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
Later, Confucius was hit by a falling piano. If only he had known....
(But in Confucius' defense, I don't think he said it.)

Raul, Only one little thing: 32 bits is "needed" only if the machine has a volume control that operates in the digital domain. In that case, 32 bits is a distinct advantage vs 24 bit resolution, because attenuation of the signal does not produce audible losses to the low level detail of the music. If there is no digital volume control, I don't think any of us would hear a difference between 24 bits and 32 bits. (That's not merely my opinion; there are facts that support the idea.) But 192kHz is said to be worth having.
Harold, I think your on to something. I think I still have my 3 head Yamaha cassette deck in a closet somewhere. Then we could get some distortions going! You are going to force me to play some Rush or Uriah Heep in your honor. I don't think they have been out of their case in 30+ years.

Bummer, gave all my cassette's away. I may have some lp's though. Probably has peanut butter on them, but WTHeck.
I also agree with All above that we need good digital, if only because of the music not recorded on LP's.

Raul, I have had the Bel Canto CD2 playing into the Dac3. Check that out. Great sound, never listened. I have tried and for the reason above, will continue looking for a good digital solution. i am thinking a tube source DAC is the best solution. :). I am using a cheap Pioneer DVD player as a source at this time, and use it just as much as the more $$ solutions.

While the chipset in the Dac is important, the analog output, and EVERYTHING else is equally important. IMHO.
Dear nandric: ++++ " However the most of us who have decided for analog may be assumed to have already compared with digital. You point is then that we need to try again I assume?
" ++++

I'm there too. All audio technology improves over the time some faster than others and today the latest digital one it is not only worth to enjoy it but could help for we can improve our analog experiences when we use it as a tool to understand in better way where we are where distortions are affecting the quality performance on each one system.

An advantage to use latest digital technology as a tool is that as Lewm pointed out is does not change I mean we heard the same recording/tracks in the same manner always with the same response many times as could be necesary during our tests, the other advantage is that the digital source has IMHO the lowest distortion level we could find out and this helps to identify the system " problems " to make there some changes as can be need it.

We can use it even if we refuse to enjoy it through listen it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: I'm not an expert on digital technology my ignorance level is really high. What I can say is what I'm experienced with both Denon players I own, one 24/192 and the other with 32/192 DACs: a difference for the better.

In the other side the latest DACs on top players as Esoteric ( example ) comes with 32bits DACs and 192 and I think 384khz as the DACs used on the digital recording process.

I hope some one could enlight your statement to us.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Acman3: ++++ " While the chipset in the Dac is important, the analog output, and EVERYTHING else is equally important. " +++++

absolutely right: ANALOG OUTPUT. Many times players with the same chipset sounds way different and the main difference is the analog stage player design.

Now, I would like to understand not only the real quality performance difference between my Denon an a 20K+ digital player but what in the design contributed to those differences if at all.

Next week I will have the opportunity tohear in my system the latest Esoteric machines, we will see.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Acman3: +++++ " Yamaha cassette deck in a closet somewhere. Then we could get some distortions going! " ++++

maybe some of you could understannd it that I tryed to diminish Harold in some ways because his cassete reference but that was not my intention other than post that what I'm talking about was on latest digital technology.

Btw, I own the Nakamichi 700ZXL and a lot of software for it including several Orinal Master recordings samples. I updated this machine through caps/resistors changes in some of its circuit boards and years ago we have a shootout against an A80 Studer open reel: no contest there but even on the differences people likes what they heard through the Nakamichi. Like you I think I don't touched by 20K+ years.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Raul, since you initiated this thread I guess you have the right to include anything you see fit. But in my opinion you would have been better served (as would this thread) if you began a new thread subject for your digital observations. It just seems to be off topic for the MM and MC discussions.

The same might be said for bringing cassettes into comments here. But I will relate that I was totally amazed a couple of years ago by the sonic quality I heard at a friend's from some independent label jazz cassettes.

