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.
rauliruegas
Elastic band is better because it is easily reversible and because it applies a steady pressure on the junction between cartridge body and stylus, whereas with tape I am not sure I could do it. There would be too much danger of fouling the stylus. But you're joking of course.

That's one thing that bugs me about all MM cartridges. The most important interface, between the stylus assembly and the body, is often a perilous contact point. Maybe I should market those small elastic bands under the Harmonix brand for $100 each.
by some weirdness the above post was posted twice. Dunno how I did that.
I searched long and hard for that 980LZS, just out of curiosity and because of its exotic nature. I got this in very used condition off eBay. Sadly, I had a chance to buy an NOS D98S stylus for it, but I procrastinated due to the cost and lost it to someone else. The original stylus did not fit firmly to the cartridge body; it's only held in place by friction. So I took a small elastic band and slipped it over both the body and the stylus assembly, so the two are firmly held together, and I imagine this also dampens some resonances. Works great. Just found an NOS Pickering D7500S stylus for it, which will have to do. But now I feel no compulsion to change immediately to a new stylus. The original is good to go so far. I really like it; Raul is not so fond of LZS, prefers the HZS version, which I would love to try too.
Regards, Lew: "So I took a small elastic band". Suggest an upgrade to audiophile grade duct tape.

Peace,
I searched long and hard for that 980LZS, just out of curiosity and because of its exotic nature. I got this in very used condition off eBay. Sadly, I had a chance to buy an NOS D98S stylus for it, but I procrastinated due to the cost and lost it to someone else. The original stylus did not fit firmly to the cartridge body; it's only held in place by friction. So I took a small elastic band and slipped it over both the body and the stylus assembly, so the two are firmly held together, and I imagine this also dampens some resonances. Works great. Just found an NOS Pickering D7500S stylus for it, which will have to do. But now I feel no compulsion to change immediately to a new stylus. The original is good to go so far. I really like it; Raul is not so fond of LZS, prefers the HZS version, which I would love to try too.
Regards, Dlaloum: "In most cases the resonant peaks seem to be a design choice linked to Frequency Linearity at the expense of phase". Exactly.

"If a particular range is dissimilar to others, there is then a lack of continuity. This phenomena can be described as an anomally. It makes no difference how it's achieved, elimination of these anomallies is the imperative. Once effected, the outcome is a correctly balanced configuration. A...(cartridge)... capable of tonal accuracy and realistic harmonic blending is said to be correctly voiced." Tools and technology are in place, how well done is another matter.

Lew: Your 980LZS is legendary. Lucky you, you braggart!

In retrospect, this must have had the appearance of the dreaded blanket statement. Mea maxima culpa. I understand the 980LZS is a privileged experience but does (looking for some wiggle room here) require additional gain from somewhere. Please excuse the oversight.

Regarding texture/color/accuracy, compare a Shure M44e (9.5mv) or one of the high output Empires (108 @ 8mV, the 2000E, 9.3mV), perhaps one of the contemporary Orto. "Club" carts, up to 11mV, to nearly any of less than 3.5mV. I think you get the drift.

Peace,
Dear Halcro: Usualy I listen at 83db-84db but when I'm testing my system or a " new " item/cartridge I always make two tests: I heard at around 76db on SPL ( continuous at seat position. ) and at around 95db.

The latest one give you very clear the distortion levels of that item/cartridge and at the same time shows you different " errors/unaccuracies " of that same item that at normal SPL you almost can't be aware of it. Btw, almost all could sound " decent " at 84db: but how good is an item or even your system at a SPL continuous/seat position 76db and 95db with recordings that more or less has a good average SPL over the recording ( I mean with out " piannisimos ". ) ?

IMHO the 5 has lower distortions than the 6se and maybe that's what you are hearing.

This morning I returned both cartridges is not useful for me following on listen tests wwith cartridges that IMHO and in my system does not shows something " interesting " or something that can motivate more listening time, enough for me and as Downunder posted I have to keep walking with the cartridges of the month.

