a distinction without a difference. In fact, you may be one of those who have mentioned it.
Dgob, I guess we would need a platter without silencer's in our system to actually know the effect of the silencers. I do remember a Acoustic Sig. video where Gunther had someone rap the aluminum platter to show it ring, and then rap a Storm, I think, and it was quiet. I believe the idea has merit, but how much is the overall table and chosen arm and how much is the platter silencers? I don't know.

The record on the platter seems faster to me. May be the rise in pitch you mention. I like the Boston mat too, but as Lewm said, you can hear it's effect. The bare platter, seems to have less signature, to me.
Hi Acman, I may have said I can hear the effect of the Boston mat, but I do prefer it at the moment to all the other mats I have around here, on the Lenco and the SP10 Mk3. The "effect" is a good one. I do use the stainless steel platter mat that is OEM with the L07D, and of course I like that too, but we have to consider that that one was chosen and made to integrate with the overall design of the L07D platter. For one thing, the weight of the platter would be unacceptably diminished if one were to sub it with a Boston mat1 or mat2. Finally, I just put the DP80 back into service, just to compare it to the Lenco. I have yet to find the "optimal" mat for it. The SAEC SS300 might be best or a Boston Mat2. But I want to keep the Mat2 on the SP10 Mk3, and the Mat1 seems too light for the DP80. Right now I am running it with both the SS300 and then the Mat1 on top of that. Not so good.
Lewm, I get great sound from the Mat II, and only can tell the very slight masking of highs, when I go back to the bare platter. As you know, this is so system dependent. Next week I might decide it is to bright and go to the Mat II full-time again.

I am looking forward to trying the resomat and actually like Storyboy's dots on a record idea. Sort of the same idea implemented differently.

Can you describe the difference between the Mat I and the II? I was thinking the Mat I might work better on my current setup. Just a little less damping.
The Precept 220 body with NOS 550ML stylus now has five hrs on Trans-Fi linear tonearm and modified ARC PH-2 phono stage loaded at 100K. My wife, a jaded observer of windmill fighting, says it sounds "big and buttery" in a good way. Beck's Sea Change Mofi sounds voluptuous and detailed like the SACD and far more enveloping and seductive than the same LP I heard on a $400K system at CES. Dylan's Time Out of Mind-- certainly not an audiophile recording-- is rich and emotional and enigmatic, with more saturated colors than I've heard before down in those grooves. The question is whether this is real or exaggeration. So far so good.
Acman3,

Incidentally, I have had the joy of listening to the same records on both silencer and older (solid block) platters and the difference is clear, to my ears. You could not listen to a record on the old platter without some sort of mat.

As always...
Dear Jlin: Maybe you are right about, I don't argue but still there is something " wrong " down there because ( for example. ) my Colibri wood has 0.6mv output at 5.0cm/sg but its SPL is very similar to my other Colibri that has 0.28mv at 3.54cm/sg and in the other side my Clearaudio Discovery has an output of 0.65mv and put higher SPL than the " similar " 0.6mv in my Colibri: the difference goes around 4db-5dbs.

So maybe the " problem " comes from the manufacturer way to measure it maybe they have a different " reference/standard ", I don't know for sure.
What I know is that exist a clear difference that any " deaf man " can hear it.

J.Carr: where are you? we need you. I'm sure he can put some precise light in the subject see it from a cartridge manufacturer point of view.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: Yes, I posted that ruby/sapphire are the same and in this thread Jlin did it:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&openusid&zzJlin&4&5#Jlin

however somewhere in the net I read it that both materials are not exactly the same but similar and has some different characteristics. I don't know if that is true or not and obviously I don't know if those " different characteristics " affect the cartridge performance level.

Those two models that AT choosed to came with ruby cantilevers were really expensive: the MM TK100 was near 1.5K in those older times and the LOMC 37E near 2K.

I like the look of the Ruby against the Sapphire " brother ". Anyway, for me this AT150ANV is a must to hear and that's why I decided to bought it. We will see how performs against the Precept 440/550ML.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Acman, The main reason why I bought the Mat2 was its weight; it is more nearly the same weight as the original rubber mat used on the SP10 Mk3, and I wanted to be sure not to compromise the servo feedback system on the Mk3. However, now that I have it, I do think it may be more neutral than is the Mat1, which I had been using regularly on the Lenco. The Mat1 is a huge upgrade from the stock Lenco mat. But then, I never have tried the Mat2 on the Lenco. Horses for courses, I think.