Regards.
Dear Pryso, Raul should answer this question but as he
explained in his answer to my post the whole point from
his perspective is that we can improve our analog system
by comparing it with the newest digital products (DVDA
records and players). So the relevance for our thread is
obvious. I myself have no problem at all with whatever
topic in this thread. Whoever thinks to have something
interesting to tell is welcome to do that as far as I am
concerned. BTW categories are for our mental orientation
but are not meant to function like some kind of walls.

Regards,
"BTW categories are for our mental orientation
but are not meant to function like some kind of walls."

As always...
Dear Dgob, I am still waiting for your reaction on my post about the Glanz 71 L and not about my 'philosophy' about 'categories'. I should use the term, uh 'terms' instead. BTW I am not sure if you agree with 'my' categories?

Regards,
The Precept 220 + Akai RS 180 stylus for the Glanz 31 E + FM 300 stylus (Astatic). The good old swap(s). I exchanged my Glanz for the Precept 220 of my good comrade Don. The Precept sounds impressive; very fast , very dynamic with no accentuation of any frequency domain and very good tracker (70 micron with 1,2 g.). I was surprised with this 'Akai' stylus but dare to swear that this one is made by AT. I would be not surprised if the Precept 220 is also made by AT while the question then would be if the JVC X 1 of which Raul is so fond is from the same origine?
Anyway the Precept 220 is an extra stimulus (next to Raul) to search further for the X-1. And if both are made by AT the better my chance will be to get one.

Regards,
Regards, Nikola: The Akai RS-180 stylus was OEM'd by AT, the AT-14S equivalent. The Precept carts shipped from Stow, Ohio, the assembly/distribution point for Signet carts.

There is evidence that, as the PC-180 was Akai's TOTL cart, it was also a select example of the AT-14S. As are (as some believe) the better Signets.

Peace,
My gosh! I have the authority of our professor on my side. Not to insult my dear comrade Don I avoided any comment on this whortless Precept 550 stylus which he wanted back while I was allowed to keep the 'Akai'. Because of the name I assume that those MUST be cheap. Anyway I hope so.
However the description 'the Precept carts shipped from Stow, Ohio' make no sense to me. Do they in Ohio produce anything else except trouble? My hope was that all
Precept carts are produced by AT, that our professor would disclose which AT they actually are so that we all can get them for cheap. Well we should be certainly proud to have the professor among us. If only this damn moderator would grasp what this means to us.

Kind regards,
Dear nandric: All ones came from AT but the X-1 design is a propietary JVC builded by AT.

Signet is not Signet but an AT " subsidary ". The main " head " was and is AT.

Good that you are enjoying the 220. Are you saying that the 550 is a " lesser " stylus replacement?, if yes ( Don can't read it??? ): which are the experiences you already had that gives you the foundations for that statement?

Regards and enjoy the muisc,
R.
My Dear Comrade,

What have I done! I have allowed the pride of my capitalist greed slip through my hands and take up residency in the Balkins. How could I have been so foolish. (grin)
Do not worry my dear friend, because if the need arises, I do know where another can be obtained.
Enjoy Nikola. The combination truly is a giant slayer!