Next post: Signet freaks.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Funny, I seem to be gravitating the other direction at the monment.

Due to me borrowing a ESC rebuild of a Linn Troika, I had to move my main MC phono in order to play my Linn/ARO with the Troika. This was my ultimate table/cartridge combo in 1988. Sounds wonderful, except not much bass at the moment. It's only had a few hours on it, so it may get better in the bass.

I then had to use a Ortofon MC step up transformer to use my XV-1 on the Phantom. Guess what, I really like the sound the transformer is giving. Really great synergy. Yes Raul, sacrilage and anti sematic I know

Bottom line in my system, outside my Technics EPC 100 Mk4, I mostly prefer MC cartridges. Not that there is anything wrong with MM's.

back to you your normal programming and MM cartridge of the month review :-)
Received my FR-5 cartridge from Japan yesterday and have been listening to it all day in the Orsonic headshell on the FR-64s tonearm with the Victor TT-81.
Whilst its sound is similar to the FR-6SE, to me it is hardly a 'refinement'?
What the FR-6SE does, the FR-5 does 'more'......but not necessarily in a good way.
The luscious mid-range and bass of the FR-6SE is exaggerated even more so in the FR-5 to the point of being 'unbelievable'?
The treble performance from about 2K Hz upwards also rolls off so that the total presentation is the complete opposite of any MC cartridge and in fact most other cartridges I have ever heard.
Now it is not unpleasant....in fact it's totally intriguing.....but it's also not 'real'?
It is useful to play 'hot' LPs, for instance 'Dusty in Memphis' and 'Heavy Weather' by Weather Report which I find slightly 'brittle' and 'sharp' in the upper registers. These LPs become most enjoyable through the FR-5.
Does that mean it's good as a "tone control"?
You bet......but aren't all our different cartridges an exercise in 'tonality'?
So to these ears the FR-6SE is a superb refinement of the FR-5 and gets the important things right.
Can we really ask much more of a cartridge?
Dear Raul,
please test the FR at continuous 95db SPL at seat position with around peaks on the 102db for at least 20-30 minutes and see what " happen "
Can't do this Raul and stay healthy. My wife would put her favourite cleaver to good use.
I listen at an average 85-90dB with peaks up to 96dB. Going up to 102dB is only possible when she's out and that isn't happening due to health reasons?
Regards
Hi Timeltel, yes indeed - also I have read references to a paper Ortofon put out in the late 70's or early 80's about their "Ortophase" methodology, theory etc...
But so far I have not been able to find a copy.

The trouble with using resonance to correct frequency response is that it messes with phase. This clearly applies to both electrical and mechanical resonance (circuit of capacitive cables / inductive cartrive, and Cantilever/suspension respectively).

The graphs in that Article clearly demonstrate it - the phase non linearity is always associated with a resonant peak - it either coincides with it, or begins with the resonant peak and then gets worse with increasing frequency.
In most cases the resonant peaks seem to be a design choice linked to Frequency Linearity at the expense of phase.

I found the TK6 on fleabay - it was delivered to me with an AT102p conical fitted...

Didn't think that this would be indicative of its performance - choices out there came down to either AT150MLx or 440MLa.... given that I didn't know what its "sound" was like, I couldn't justify the cost of the 150.... so the 440 it is!

It arrived a little over a week ago but I havn't had a chance to listen to it enough to characterise it.

I'm still working on the phono / loading side of things before I get back to listening....
Thanks, Nicola. It would appear based on your contribution that some of the other FR tonearms might indeed be more suitable for the FR cartridges that Raul and Halcro own. But now Halcro states that in fact the compliance of the cartridges is indeed rather low and probably suited in a technical sense for use in an FR64S. (I also think we have to include the "S" designation, because the S version of the 64 has higher effective mass than the other versions.) Anyway, here I am speculating about stuff I do not own and probably never will own.