I confess that I too succumbed and bought a Precept 220XE and a 550ML stylus. Now I will have to have a listen for sure.
I own 2 AT150ANV's and both have the stylus mounted so you need to have the back of the arm quite high to get the SRA to 92 degrees. I am using a brass shim in front of the cartridge so I don't have to raise the back so high. Once the SRA is correct this cartridge is great. Very clear sounding. It kicks the MLX's butt. On my rig it sounds perfect loaded at 68k with a naked Vishay resistor. I liked the sound so much I just picked up a backup. I also just sent in my old AT150MLX to Soundsmith for a ruby cantilever and OCL stylus. When I get it back I will see how the Soundsmith ruby cantilever compares to the ANV's sapphire cantilever. I'm hoping that they are similar as I really like the ANV.
Dear Sarcher30: Thank's for your post. I almost can't read nothing about the AT150ANV quality performance level so your experiences are appreciated. Now I'm confident that I took a good " move ". No one bought two samples of the same model cartridge especially in a current model and at its asking price.

I think I own or owned every single top of the line AT/Signet designed and till today never disapoint me and I'm sure that this one will follow on that excellent " road ".

Btw, really nice audio system you own, everything looks just great.: congratulations!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Thanks Raul. There are not allot of comments about the ANV on the web. I've had mine for about 9 months now and I'm quite happy with it. The stylus is not glued on like most carts. I think it's pressure fit. They must have used a laser to cut the hole in the end on the sapphire cantilever. I've been trying to find just the replacement stylus for the ANV but they must have sold out of them already.
Dear Sarcher,
Have you tried listening to the SP10 Mk2A in the GTO? What year is that, 64, 65, or 66? I don't think it's a 64.

Yes, I like your system, too, and the fact that the ANV works well with it would suggest it will work well in mine.
That's a 67. I had a 65 with tripower power back in the day. Wish still had that fine machine.
Yup it's a 67. It's easier to tell if you can see the tail lights. I prefer the tail lights on the 67. The other way to tell between the 66 and 67 is on the 66 the GTO badge is in the middle of the front fender. On the 67 it's on the bottom of the front fender. The 65 has a different body style and are pretty cool too.

Lewm, Your system does have some similarities to mine. I'm sure it sounds great. The ANV is very clear and realistic sounding to me. It's not romantic. It just tells it like it is. In my system loaded at 47k it's still very good but a little damped sounding on top. At 68k it's nice and open just how I like it. If you don't mind buying grey market they can be had for around $675.00 on Ebay from Japanese sellers.
Dear Acman, Experimenting different spacers on Tomahawk wand is the most important study on the subject, so also you are the chosen one for this quest. The aluminium wand itself is very rigid & light, so the answer may very well lay in the headshell. Nothing else interests us Terminator fans (and many other Agoners I believe) more at the moment.
I´m also delighted that you both Messengers have the PRECEPT PC220 engine, a perfect tool for this highly important research. Hardly can wait for your reports.

Btw, I and probably many others have found a fool proof method to determine a cart´s optimum maximum VTF. Play a very eccentric (max 2 mm off-axis is reasonable, unfortunately many records are eccentric) record with certain air flow and VTF. Manual says: "If the stylus is tracking reliably, you should see the saddle swaying to & fro smoothly with eccentric records. There should be no strain on the stylus, which should remain stationary relative to the cartridge body." So you have to increase air flow and/or VTF to achieve satisfactorily tracking. In the case of my ACUTEX LPM315 STRIII, the air flow must set at very high to maintain VTF at 2.0 grams.
If a cart tracks a very off-axis record, it will track anything in normal playing situation (of course if it is a good tracker initially). Furthermore, my ACUTEX needs at least 1.8 grams VTF on certain on-axis but very difficult "ubertransient" and very dynamic recordings like Al di Meola´s "Elegant Gypsy" (Columbia 1977). Otherwise gets very distorted and impossible to listen.
Greetings All, I'm curious about the ANV and I apologize if this question had been asked and answered, but would anyone hazard a guess as to how much the replacement stylus will cost for the ANV?
Don
All, I've just concluded my experiment with my homemade res-o-mat and I can honestly say with confidence this idea works! I was skeptical before listening thru the headphones, but now I'm convinced. I guess this let's me know how much more I need to improve my amp and speakers.
Thanks as always!
Don
I recall riding in a 64, the first year, and the almost unbelievable effortlessness of the acceleration. I tend to like the 64-65 for their smaller size and possibly lower weight.