Best Regards,
Don
Think about 'there is something about Mary' and then further about our list (cataloloque) of demands which 'Mary' need to fulfil in order to make us happy. We may even, despite of all the qualities she may have, also wish her to be modest. When then someone ask the question: 'is there just one quality of her that you value the most?' our answer would probable be:'you are an idiot, I just made a list with 33 'demands'. However sometime we want to underline some peculiar quality for some reason or other. We want, say, to make some kind of point and then need some 'forceful' expression. Say the behind of Mary which is the most sexy ever seen. Since Lopez this kind of inappropriate qualifications is considered to be ok. Now Frogman stated that music is about 'rythmum' (aka 'dynamic nuance'; 02-25-13). Who would and why characterize such a
small and delicate instrument like a violin as a 'canon'?
Who would then visit a violin concert , take a seat, and play for a target? But there it is: 'Il cannone del Gesu' (made by Guarnerius).
When I listend to my new Precept with 'Akai' stylus (thanks comrade Don) I was surprised with the dynamics of this cart. Then I thought 'there was something about the AT 180'. Something with dynamics. I feel really embarassed to have overlooked this cart for such a long time. Because of the Precept I (re) adjustetd my AT 180 again and this time my adjustment was somehow much better. Just one word: UNBELIEVABLE! Takeda san and less well known Hiroaki Hibino(Klipsch and Zenn MCZ) thought that other carts lacked dynamics and made their own as a reaction. According to me
they have never heard the AT 180 ML/OCC. Without any question my best MM cart by revaluation. Those who own this 'wonder' but are not 100% satisfy should post the cart to Axel for a check. I deed and got the cart fixed(aka 'refreshed') for only 30 euro.

Regards,
Dear Nandric: ++++++ " Just one word: UNBELIEVABLE! Takeda san and less well known Hiroaki Hibino(Klipsch and Zenn MCZ) thought that other carts lacked dynamics and made their own as a reaction. According to me
they have never heard the AT 180 ML/OCC. " +++++

good that finally you are " really " hearing what the 180 can shows you.
This cartridge is something very especial, so especial that never was marketed in America but into the Asia market and some samples in Europe. I was lucky that the México AT CEO was and is a close friend and trhough him I put my hands on it as in other non-America AT products.

In the past I posted about the AT 180 top quality performance level but not many people really cares about.

Btw, by ANV that's still improving and showing better quality performance level remember me the 180 ML/OCC. Perhaps before the ANV that 180 is the best AT group cartridge design even a top the TK10MLMK2.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Raul, 'I just tested my second best MM'. End?

The Precept 550 which my comrade Don posted to me together with the Akai 180 was meant for comparison sake. But there was no marking of any kind on this stylus while the
plastic holder was very thin and suspicious. What is much more worst is that the diamond stylus was mediocre in comparison with the Akai (aka AT 14S). So I am no at all sure that this stylus is actually the 550. Because of your influence on me I deed not (re)read your comment on both of those Precept carts and wanted to make my own valuation. I intend to (re)read your comment as soon as I finish this post.

Kind regards,
Regards Nandric & Raul, Great news from the vintage AT 180 ML/OCC confirming its superb quality. This announcement I have waiting for a very long time ! Not surprised, according to the specs and the sophisticated techniques used it must have been AT´s flagship at the time.
If you are planning to sell it in the future just let me know....
As always, thank you
Dear Raul, As you know I never questioned any of your carts opinions and/or judgment. I can't possible compare with you but even at my level I get confused with so many carts. In my case there are only about 30 MM carts. This is about 4 time less than you tested. The AT 150 ANV is without question beatufuly made but I don't believe that they are tuned. The tracking ability (not even 60 micron) is to me an indication that this cart needs at least 40 hours of use to loosen up. Do I understand your 'prediction' well that the AT 150 ANV will surpass the AT 180 after this period of use or time?

Regards,
Hi Harold, You have a good chance to get my AT 180 from my
successors but not from me.However I have no intention whatever to pass away voluntary . Besides I am after this JVC X 1 and will probable need some time to get it. You can't expect from me to say :'sorry'.

Regards,
Hi Tom,

I am wondering if the following "Frankenstein", that you constructed, "13Ea/beryllium cantilevered 155LC stylus", would also be a viable option for the Precept 220/440?
I have the stylus housing and a new 152LP stylus assembly in which I would like to combine. This would make a round plug version of the 155LC and with a little trimming of length, would also fit into my Precept 220.
Question: How much compression pressure (if any), did you put on the cantilever donut when you did the transplant?
Regards,
Don
Dear Nandric: I don't like what I heard trhough my 550 sample and posted in that time.
Fleib told us that needs more time but I already gave it with no great success. Maybe I have to try harder. I was a bet " confused " as you more than all because the colors choosed in the 550 whole stylus/cantilever holder. I really like to find out a Precept PC550 to see it and check that NOS stylus replacementg realloy is a Precept original one. I'm more curious that any other thing because my Precept 440LC is a winner! and it is not " asking " for its " brother ".