Timeltel, You suggest that low output MM cartridges lack "texture", I think is what you wrote. But I am here to tell you that the 980LZS in the Kenwood L07J tonearm has remarkable ability to convey musical texture. In fact, that is its forte, IMO. I am listening alternately to the Acutex LPM320 in a Dynavector tonearm and the Stanton in the L07J. The former cartridge puts the spotlight front and center on the central performance. The latter one casts perhaps a wider soundstage and brings the collateral supporting artists into a wider, paler light. The feel is like that of lying down on a comfortable divan to enjoy music at leisure. This is all about texture, I think.
Dear Halcro: I forgot, please test the FR at continuous 95db SPL at seat position with around peaks on the 102db for at least 20-30 minutes and see what " happen ", what is what you experienced?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards, Dlaloum: "Fixed coil cartridges exibit phase shift because of electical resonances (at frequencies typically in the audible band) due to the 2,000 to 3,500 turns of wire in the coils...usual method to damp down these resonances is to load down output with capacitance...adding to phase shift, just as mech. damping does". One of the clearest descriptions of the value of matching capacitance to cartridge I've read.

Good reference for this thread, not a far reach to extrapolate an explanation for the ability of lower-output MM's to generate a more "refined" signal but with (IMHO) a reduction of texture. If this "texture" is percieved as distortion, let's not overlook that by modulating the frequency of the resonance waveform, the timbre changes. By adding and subtracting harmonics by design, a controlled enhancement or cancellation is possible. Thanks for the link.

Have you tried other styli with your TK6 (not AT's 6006, my bad)?

Peace,
Dear Halcro: The one I tested was the 6SE. About compliance you can check against the XV-1 (with VTF in between: 1.8grs to 2.0 grs. ) and see how the FR cantilever with the same VTF than the XV-1 ( I just do it. ) goes down a little further that the Dyna one. Anyway 10cu that you and me can't be sure is the real value at 10hz ( instead 100hz that normaly is the Japanese reference. ) IMHO belongs in the low side of medium compliance.
Maybe in those very old 63 times even the high FR mass tonearms did not exist: I don't know but this is not the real subject.

+++++ " whilst the EPC100MK3 is just a little more 'neutral'.....possibly a tad more 'flat' or 'accurate' if you like " +++++

IMHO the Technics is all what you said where the 6SE is on the " colored " side in a frequency range ( around 45hz-70hz, I can't be sure exactly. ) where my ears are really sensitive and where harmonics ( and up ) puts its " grain of colored salt ".
I think that that " rich deep bass " you mentioned could means everything about that cartridge colorations.
Btw, I don't want to go in deep what I heard through the FR64 against the Lustre and the other tonearms I used.

In the other side I agree that the G-940 is not the best for the 20SS ( my review was on a different tonearm. ) where you have to find the right headshell match. I don't know why but a not easy cartridge for the Grace tonearm.

+++++ " It's a litle disturbing since we agree on most other things and my experiences with the Signets appear to match quite well with Timeltel's " +++++

the latest up-dates to my system ( including the electrical power supply " direct connection ". ) IMHO lowering so down/much system overall distortions that the self/own system limitations factor ( about quality performance level/resolution. ) goes two-three steps down given it a resolution where we can detect " sounds/colorations/errors ) that I was unaware before the audio system up-dates.

Any audio system has limitations ( many kind. ) and is this limitation system factor the one that permit or preclude to " hear things " or hear things at different quality level.

Your system as my system and other people system has lower or higher limitation factor level and this factor makes differences.

I don't know you or other persons here but if it is true that I take every single opinion very seriously and that I give the right importance to all opinions it is true too that I always analyze the " environment/stage " that surrounded/surround that single person opinion, including my opinions!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Just picked up a NIB sealed Signet AM30s.

Will follow up here in about a week.

This is my 6th Signet and every one has been a joy.
Hi Timeltel,

to the best of my knowledge the 6006 (2002/3003/4004/8008) is part of the same family as the AT3282/300/301/311.