Some time in the foreseeable future I will be visiting my son in Tokyo, may pick up an ANV at that time.
I would not wait too long if you want an ANV. It is a limited edition and showing as discontinued on the US Audio Technica website. Probably why LP Gear is charging $200.00 more than they were when I bought my first one 9 months ago. When the dealers run out of stock that's it.
Grbluen2, I've been looking for the replacement stylus (atn150anv) for the AT150ANV since I bought my first one. The only place I have seen one is on a couple of Japanese websites. Even with a translation program I could not figure out how to order one because these websites are not setup for international sales. I tried to order one on Ebay and even payed for it only to be told they were out of them. Audio Technica must have only made so many of these. I hope they decide to make some more in the future.
Dear Sarcher30: ++++ " I would not wait too long if you want an ANV. It is a limited edition and showing as discontinued on the US Audio Technica website....... When the dealers run out of stock that's it. " +++++

that's the problem with AT limited edition on models that were celebrating AT aniversary, for example in its 30th aniversary they builded a LOMC to celebrate it: AT OC30, these ones disappeared faster that you can read this and after that the posibility to achieve one is far away.

So, your advise to buy now while it last is a very good advise just in time. Good for me that I bought it.

Btw, probably the problem to not find out the ANV stylus replacement is that the ML stylus shape is an AT patent so no retip source handle it, sapphire is no problem at all.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
I'll still wait to hear from some of you who can compare the ANV to the other flavors of the month, before spending $1200. I've got the Precept 220XE/550ML in-house for much less money.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " can be had for around $675.00 on Ebay from Japanese sellers. " +++++, I have to add: " right now ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
My last MM cartridges were AT150mlx and Grado Prestige Gold. Now I use Ortofon MC20 and SL15E MKII with Ortofon T20 SUT and MCA76 phono amp.
MC20 (used in very good condition) + T20 (or SLE15E MKII + MCA76, or any other combo) can be bought at around $300 ~ $400 from eBay.
On my system they are much better than those AT or Grado MM cartridges which I seldom use these days.
I am considering to buy an Ortofon SPU cartridge in the future, and wonder how much they are better than MC20 or SL15E.
Like all the rest of the flavors of the month Raul that price. Is going up. The stock exchange can't touch this thread cause the price never goes down.
Raul seems to be driving the market. We just need some good old insider information to buy ahead of his announcements. Maybe an investment newsletter for $10 a month.

Btw, As good as the Precept is ; Raul keep it up as long as its fun or till I am broke!
Between the fine cartridges, great practical info and general small talk you won't find a better thread for vinyl enjoying music lovers. Raul O yea keep the flavours coming.

With some tweaking I've reduced hum interference and I'm seriously enjoying my AKG p100le. Axels repairs were preformed as we all would expect. This cartridge tracks like my 65 goat did warped lps no problem. Clicks and pops on not so perfect lps does not distract from musical enjoyment. When it comes to playback nothing sticks out lows, mids and highs presented fairly which lets listening come so much easily. Yes my timing was right to obtain this jewel and initial concerns due to needed repairs put to rest. Nothing left to due but enjoy some rock and roll and all other flavours of our beloved music.
Ihcho, interesting your opinion to mc-20 cartridge. With prefering it over the Grado I can follow. That it sounds better as at-150mlx you can please explain. In which way it sounds better? The Ortofon mc20 is a good cartridge. If SPU will better it? I heard SPU classic N, E , 50th anniversary . I tried also the naked SPU. All ok on Ortofon 309 and Garrard 301. But no chance against AT 20 ss, Empire 4000/3 , B&o MMC2 on my Mission 774. So I sold all MC's , stayed with lightweight arm and MM's . I will never go back to SPU . Is it right you have Garrard 301 with 309 also?
On my system, MC20 with MCA76 or T20 provides sound with more depth and detail. In full orchestration or 50~60s jazz, I feel the sound from MC20 is more full and real. (Sorry, I cannot describe any better.)

Yes, I have Garrard 301 with Ortofon RMG 309 arm. I sold all my other gears (amps, guitar, ...) to fund for 301 and 309 without being noticed by my wife (money wise), but have not saved enough money yet for SPU. Currently I use two quarter coins on a Sumiko headshell with MC20 and a Marantz headshell with SL15e to balance the weight. Doh!