About the 180 what I'm saying is that my ANV remember me the 180 perfromance quality but I don't heard the 180 for a long time and as with the 180 I need to make several cartridge re-evaluations.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Nandric: I forgot, ++++ " my second best MM'. End? " ++++

I was a little in a hurry when I posted but there are no secrets there.

The cartridge is the JVC-X1MK1 that's behing the MK2 version I had the lucky to found out.

Here happened to me what other AT builded or designed cartridges did it. I'm refering to cartridge tracking habilities where the MK2 is way better than the MK1 average own habilities. This is the same that I experienced through four different Precepts stylus shapes and the same that experienced in the Stanton top of the line 981 against its down step Pickering XSV 5000 where this one beats easily the 981.

All these experiences makes think that that: " vintage suspension in my cartridges is no issue " that some of us are thinking is totally unreal and that cartridge vintage suspension some times is ok but normally is a real " issue " but because performs good we are unaware of it till we compare it.

That happened to me not only with those cartridges but with Empire and other samples too. Is obvious that 30 years already made it its works on that cartridge suspension.

The JVC MK1 version is really good. I wish that that person that bought that JVC X-1MK1 NOS on ebay could comes here and shares his experiences because is my take that that person knew exactly what he doing when he bought it in BIN auction for 700.00. I think no one invest 700.00 for a vintage MM with out knowing its " credentials ".

Anyway, my second today best was and is worth fully.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Nikola,

"So I am no at all sure that this stylus is actually the 550".

When Raul first mentioned where the 550ML could be purchased (LPGear), I immediately ordered it. Very soon after, it sold out. I have no doubt that it is anything other than an original Precept 550ML. LPGear is one of our trusted suppliers. Raul was quick to point out that he felt the 440LC was better than the 550ML. I think you have discovered why he felt that way. We have also found out that the Akai RS180 (AT14S), also beats the 550. I wonder how the Akai would compare to Raul's 440LC? The "Frankstein" I've asked Timeltel about just might be the ultimate answer! We'll see.
Regards,
Don
Dear comrade Don, It may look as if I am not thankful for your kind involment and cooperation. But my involment with the 550 ML was only 'academic'. I was supposed to return this stylus to you. So I have no personal interest in this stylus. I wrote to you about my opinion before my post in our thread. Whatever the status of LPgear one should be always cereful with styli which are not original. I have no idea about Raul's 440 CL nor his 550 Ml . So my opinion about the 550 is only related to the specimen I got
from you. As I mentioned before no markings of any kind are on this one. It may be made even in Nord Korea. How should I know? But I inspected the stylus with my microscope (50 x) and was surprised with the poor quality of the diamond. I feel in no way responsible for this stylus.

Regards,
Dear comrade Don, Your 'Frankenstein' intentions are frightening. You can put whatever head you like on the body of Schwarzeneger you will always get the same Schwazeneger. He sells btw the same body with the different 'faces' he got because of his age. Your intended experiments are is some sense the 'other way round' but to use some extraordinary stylus for some 'average body' is very questionable. Anyway so if you need to perform some surgery to the poor stylus. But with our Raul as our primus inter pares, Herr Professor and Fleib there is considerable amount of knowledge in our forum to inform yourself beforhand. Ask questions before using your knife or scalpel I would say.

Regards,
Dear Comrade,

I think you have taken my response to personal. I, like Raul, have not seen even a picture of a Precept 550ML cartridge. So we do not know what one "should look like". LPGear did not in my opinion represent the 550ML as a substitution for an original 550ML. Good or bad, it (the 550ML stylus), is what it is. It was the last of the Precepts to be offered to the public for sale so maybe the poor quality stylus is one of the reasons for its demise? It surely wouldn't be the first time a product quality went down hill just before it went out of production!
The following is a quote from the LPGear web site. I could not include the picture, but it is the blue housing with black guard with the word Precept on the guard (identical to the one you have). Type in Precept 550ML on the LPGear site and it will take you to the listing and picture.