Apparently some members of that family were available in a low inductance (unknown stats) 3mV output version. According the the specs on the x00x series (on Vinylengine) they all had 5mV output.
BUT: The AT331LP had 3mV output - apparently Ed Saunders had a batch of these (not sure of precise labeling) - long since sold out.
LPGear have the AT Series V from the same family - which also has the 3mV generator - and is still available. They sell it as "LPGear Series VL" - Vivid Line, and "LPGear Series VS" - Shibata.
All of these use the "213" style needles interchangeably... eg:http://www.turntableneedles.com/Needle-213-Dshibata_p_960.html

However the Signet TK6Ep I have is from the p-mount versions of the AT120/120/140/150/440 family (Which I believe includes the TK5ea) - I currently have it mounted with a 440MLa stylus. - It appears physically identical to an Audio Technica SLT96e cartridge I also have... Which in turn looks to be the same as any of the AT102/112/122/132/142/152p family...http://www.vinylengine.com/images/cartridgedb/at102p.jpg
But like the other family I believe the upper end models may have had a lower voltage output (and a lower inductance) - as per the AT10/AT11/AT12Sa - the AT12Sa was lower voltage and inductance too...

With regards to phase... once the phase is stuffed up, all the various artifacts will become audible/measurable... obviously the place were they become audible is at the listening point - after exiting the speaker.

And there are a number of places where phase issues can happen well before the speaker - stylus (cartridge alignment), cantilever resonances/behaviour, electrical interaction between capacitance/inductance in the leads and cartridge before the phono stage... and then the electronics chain.

And of course many (most?) speakers are NOT phase coherent... (I used primarily electrostatics for most of 20 years - which are one of the few types that usually IS phase coherent) - so the question arises as to how audible phase issues are/can be?

There is an interesting article on research done by Ortofon on phase - scanned on posted on VE http://www.vinylengine.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=33679
Dated 1983... so none of this is news!

But current mainstream speakers are gradually becoming more phase coherent. (or rather the developments in speaker tech have allowed "ordinary" speaker to be built that have the phase coherence previously reserved for panels) - which moves the ability to hear phase differences from the realm of exotica into the realm of the "ordinary" Audiophile.

So having read all this stuff - I thought, what would it take to provide high resolution, linear/flat Frequency response, and phase coherence within the audio band.... the answer is - Line Contact stylus, exotic cantilever/suspension and low inductance and capacitance.
Which is a very good description of most original Quad cartridges. - And perhaps explains the popularity on this thread of cartridges such as the 4000D's, EPC100, etc...
These are cartridges that in most ways (and sometimes all ways) meet the above description.

By the way - for those with a full wallet needing some lightening - there's a NOS 4000D up on fleabay.
I have also recently seen some EPC100's and EPC101's up there for around the same (extravagant) price.

Bye for now

David
Dear Raul&Lew, Everyone seems to associate Ikeda san with
FR-64 & 66 tonearms. But he also produced: FR-14; FR-24 mkI
and mk II; FR-34s and FR-54. All of them medium mass arms.
So those MM carts are obviously not produced for the'other
tonearms'.
Regards,
Dear Raul,
On Vinyl Engine it shows the FR-5 to have a compliance of 12x10-6 dyne whilst the FR-6 has 10x10-6 dyne (the same as the XV1s).That certainly falls into the 'low' compliance definition?
I have the FR-6 SE which is the elliptical stylus (the FR-6 has the spherical).

In any case, this demonstrates differences that are hard to explain?
I have the FR-6SE in the FR3 headshell and mounted on the FR-66s it's performance was 'extended' slightly over the FR-64s with rich deep bass, not exaggerated mid-bass 'bloom', a mellifluous and totally charming midrange and translucent shimmering highs.
The Empires are slightly coloured in comparison but still a pleasure whilst the EPC100MK3 is just a little more 'neutral'.....possibly a tad more 'flat' or 'accurate' if you like?

The AT-20ss on the other hand, in both the Micro Seiki MA505s and Grace G940 tonearms is quite a disappointment with a very 2 dimensional presentation consisting of a disturbingly forward and unrealistic midrange presentation with little depth or transparency coupled to a recessive bass performance.
This is with both an original AT 20SS stylus and an aftermarket one as
well.