I also have Clearaudio emotion with AT150mlx and Thorens TD 145MKii with Grado gold. I've also tried MC20 on Clearaudio, and yes, it sounds better than AT150mlx on my system.

I have VK60, VK30 with on-board phono, and Tyler Linbrook systems.
And, MC20 gives more bass. AT150mlx is good on highs, but sometimes I feel it lacks bass, and a bit too bright. MC20 is not as bright as AT150mlx. On certain rock albums like Jimi Hendrix, which has a lot of guitar distortion and metal sound, I prefer AT150mlx.

Anyway, I intended to have SPU cartridges when I bought 301 and 309, but money is tight and it is just taking too long to get it. So far, I am good with MC20 and SL15e.
I'm not sure that anyone is interested, but the rep from LPGEAR made it sound as if there would not be a 150ANV replacement stylus to be made available. The suggestion was to use the 150mlx stylus as a replacement.
FYI

Don
Regards, Ihcho: The Orto MC20 was the last MC cart I purchased. It offered a sense of transparency that, on my ancient rig, eventually led to fatigue. In order to tame it's brightness I ended up running it with an AT-630 SUT. Your post has resulted in digging it out in order to re-evaluate.

In order to level the playing field, I also pulled out a Denon HA-1000, an active head amp capable of switching between MM/MC carts and ran through it the MC20, Shure ML140 HE, Empire 4000D-111, Empire 1000 Z/EX, Signet TK9LC, Empire 8000XVE and a Signet TK7LCa. Cabling from phono to head amp is the low cap. BlueJeans, remainder is from (before they were ZU) Wasach Mountain Cable Works.

The MC20 offered a most attractive sense of transparency and clarity in the upper mids & hfs. Bass was neither disproportionately recessed or emphasized. There was evidence of a steely character, a brightness that is possibly due to taste, system integration or preconditioned expectations.

Through the HA-1000, the TK9LC was neutral, resolving, and navigated the extremes of response without any apparent editorializing due to voicing anomalies. Timbre and tone were delivered with accuracy, almost as if the Signet and HA-1000 were designed for compatibility. Transients are very good. Personal opinion, the Orto is immediately engaging but less, umm, refined?

The neutrality and lack of coloration of the Shure ML140 HE became especially/overly evident. I immediately concluded the cart did better without the HA-1000 between it and the phono section. Neither was the Signet TK7LCa in any way improved. Midrange resonance and hf extension were diminished. With the hf 100k filter engaged both the ML140 and TK7LCa lost immediacy and involvement. Even with the additional filter out of the loop both carts seemed veiled.

A number of Empires were chosen after reading your post. The AT 150MLx and Grado are at near extremes in presentation. Grado's are renowned for rich mids and smooth bass but lacking in hf apparency. The 150MLx, like many ATs, has a reputation for bright highs and "thin" bass. Correct loading and attention to setup are essential in order to extract the potential of the upper tier ATs. Of course.

Early Empire carts were MMs. Around 1968-69 a transition was made. ADC was making waves in the marketplace with their patented MI carts, Empire introduced their version. In order to evade patent infringement it was described as "induced field moving magnet" stylus. Easy to listen to mids, a strong but not extravagant bass. Hfs never glare. Frequency response in the better Empires range from 10-50k. Well balanced, there's no aspect of a typical Empire carts' response that stands out.

If budget is a concern, a sample can be found here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Empire-999-II-MEX-Cartridge-and-Stylus-/281052843104?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item41700e0c60

The 2000E-111 was produced in the thousands, H. Pearson (old school reviewer) placed it on his "recommended" list in 1978, plentiful & cheap. With some exceptions, the 999-1000 carts are comparable, the same can be said for the 2000-8000 range. With two digit or other three digit carts or those identified with "GT" or "LAC", stylus configuration needs to be confirmed before replacing.

Replacement styli are plentiful, for the 999 MEX above, this .3 x .7 elliptical by Walco for Empire has a particularly good reputation:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/TURNTABLE-NEEDLE-STYLUS-for-EMPIRE-S-1000E-XERD-EMPIRE-1000E-X-235-DE-235-PDE-/290821421234?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item43b64eb8b2

After acclimation, Empire carts can be a good listen.

TOTL Empires are a very good listen.

If it's the "impression of detail" you find important, stick with the MC20.

Peace,
Dear Timeltel: I own the MC20 and the MK2 version too and IMHO I think your test was a little in the unfair side for the Ortofon LOMC cartridge and the " problem " is that HA-1000 that IMHO is a " crap " of headamp. The MC20 is a lot better than that headamp.