" AUDIO-TECHNICA STYLUS FOR AUDIO-TECHNICA PRECEPT PC-550ML PC550ML CARTRIDGE
- Discontinued and unavailable, we do not know if and when this will again be available. For alternative stylus replacements, refer to the Related Products below.

The Audio-Technica PCN-550ML PCN550ML needle stylus for the Audio-Technica Precept PC-550ML PC550ML phono cartridge features a beryllium cantilever - a lightweight, corrosion-resistant, rigid, steel-gray metallic element used as an aerospace structural material. The Microline diamond offers superlative performance with less wear and distortion than elliptical or conventional linear contact styli. The small curving rate of the stylus enables it to track and playback the inner part of the record groove that other styli can hardly maintain. Also, the curving rate of the stylus does not change until the stylus is almost worn unlike that of conventional styli which increases as they are used. Accordingly, the stylus has a much longer average playing life. We have very limited stock and when depleted will no longer be available."

Comrade, to me based on what they have stated, it's kind of hard not to believe it is not an original. But being an original doesn't mean it had to be good!
Best of Regards Comrade,
Don
Regards Griffithds:As I've found the reports about the Precept intriguing, a modest amount of research indicates the AT-13Ea at 4.2mV output/1200 ohm output impedance is comparable. An exception is the 13Ea's metal mounting shroud rather than the Precept's plastic.

Purchased a 13Ea with a broken cantilever, mounted on a low mass AT waffle-pierced style headshell. An ATN-155LC cantilever transplanted to the original AT-13Ea grip results in the appropriate VTA/SRA, self-resonance of the cartridge is minimal.

Exceptionally solid center image, pleasing layering, depth & channel balance. Soundstage is in front of the speakers. Depth develops from well forward to a front center stage, an unusually lively hall effect ambience results, speaker location is removed as a source of distraction. Piano strings resonate & background vocals/subtle nuance emerge. Response is smoothly developed, there are no noticeable peaks.

Bass notes retain individual identity, presented with conviction. Speed in rise time and decay is gratifying. Midrange/hf grain is minimal.

Don, in attempting the cantilever exchange begin by removing as much of the compliance screw sealant as possible. Be sure to use a correctly sized screwdriver and use it to clear sealant from the screw slot, Turn the screw slightly & reverse repeatedly until the screw travels the necessary amount. One to one & one-half turns should release the cantilever. Pushing from the back with a pin rather than trying to pull it out is recommended.

Insert the cantilever and with the compliance screw turned upwards, view and align the V-magnets from the rear to confirm azimuth relative to a horizontal surface of the grip. Holding the grip between thumb and middle finger, apply pressure with fore-finger directly in line with the cantilever axis. Double check azimuth and tighten the compliance screw. This may require more pressure than anticipated on the first effort. Too little will result in the magnets contacting the poles when VTF is applied. It may be best on the initial trial to apply a small amount of pressure, test and then gradually increase until distortion at the desired VTF is eliminated.

Initial concerns are that VTA/SRA are correct, confirming azimuth after tightening the compliance screw is obviously important. I can't speak for the Precept but the 13Ea Frankencart impressed me enough (especially soundstage) that the initial example was sent to Halcro for confirmation, Henry wrote that he was pleased with the cart. Good luck &

Peace,
Comrade,

Funny how the name "Schwarzeneger", came to mine when talking about Frankenstein.
The Precept's as well as the Signet's were both top tier Audio Technica cartridges. This fact alone, means it's not just an "average body" cartridge. As far as "extraordinary stylus", I do not consider it extraordinary. Just very good! The Akai, well, that I would consider "extraordinary"!
Best Regards,
Don
Lep,Lep,Lep,Lep
You don't know your right from your left (your right!)
You don't know your left from right (your left!)
Hound dog
P@@@ tang
Three
Four