How to reconcile these apparent differences in our experiences Raul?
It's a litle disturbing since we agree on most other things and my experiences with the Signets appear to match quite well with Timeltel's?

Regards
Henry
Dear Waynefia: IMHO the 140LC is worth for a new stylus ( after you tested what you have right now, maybe works fine. ) or the 155LC up date.

Five dollars for it?, that's a real bargain. I think the best you can do is test that cartridge for you can decide which " road " you have to take.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I have an AT140LC, not sure of the stylus condition, but the body is in nice condition original box etc..., paid 5 bucks for it. Is there anything to do with this cartridge ? Is this worthy of a new or upgrade stylus ? What stylus and from were if any ?

Thanks,

Wayne
Raul, That's very useful information, even to someone who might have a different opinion of those FR cartridges. (I am not one of those; I don't own one.) Thanks.

One wonders why the FR cartridges are not in fact perfectly suited to the FR tonearms, but maybe some of the other FR tonearms (other than the 64S and 66S) do have the lower mass that is more ideally suited, based on resonance theory.
Dear friends/Halcro: I already have on hand the FRs cartridges 6 and 5 ones ( courtesy of Mario. He worked for five years in Japan. ) along the Signet 5ea.

I was " playing " with all them and permit me to report my findings first on the FRs:

first thing I noted is that these FR cartridges are not low compliance ( Halcro, maybe I'm wrong but I think you states that the FR is a low compliance. ) but more in the medium range and over 12-14cu, I can't be sure but certainly not low compliance. I don't buy either the " idea " that these MM cartridges were designed thinking on FR heavy mass tonearms: makes no sense with a low weight/medium compliance cartridges like these ones.

IMHO these cartridges were designed/voiced with low mid bass ( around 45hz to 70hz. ) " strength " in mind, at least for what I heard in my system.

As J.Carr posted the 5 is a little more refined cartridge than the 6 and shows better tonal balance.

Both cartridges are good at the HF extreme nothing that you can compare against the EPC100CMK4 or the Acutex LPM315STRIII or the AT ML180-OCC or the Azden that's very good on this regard.

Halcro, ( and sorry if I'm wrong with. ) you posted that the cartridge has the deepst low bass you heard and IMHO these cartridges are totaly " normal " on deep bass where the Empires, the 100CMK4, the 205MK4 or the Acutex along the 20ss are a lot better in this regard with true/real low bass, maybe IMHO that low mid-bass coloration " help " to think it had/has better low bass that in reality does not.

I used the same tracks that were in the EPC100CMK4 and 20SS reviews as in the Acutex one along my normal test recordings.

Nothing I heard in the FRs approach the quality performance of all those named cartridges.
Yes, the 5 is a little better but even not on that " big league ".

I tested both cartridges in the G-940, AT 103, FR64 and Lustre GST-801. The best performance comes from the Lustre tonearm.

Anyway a good overall experience.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards, Dlaloum: Rumours are that the 6006 (and it's brothers) were a Japan only cartridge. Information about these is harder to recover than the already elusive figures for the more common Signets and the veracity of "Japan only" should be taken with a grain of salt. Looking at the test figures you relate, it seems the 6006(p) is associated with the TK5(x)a. The only other P-mount from Signet I'm certain of was in the AM series, 780 Ohms output imped. The mid-level "Hi Tech" may have offered another P-mount option. Considering your 6006 a "6" and others offered were a "2", "4" and "8", associative reasoning would SEEM to support it's similarity to the TK5(x)a. Can't be of much help, someone hauled everything to the landfill. BTW, phasing/linearity: Transducers at the other end of the signal evidence nulls, comb filters and constructive/destructive resonances, are you proposing the same is true of cartridges? In simple English please?