Over the years I owned several SUTs and headamps including the HA-500 and 1000 and almost all are in that niche " crap " units, perhaps only the Accuphase and the NIL-3 from Classe Audio are something to hear.

A head amp is IMHO the most critical design in audio electronics for any designer. In any today active high gain phonolinepreamps what exist in the design is a headamp and even with the today technologies the fingers of one of your hands are more than enough to find out something really good and all these are extremely expensive. The price on that Denon headamp and the SUT Denon I own was the samem in those time.

You posted that to " tamed " used in the past the AT670 SUT ( almost and AT entry level. ) and Ihcho is using an Ortofon T20 that was designed for the MC20. IMHO SUTs are a lot better than the headamps I know.

So for me your " clever " tests are no reference against the Ihcho experiences. IMHO what you are hearing is that HA-1000 and not the MC20.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul, In your search for perfection you may lose the connection with the reality. The most of us don't own the components we want but those that we can afford. I can't complain about my means but in comparison with, say, Thuchan I am a poor proletarian (Hi comrad Don). So I consider Herr Professor's contributions as very relevant, interesting and certainly justify.

Regards,
Dear Nandric: As always I respect your opinion but IMHO your post has no relation with what I posted.

Look, Ihcho posted that he really likes his Ortofon MC20 against other MM/MI cartridges and he said is using the Ortofon T20 SUT. Timeltel posted that overall is not exactly according with him because he tested the MC20 in his HA-1000 headamp ( as I posted IMHO a crap of item as almost all headamps out there. ) and I said that tests was " a little in the unfair side " because that headamp: the MC20 is a lot better ( I know that because I own it and its MK2 brother. ) than the headamp.

But this has nothing to do with Timeltel it self or money or whatever in Timeltel person, problem is the headamp it self that's IMHO the most dificult audio electronic item to design and that that design works better than a SUT and till today that headamp does not exist or at least I don't know it.

Why do you think that the majority of phonolinepreamps designers choosed to use internal SUTs as a gain stage against an active high gain one?: Nikola because an active high gain stage is a challenge for any designer and if you don't believe me then ask Atmasphere.

The NIL-3 by Classe Audio is perhaps the only " decent " headamp out there, Dave Reich was the designer ( he was the founder of Classé ), the circuit unit weights around 12kg and all the circuit board is not only encapsulated in a especial metal-blend but the circuit board is encapsulated in silicon-like material to avoid any single vibration to the delicated circuit, outside the metal capsule is the unit " body " by metal too: this elctronic unit is impressive by it self but has an external power supply that's more impressive and with bigger chasis: inside everything is first rate from transformers to filter capacitors, the capacitor reserve could be an envy for any 100 watts amplifier.

Well this NIL-3 headamp is no challenge to a top SUT and certainly both against a good active high gain design.

I repeat, Timeltel is not the subject of my post as the money either. You mentioned Thuchan because of money but money means nothing if you have not top knowledge and skills on the audio subjects.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Regards, Raul: As to the HA-1000, when I pulled the old unit out, it was necessary to dig pretty deep into the pile of unused gear.

Since you want to enter the dialog, several considerations.

Our friend Ichco mentioned two MM/MI carts. I applaud his sincerity but think this a very small sample on which to base an evaluation of the genre. In his interest the suggestion was made (welcome or not) that an Empire cart MIGHT fill the gap between the midrange rich Grado and potentially bright AT. You may have not noticed but out of consideration for the varying tastes and system characteristics we all possess, a real effort is made to avoid recommendations. I'll not hesitate to make a comment based on personal experience and the gear available. I hope these "suggestions" are read by others as free of any hidden agenda or artifice.

The referenced cart, an Empire 999ME/X, is somewhat (but not too far) downstream from the well liked 1000ZE/X. With the black stylus assembly, FR is 6-36k (the 1000Z is 4-40k), 6.0mV output, separation is a very healthy 35db+. 1/2 - 1 1/2gm VTF, a .2 x .7 "hand polished micro elliptical" stylus. An aged but tested NOS Empire for $20 would seem to be an adequate platform for gauging wether or not further interest in Empire carts was justifiable. A suggestion, not a recommendation.

I did find it interesting that the insertion of "that piece of crap" into the line did have a positive (IMHO) influence on the increased detail, dynamic swing and presence of the Signet TK9LC. And, the diminution of these considerations with the usually sweet TK7LCa and especially the Shure ML140 HE. Integration of cart/component is always a matter of concern. It might be better to actually listen to the manner in which a cart integrates with a pre/head amp or phono section before coming to a conclusion?