After hiking so far into the mm/mi wilderness sometimes you just need a good cadence to get back home. I just had to throw this out there.
Acutex M3xx revisited

These modifications work with the Acutex M3xxx series only (shortnose)

Tools needed:
* Razor Blade
* Small tweezers or fine point needlenose pliers
* Super Glue. Gel is better and does not travel
* Patience. Be in the right frame of mind. Zen always Zen

After experiencing the Acutex M310 IIE, M310IIIe, M312, and M320 III and experimenting with many an aftermarket stylus I have come to the conclusion that every aftermarket stylus has fitment issues. Obviously the aftermarket does not pay as much attention to tolerances as the OEM, and this is not surprising with many sources/countries for stylus manufacture. The less expensive the stylus the worse the fit. Poor fitment can be seen with the naked eye from both a side view and frontal view or better yet with a 10x loop as 1/16"-1/32" physical gap between the stylus assembly and the cartridge body. OEM stylus assemblies fit as designed and are tight to the cartridge body with no gaps!. The poor fitment of the aftermarket stylus assembly can be rectified fairly easily.

1) Remove the stylus assembly from the cartridge

2) Put the stylus protector in place

3) Look at the inside of the Stylus Assembly and you will notice the metal Magnetic Shield Plate (MSP) it is a U-shaped piece of metal on the rear of the Stylus Assembly

4) Run the razor blade down the inside of the of the MSP. With an OEM stylus the MSP is quite tight. Aftermarket may not even need the razor blade treatment

5) with the tweezers or fine point needlenose grasp the MSP on the bottom and pull straight back, away from the cantilever. The MSP will slide right out. Try not to handle the MSP too harshly you do not want to deform it

6)Slightly trim with the sharp scissors the plastic stylus assembly top edge and top most corner. You can also trim the same edges of the MSP. Dry fit without the MSP back onto the cartridge body until you get a better fitment. Then dry fit with the MSP in the Stylus Assembly Do not trim too much at at time and trim in very small increments until you get what you want

7)Do not run these cartridges without the MSP unless you like listening to magnetic resonances. The MSP was put there for a reason and surrounds the large bulbous cannon magnet, the heart of tri-pole design and the magnetic engine. It also adds stiffnes and rigidity to the cartridge assembly

8) Potting the MSP back into the stylus assmebly will allow greater tensile strength and quite a bit of stiffness and rigidity to the entire stylus assembly. One small dab of Super Glue Gel the size of a pin-head on both the front side edges of the MSP will allow it to smear and adheare the edges of the stylus assembly when you slide it back in. DO NOT OVERDUE IT or you will have perma-stylus which is not the purpose of this mod. You are only glueing the MSP back into the stylus assembly. You will not want any errant/sloppy glue here. After glueing and still wet put the stylus assembly back onto the cartridge body and hold it between thumb and forefinger to let it set up where it should be with a light finger pressure. Done right the Stylus Assembly is still removeable.

Now the cantilever is interfacing correctly with the cannon magnet and in a closer proximity. If you have two stylus compare the potted stylus to a non-potted stylus. the non-potted is a flexi-flyer and you can certainly feel it by just a small squeeze. With more internal dampening the end result is a lower susceptibility to resonances further increasing the accuracy of which the cantilever movements are tracked by the coils. Enjoy even more of the Acutex sound.