Peace,
Regards, Headsnappin: The given induct./res./imped. for the TK7ea is the same as for the TK5ea, the reference for the variation in coil wiring is lost but IIRC, the windings are of Ohno continuous casting, a reheating of the wire as it is formed resulting in copper "grains" of up to seven hundred feet, as compared to LC-OFC windings (6N's pure) found in the TK5ea. After your previous post, I'm now apprehensive as to just exactly what the "examined under a microscope, absolutely perfect" TK7LCa will do. Anticipated delivery today, unless UPS "soccered" it, tonight should make for interesting listening.

Peace,
Regards, Halcro: A horror story, recalled in conversation with a former U.S. representative for AT. At dinner following a meeting with AT execs. from Japan, their discussion turned to the dispositon of the Signet assembly facilities in Stow, Ohio. The building was purchased by a corporation which then proceeded to remove the entire contents. Lock, stock and microscope barrel, everything was thrown into dumpsters and removed to a landfill. The meeting was held (in his recollection) around '98 or '99, the gentleman estimated the actual transfer of property was in '95. Related to me by another and henceforth "hearsay". Just thought I'd pass this one on, "Signuts", sleep well.

Output for the TK10 is hovering around 2.2mV, cartridge imped./1khz=550 Ohm. Induct. 85mh!, D.C. res. 240 Ohm. I'd wager your impression of the TK10 is it has a "whispy" character, all the components of outstanding performance are in place but seem somewhat distant. Turn the volume up and listen exclusively to the TK10 for about a week, you may find it a very refined pickup which needs a certian degree of aclimatization before it's qualities can be appreciated. The same may be said (IMHO) of the earlier TKe/SU/LC series, 2.7mV output, again, very refined, a subtle approach without the "wow factor" found in carts with higher output. On my ancient gear I find this point is crossed somewhere in the neighborhood of 3.5mV output. Poet Rob't Browning wrote "less is more", this may be true of the arts, not sure if so with carts. YMMV.

Peace,
Still no one out there with info on the Signet TK6Ep ?

I have fitted mine with a 440MLa.

And I have measured it as follows:
Inductance 565/567 mH
Resistance 791/797 Ohm

I don't know at what frequency my multimeter measures, but the normal AT specs are given as Inductance at 1KHz.... and from my measurements it appears that my meter is giving me a higher figure. I would estimate highish 300mH??

Based on measuring a whole bunch of cartridges the closeness between the two channels is usually a good indicator of quality - and the two channels are VERY close on this one.

Still curious about OEM Specs

bye for now

David
Dear Headsnappin and Timeltel,
Is the TK7ea too much of a good thing?
I have one coming in a week or two and will hopefully be able to report.
The Professor will lead the way. Having listened to the TK10LC, I don't know if I'm a big fan of the line contact stylus?.....or maybe it is the number of coils in the TK10?
What say you Professor?

Cheers
Henry
Regards, Halcro: TK3ea-5ea: Concur.

Enjoying (at this time) Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto No. 2, Rubenstein-Ormandy. Catalog ARD1-0031, 1973 RCA Red Seal "Quadradisc". The TK5/155LC "Sigmutt" is revealing and transparent without loss of energy on an EPA-250 TA. Rubenstein's piano varies from brusque to haunting, the shift in time signature from 4/4 to 3/2 is effortlessly accomplished. On this demanding recording, the TK5 navigates subtle harmony and complicated climax with assurance.

3ea-5ea: 3ea cartridge impedance 1000, 5ea 900 ohm. Cartridge inductance, 3ea 490, 5ea 550 mh. D.C. resistance, 3ea 780, 5ea 800 ohm.

A TK7LCa is on the way, hope to have it dialed in by the weekend.

Peace,
COTM Herr Professor?
Well I'm willing to nominate your Signet TK5ea.
I've listened extensively to it with its own stylus and with the 155LC and I'd be lying if I said I could hear any appreciable difference?

Yes, the TK3/155LC is a perfect blend of midrange beauty with extension at both ends (to these ears at least), and can be guaranteed to provide excitement 'plus' to any musical genre but...........the TK5ea adds a slight refinement without losing even a smidgen of excitement.
The more one listens to the TK5ea, the more one appreciates it's translucent qualities which in my mind puts it slightly ahead of the Technics EPC100Mk3 as possibly THE new reference?