I've not dabbled with MC carts for more than twenty years. The performance and variety in voicing of MM carts, the impact of stylus profile, cantilever build and electrical characteristics are well illustrated on what (in an attempt to avoid the appearance of hubris) is described as an "antique" rig. The cost for experimentation is negligible & I've learned a lot. Although there are favorites, I've found only two carts I don't care to hear again. So as to not seem falsely modest, there are times when the outfit transcends the act of playing a record, it's sometimes capable of making music, keeping me transfixed for hours.

So, friend Ihcho mentions a Orto. MC20 & a couple of MM carts. I've a MC20 that hasn't seen a headshell for years. A couple of inconsequential phono accessories and an impression that in order to "level the playing field", comparisons would be best made without switching gear.

I've no interest in trying to impress anyone. "Just give us the facts, ma'am".

As to the facts, I need to make a correction. M. Collums reviewed the Empire 2000E-111, not H. Pearson. The HA-1000 also appears on his 1978 review. In the "not recommended" field.

Under the circumstances I need to withdraw an earlier comment. Through the Denon Crap-1000, the Signet TK9LC is most certainly NOT anemic.

The MC20? It'll go back into a drawer but will remain on a headshell. I may decide to listen to it again. Or not. The HA, excuse me, Crap-1000 will remain in the loop while I familiarize myself with that it does for the TK9LC, also the very similar AT-22/ATN25 stylus.

Good listening to all &

Peace,
Dear Nicola and Timeltel,
Please lighten up on Raul for using the word "crap" with respect to any cartridge or headamp or SUT. Don't you realize what that means? That means that none of us has to buy it. Do you know what a (financial) relief that is?
Dear Raul,
Carry on with your harsh judgements.

Kidding around, as usual.
Regards, Lew: Some of us experience excitement when discussion turns to audio. This is as it should be. At times, subjects of a controversial nature are introduced and then discussion tends towards liveliness. Tis' also as it should be, it makes good reading & occasionally someone learns something.

You're dealing with a happy camper here. Found a Signet TK7Ea with a LpGear ViVid line (not bad for an after-market replacement) stylus. Today, a GENUINE, untampered with NOS ATN155LC stylus. Black dot on the cantilever, undisturbed white sealant on the compliance screw. It's rumored scoundrels are inserting lower quality cantilevers into TOTL assemblies.

Not sure what to think of the Boston Audio Mat 2. Highs are spritely without evidence of glass. Bass is energetic, discernably separated notes rise and truncate as appropriate. Mids are clarified, maybe a little too much for my taste. With the BAM 2, I miss my favorite resonances. :)

Get any snow lately?

Peace,
Timeltel - if you ran the Signet MM through the Denon HA1000 headamp, I assume you ran the MM bypass. I cant see how this could improve the sound unless there is an active buffer at 0db, or it is altering the loading that the cartridge sees, fortuitously. I would have expected a decline in transparency due to the extra cable and connectors, but possibly a change in spectral balance.
Between Ortofon T20 and MCA76, I initially liked T20 better because MCA76 sounded a bit bass heavy, but with more listening, now I like MCA76 better. T20 is a bit more modest than MCA76. I feel the music more alive and colorful, and the sound stage is wider with MCA76.
When I first played Bach cello suite by Janos Starker (180g reissue, stereo) with MC20 and MCA76, my jaw dropped!

Many thanks to Timeltel and Raul for the thoughts on the MC20 cartridge.
Dear Timeltel: The Crap-1000 as you name it is only that. Being you a Pioneer fan is weird you not own the Pioneer headamp that's better than the HA-1000, not superlative but better than the Denon for what I remember.

To compare a vintage headamp with a today active high gain stage is like compare a banana with a cycle. Those vintage japanese headamps was good only on specs/numbers and nothing more. Do you know why the vintage SUTs were a lot better than any headamp of those times?:

IMHO because in a passive design the japanese designers can't make things worst instead in an active design everything could goes wrong trhough those designs and that's the way it gone.