I would be interested in knowing more of the alleged Nagoka stylus transplant ala Frankesteining the M320
Tubed1,

Sounds like something well worth the effort. I have the short nosed M312STR. I will definitely give this a go. Thanks for the Mod effort and the write-up. That's what is great about this forum. A person can learn so much just through sharing ideals. Thanks again!
Regards,
Don
Hello Nandric, Obviously the AT-180ML/OCC is the very best cart you have right now. So I´m glad you love your AT-180 and never leave, and that is the most important thing. I highly appreciate your honesty as I try to be as honest I can and I usually say exactly what I think. I just asked, nothing more truly.
If you some day have two samples and perhaps would renounce the lesser one just let me know. I´m particularly interested in this AT design and wonder how fantastic it could be in my Trans-Fi linear tracker.
The JVC X-1 does not interest me so much despite it is truly an exceptional cartridge, somehow I "feel" (technically) that the AT is better, in my system of course.
Thanks for your time and good luck for your future purchases
Hi Harold, The designer/producer of the Trans-Fi tracker
bought from me the Acutex 420 and 312 STR and was impressed by both. I assume you are familiar with the ET-2 thread? The most owners of the ET-2 regard the 420 as ideal
for this linear tracker. The 312 STR can still be get in Italy for about 40 euro (www.ebay Italy.com).

Regards,
Hi Nandric, You have "met" Vic the Magician quite recently and done cart business, great. I know some of his adventures in seeking the ultimate cart for his arm. At the time he had just sold the uber expensive Decca Reference in order to test various interesting classic vintage carts.
Yes he liked both your ACUTEX but eventually found the M320 IIISTR (short nose) of the ACUTEX fleet to fit best his mighty design. He was very positive about it at the time.
Also Dave the Messenger praises his M320 on the Trans-Fi arm. So, following the path of them both I won one in a battle against... Acman3 (regards it was a good battle) ! It fits fabulously the arm but can´t perform its best due to the 1 mm off-axis cantilever. It needs to be sent to the capable hands of Axel the Retipper in Germany. But he´s so busy at the moment so I have to wait my turn.
No I´m not familiar with the ET-2 thread, I simply don´t have time for everything in hi-fi because I´m learning a new profession. I fully understand if the owners of that linear arm have found the ideal cart for it.
It seems that there´s certain synenergy between the ET-2 and the 312. Still, I advice you to give a try to the M320.
Good luck !
Griffithds, **Comrade, to me based on what they have stated, it's kind of hard not to believe it is not an original. But being an original doesn't mean it had to be good!**

Like Nandric, my magnification is inadequate for a definitive answer, but this is a rip-off. If you look at it head on, the cantilever is obviously aluminum. Although the diamond on mine looks like decent quality, it's not a nude square shank or even a micro line. It looks more like a bonded elliptical. This stylus is a bottom feeder, sold as a beryllium/ML. The light blue color of the plastic should have been a warning sign. Beryllium cantilevered styli were all in black plastic. This was probably the stylus for the PC-100.
Regards,
Dear Tubed1: +++++ " Enjoy even more of the Acutex sound. " +++++

I assume you took all those kind of work and shared with us ( appreciated. ) because it's worth to do it: right? and I could assume that you +++ " compare the potted stylus to a non-potted stylus " ++++ ( both original ones. ) and the rewards are worth that work: right?

Regards and enjoy the muisc,
R.
Fleib,

I did not had it in my possession long enough to see the comments you and Nikola have stated. I sent it off to him after a short time in my system. It was not even broken in when he received to for an audition.I do intend to spend some time with it under a scope when it returns. Bottom line is it doesn't measure up sound wise. The Akai RS180 stylus really does put it to shame with is sonic display. I have done a lot of business with LPGear and have never been disappointed with anything bought from them (until now). I do intend to run my Precept with the Akai. Something else I would like to add about this Precept discussion. I bought 2 of the Akai RS180's to transplant into the Signet TK7SU stylus housing. Because 1 was a spare, I decided to slightly trim it and try it on the Precept 220 body. At that time I didn't have a stylus for the Precept. I was all smiles with the results. That is when Raul stated where a 550ML could be purchased, so I jumped on it. When I sent all to Nikola for review, I knew at that time the 550ML was not out performing the Akai. I just assumed it was because the suspension on the Akai had days of use while the Precept only had minutes. I am looking forward to the return of the 550ML. Talking to anyone at LPGear is rather difficult but I do have question of them to ask!
Since this revelation, I have also tried a AT20SLa on the Precept. Surprisingly the results with it are also not positive? A little thin sounding. A bit like what I remember the 550ML sounded like. It (the SLa), performs beautifully in the TK7SU. I think I will leave it there. Go figure?
Regards,
Don
Dear Fleib: I already emailed to LP Gear asking for a full refund.