Certainly my COTM.
Regards, Raul: Really enjoy your terminology. Just to clarify: I'm reluctant to recommend any piece of audio equipment. However, from time to time something comes to my attention that seems worth suggesting to others. There were more than twenty Signet styli included in a lot of styli purchased last summer, and two Signet cartridges, an ("analog master") AM-20 and a TK9LCa (as well as B&O, Micro-Acoustics, AT, yada-yada). All those styli and so few cartridges! The AM-20 caught my attention and as prices for these underappreciated cartridges were reasonable, several were collected for cheap. As there had been little mention of Signets, the suggestion was made that there might be others who would enjoy sampling the premier line from AT. It now seems so.

The TK1ea, 3ea and 5ea are progressively more articulate, it's a coil thing. Consequently each has slightly less presence. There are other listeners who may prefer a different presentation, such as those who focus on midrange, bass or hf detail. Nicely voiced, the 3ea offers vibrant mids and easy bass without sacrificing hf extension, makes "big" sound with a 140LC stylus. The 5ea/155LC faster, precise and revealing and consequenty, slightly less involving. Halcor's recipe, the 3ea/155LC is probably the most pleasing.

Anyway, there are many other wonderful pickups from the "golden age" of analog available, such as the Acutex LPM 315-111STR now offered on that acution site with two(!) styli. Just as with the Signets, there is a specific voicing with the 315STR stylus, those who might be interested in this cartridge should be mindful that there is significant difference in the performance of the 315 stylus with it's marvelous presence as compared to the more resolving 320, this is the one that has won a certian A'goner over. Perhaps with enough pressure, he'll tear himself away from the 320 long enough to give the 315 stylus a spin and post an impression.

Best wishes should you wish to experiment with Signet carts., Halcro (Henry has ears, H'snappin too) has it right in his assesment of the difference heard between the TK3ea and 5ea. Had I the fantastic selection of AT cartridges in your posession, I wouldn't be able to resist sampling some of the earlier Signets such as the boxy TK7e, 7SU or 7LC. 2.7mv output and very refined (a little to much for my plebian taste, YMMV). These will accept styli with the round post such as your AT20SS, which like the AT160 or AT180, is at the top of my wish list. "One of these days, Alice!"

Is it time for a new COTM? Again, regards, respect and of course,

Peace,
Dear friends: For all your posts and especially the starting ones by Timeltel seems to me that I'm just loosening the " big party " with the Signets/ATs freaks.

I own the AT 155LC but no the TK5e or other Signet but the TK10ML II/III.

Fortunately there are several out there for sale so I will buy one and have my ticket to be inside that " party ".

On the AT line and in my book the AT20SS continue a top the 155LC as the ML180-OCC even the AT-ML160-LC/OCC is a champ on the AT line.

No, I'm not diminished the AT 155-LC that by its own " rights " is a very good performer.

I have to say that what you can read in my 20SS review was experienced with the cartridge mounted in our self design tonearm where the 155LC never had that opportunity so maybe I'm a little unfair with the different cartridges test " environment ".

I don't have on hand that tonearm but I will test the 20SS in the same tonearm or similar to the one where I tested the 155LC and report on it.

The main differences between the 155LC and the 20SS are IMHO exactly what Frogman posted elsewhere ( I think in page 65-66 ) in the thread about: color, rhythmun and alive performance concepts, the 20SS is IMHO superior overall to the 155LC especially on color/rhythmun.

Btw Travbrow, I can't say yet if those middle of line " freaks " are better than the Signet top of the line TK10ML or only " different " and if that " different " performance is nearest to a person's preferences/priorities and not a real better performance .

This is one of the main factors that push me to look for a TK5 sample along to know : what is happening there? how is that one of those freaks even the Acutex quality performance?, I have to hear it because that could means that beats almost any other MM/MI cartridge but the very very top ones like the 100CMK4 or AKG P100 or the Empire DIII, etc, etc.