Godd that you like it and that you will follow listening, everyone one of us choose what each one wants or likes.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Dover: Even that IMHO can't exist an improvement but higher distortions/degradation.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Greetings Professor,
Some of us experience excitement when discussion turns to audio. This is as it should be.
Quite right.......and excited you should be with a NOS AT-155Lc stylus assembly.
I thought I had five of these beauties but I was wrong......I have six!!
And four of them have the white silicone undisturbed sealant over the compliance screw.........but you know.....sometimes they may have run out of WHITE silicone and who could really blame the technicians in the laboratory if they then used black? :-)
Two of mine have just that!
And that black dot on the end of the cantilever is actually a deep cobalt blue. And sometimes the technician had a little too much on the brush and coated the last top end of the cantilever as well as the end point.
All the line contact styli however are perfectly identical.
Enjoy.....and I found your cartridge comparisons extremely valid and informative.
I look forward to more?
Regards
Henry
Regards, Dover: Life right now is good indeed. Listening to Mark Knopfler's recent release, "Privateers". A couple of ballads, some boogie, get down blues and a few of his Welsh inspired tunes. All accompanied with his immaculate guitar work. Heavy, flat and dead-quiet vinyl with a minimum of the current trend for "Audiophile" bass boost (the re-issue of Roberta Flack's award winning "The First Time I Saw Your Face" is nearly unlistenable). I'm even starting to think I may end up liking the Mat 2.

Some esoteria:

Phono section design in the Pio. SX-1980 was transferred into the later Japan-only C-Z1 preamp. Incorporating "Super Linear Circuit" modules (SLM) and a non-NFB circuit design, "SLM" provided stable high-frequency response and low TIM. That's the spec-wars aspect.

Placed in the voltage amplifying stages with a current mirror configuration, one transistor's non-linearity is cancelled by another's non-linearity operating in reversed mode. Consequently, NFB circuitry is eliminated as well as the time lag in a NFB loop. Kinda' like a reverse phase servo. ;)

Both the SX-1980 and C-Z1 (as Raul notes is highly desired in Japan, they think it's high end) pre have been described here as somewhat less than magnificent. The 1980 has eleven ICs, nine of those are in the five gang tuner. The old Pio. goes to work in a straight forward/no nonsense manner and won't do your transducers any favors. :) That's what the Crap-1000 feeds.

Harry Pearson and Martin Collums had different perspectives, Collums didn't like the MA-505, the Grace F9-L or the Crap-1000. He did give the thumbs up to the Grace F9-E, the Empire 2000E-111 and ADC XLM. The AT 20SS was bestowed a "highly recommended" accolade.

Before learning better, attention was given to the audio mag gospel. In describing TAS magazine's first "reference" system, Pearson wrote:
"Such a system demands the use of the very finest components. And so it happened. In the first set-up, we used the Van Alstine-modified ARC SP-3a-2; the Grado Signature II (in an SME 3009 III) and the Denon 1030 with the Denon HA-1000 head amp." For perspective, the Infinity Black Widow was an alternative.

Still young, gullible, and in awe of these audio illumnati, I had to have both the BW and Crap-1000. They've been hanging around as long as the ancestral portraits in some families.

Manufacturer's description for the Crap-1000:

"Parallel connected input stages utilizing low-noise transistors suited for pre-preamp result in extremely low noise levels – especially noticeable on low-gain MC cartridges.
High dynamic range.
Selectable gain (24 dB or 32 dB) for moving MC cartridges and pass-thru operation for MM cartridges.
Ruler flat response curve (into the 100′s of kHz).
Separation of power supply from main electronics through umbilical cord virtually eliminates hum and noise.
Silicon steel plate shield to minimize stray external magnetic fields even further.
Built-in muting circuit to prevent “pops” or other transient noise during changeover operations of switch.

"Specifications-
Input Impedance: 100 ohms
Voltage Gain: MC (24dB/32dB, MM (0dB in 3 stages)
Output: Max 3 Vrms
Noise level: -157dB output ref to input (input shorted; IHF ‘A’)
Frequency Response: 8Hz to 600kHz (+0/-1db) (No misprint – six hundred kiloHertz!!)
THD: less than 0.008% at 0.3 Vrms output (20Hz to 20kHz)
IMD: less than 0.008% at 0.3 Vrms output (60Hz to 7kHz = 4:1)
Crosstalk: less than -70dB (1 kHz)
High Cut Filter: 100kHz (-6dB/oct)
Power Consumption: 12 watts."

How does it sound? It's safe to say no one will ask about what tubes---

I haven't pulled up the schematic for the Crap-1000 yet but if max. output is 3v !RMS!, then there's the possibility (otherwise known as a wild a--guess) that the MM pass "in three stages" is not wholly passive. The 100k filter is another hint.