I will return here with their answer.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear harold-no-the-barrel: ++++++ " somehow I "feel" (technically) that the AT is better, in my system " +++++

I wonder why you " feel " that because both cartridges are so different not only in design but on specs, example: the X-1 is 1.5grs lower in weight than the 180 and in both the compliance is different too and several other " technical " specs.

Could you tell me for example why you think that a higher weight cartridge can performs better in your system/tonearm than a lighther one or one with lower compliance?

seems to me that in any case is the current 150ANV model the one nearer to the 180.

In the other side, either : the X-1 and 180 are hard to find out so you have nothing to lose, let me explain: in theory if you buy ( lucky enough. ) both cartridges then you can test it in your system to decide which one match it in better way and put on sale the other one where you will take money the same day you put on sale and maybe more money that the one you paid it for.

Just an opinion,}

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Griffithds, what is this Akai RS180, beryllium/LC?
You bought them to transplant into a TK7SU. Is this more cost effective than a 155LC, requiring no transplant?

I don't have the Precept cart. I tried the PCN550 on an AT15 which I hadn't used in quite awhile and needed to break in. After it started sounding 1/2 decent, I switched to the 20SS and the 550 never went back on.
Unfortunately I trimmed the plastic on the 550 to use on the 15 so I probably can't return it.
Regards,
Turntableneedles has a much different description of the Precept 550ml than LP Gear. Micro line is stated as better than .2x.7, which is usually how an elliptical is measured. No mention of beryllium.
Raul, Don't hold your breath. LpGear is notorious for not answering emails. It's almost impossible to get a hold of them. Their reputation has been tarnished lately with a bad batch of OC9II carts. People couldn't get a response and had to cancel their credit card charge which got an immediate response.

I've bought many items from LpGear and have always been satisfied, but I have to say this looks sleazy. I don't think there is any way you could look at this and think it's what it is advertised to be.
Regards,
Raul, most all of the Acutex M3xx OEM stylus assemblys I tested need no trimming and are in fact very tight. A close factory fit with no visible spacing from the side or frontal views. The curves and the edges of the stylus assembly fit the cartridge like a glove. As you well know the OEM stylus are no longer available, consider yourself lucky if you own one! Trimming & potting greatly benefits an aftermarket stylus assembly.

Potting the magnetic shield assembly in the OEM stylus assembly does provide benefits. Assuring ridigity allows the cantilever to be the only moving component around. As it should be in a miniscule movement, sending the signal to that magnificent tri-pole induced engine. As the LP is being dragged accross the stylus (vs the stylus dragging over the LP) there are lateral forces at play. Many M3xx stylus assemblies have a bent cantilever because of a high VTA setting/out of adjustment anti-skate or a combination of both. I lust for a factory M320 stylus assembly or the equal. Titanium cantilever where are you?
Fleib,

See Tiemltels reply to Nikola dated 4-25-13. Just up the page.

As far as "cost effective", what I wanted was a stylus as close as possible to an original 7SU. I have a TK7CLa already and wasn't looking to replicate it.
I recall someone on another forum did the trimmed 550ML to a 15Sa and claimed to consider it a major improvement. I, until reading your findings on "your" 15 had considered doing the same thing. From your deductions, I think I will wait. If Raul keeps us posted with his return/refund quest, and gets nothing for his efforts, then I think I will use the Precept 550ML housing and install a 155LC into it. $200 is sure a lot to have paid for what turns out to be nothing usable other than a stylus housing!
Regards,
Don