I enjoy a puzzle. Phono stage sensitivity in the old Pio. is 2.5mV, output for the Signet is given variously as 2.0 or 2.2Mv, my bet is that the 2.2 figure is correct.

I'm running in the TK7Ea with a new ATN155LC stylus straight into the Pio's phono, M. Knopfler is singing about rats in the barn. It's absolutely glorious. The Crap-1000 sucks the goodness right out of the TK7, the TK9 is excellent through the same unit.

Output, resistance or capacitance? Neither overwhelmingly important or a crucial concern, I do like a puzzle. May even learn something?

Dover, sincere thanks for your observations.

Raul, oh no, you don't give it away that easily. You're the first to call it crap. I'm just honoring your assessment. ;)
I've absolutely no illusions about it. If Collums/Pearson can amicably disagree, and if I can have a little fun at the expense of my own gear, there's no problem. Haven't I previously mentioned your opinions are never disregarded?

Henry: Yep, a tiny touch of blue on the very tip. Six? No wonder they're disappearing from the vendors. Black sealant is poor copy, I'll take 'em off your hands. Would you expect less of a friend?

If you enjoy Knopfler, I'll SUGGEST you'll like the 'Privateers" double album. Original R. Flack is Booker T. Jones' excellent studio work, the re-run is recorded with a Crap-1000 in the loop.

Rats in the barn.

Peace,
Deal Timeltel: Those japanese SS design in the old times of the HA or yuour preamp were all about specs but a " crap " of sound because transistors in those times were sounding in that way and the japanese IMHO never been very good electronic designers. I owned the Sa-9800 ( Pioneer, I think that was the model and other Pioneers/Sansuis, Sony, Accuphase and the like. ) full of specs and controls but nothing to speak about. Full of ICs and the like.

I don't want to start again the same " discussion " we had years ago when I posted that your Pioneer is not the best reference, not match your better analog rig items. Please forget about those old japanese specs means NOTHING. Specs in today audio items means a lot.

I don't try to diminish your system of that HA-1000 but facts are fact and you can't change it it does not matters how many links/information/speca you post here.

I don't know why with your post you want we follow in this disagreement, it is almost useless. As I said : why to remember what I posted about your system and what you answer that always is the same: specs.

Please no ofense but things are the way are if you want it in other way then you have to change those " things ", that's all. I respect you, this ha nothing to do ( as I posted before. ) with Timeltel, I never analize persons but audio facts.

You like me and I like to read the information you always are willing to share but that's not the subject here but the HA-1000.

Btw, with all respect H.Pearson is almost reference of nothing. I respect him because he already helped to the high end culture and its develpment, thak's to person like him audiophile " exist " and that's why we are talking here on so many audio topics. Through the time I think many of us learned what to do or what not to do because those " underground " audio magazines but today some of us know that some of those reviewqers are not exactly " trusty " ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Chopin123: A good phono cable?. Well, I think that each audiophile has his own advise that normally is what they are using it.

The IC I'm using I choosed because its neutral and accurate character, I don't like false " fireworks " on ICs.

My ICs are Silver Oval by Analysis Plus and Silver By Harmonic Technologies.

In the Other side I read very good " things " about the Audience cables. Btw, the IC connectors ( both ends ) type are very important too.

Have a good " hunting ".

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Highest regards, Raul. I've had a wonderful time with the discussion. Your willingness to spend your time (and expend your patience) on the matter is a reflection of your dedication to the hobby.

You wrote: "the japanese IMHO never been very good electronic designers."

Too long ago to remember if from published research or knowledgeable post, a very good case was made concerning the cultural aspects relating to audio expectations. Many Japanese instruments are of a higher pitch than orchestral/electronic performances of preference in the Western domain. Consequential to the expectations of the audience, Japanese broadcasters supposedly EQ towards the hfs. The same tendency in many Japanese mastered/pressed lps is frequently commented on.

There's an amicable division in the audiophile world, the "spec" crew and the "sounds good" bunch. Specs are handy to those who wish confirmation of performance parameters, but then if it doesn't "sound good", why bother? Be assured, I've heard too many of the Japanese engineered mid-fi components and have a familiarity with many of the boutique offerings too. As articulate as the Exclusive PL-70L is, the very nice JVC TT-71 integrates so well that the gear is no longer heard.

Although at the last Axpona show, there was this lovely sounding Brinkmann---

Sincerely, Peace.