I have some examples of those freaks with the ADC cartridges and others that I will share after that Sigfreak experience.

Regards and enjoy the music,

Raul.
Perhaps I misunderstood what the "Sigmutt" referred to?
I thought you were commenting on the TK5/155LC but then perhaps you meant the TK3/155LC in which case I agree with the Professor.
Ebullience in the midrange and wonderful extension at both ends.
I have resistance at 60K Ohm and Capacitance at 70uF + phono cable.

If this is the "Sigmutt" to which you refer, something is indeed wrong?
Hello Headsnapin, Do a search on Audiogon for Signet to find the specs. on the 5.0 basic. The bodies are the same on all the MR 5.0.

Danny
Hello Headsnappin, As Timeltel has mentioned there are many choices for the Signet MR 5.0 cartridge. Check out Lp Gear for replacement styli. They have added different choices since I last looked.

The main characteristic of the MR 5.0 is detail. It is more of a MC sound but is enjoyable to me. In my older setup it was a little to much, and it was hard to tell differences in stylus types.

I have been listening today and Line contact replacement is a little more subtle than the original ME stylus. Bass is deep and full. Highs are easier on the ears. Midrange is very good on both. Nice cartridge.

I will recheck the AT140lc and AT155(Works but snaps in
funny)and if any great improvement will post.

Hope this helps,
Danny

Regards Professor and Headsnapin,

I think compared to the TK3/155LC I can see how you might hear the TK5ea as very slightly recessed in the midrange........but I think that may be because the TK3/155LC is quite ebullient in that respect (part of its seductive charm if you ask me).

Compared to the UNIverse and the EPC100Mk3 (a true reference), the midrange of the TK5ea I find to be a perfect match and therefore neutral and transparent.

If you really wish to hear midrange 'bloom', get yourself an FR-6SE which is somewhat larger than life.......but then again, what's not to like?

Incidentally I'm sorry about misleading you about the FR-6SE in a previous post but it was listed on EBay and not on Audiogon as I indicated.
One of you was clever enough to work this out as the cartridge has disappeared?
The lucky winner should post his impressions here for the benefit of all?

Cheers
Henry
Regards, Headsnapin: Have little input for the Signet MR 5.0. Haven't found a body yet, do have styli for the Basic, 5.0e and 5.0me carts.

From memory, the 5.0 has a fairly high output impedance, 3200 Ohm and coil inductance of 490 mh @ 1k Hz, values shared by the AT120, 130, 140 and 440MLa. Styli for any of these should be perfectly appropriate with the 440 stylus being nearest the original MR 5.0me, an AT120e (0.4 x 0.7 nude on alu) for the Basic. If you search TTNeedles for AT styli with the "208" prefix, any of these will work. Double check, of course.

Maybe Ackman3 will log in. IIRC, Danny tried a generic replacement stylus, a NOS stylus, a 440MLa stylus as well as a 155LC stylus with his MR 5.0. Good luck and of course,

Peace,
Dear Timeltel: As a fact I'm still learning on the whole subject thank's to this thread and yours and all other great people contributions.

If we take stylus/cantilever as a stand alone " set " then I agree the cantilever has more " weight " on quality performance.
Unfortunately for me that is not so important as is the cartridge overall quality performance level and I said " for me " because I'm on the cartridge own design.

+++++ " "swap" styli has resulted in numerous styli for the same cartridge, wether it be AT, Signet, ADC, Shure, Empire, enough to have some awareness of the difference. " +++++

I agree that we could have some awareness of the difference but IMHO what we can't have is the awaranees that that differences comes precisely from the cantilever. The only way IMHO to be sure about is when we have the same cartridge stylus with two different build material cantilevers.

You have to take in count that even same build material cantilevers with different design " sound " different: it is not the same a 3mm Al hollow tapered cantilever than a 5mm solid Al non-tapered cantilever.

I insist in this because if there is some " formula " out there that can help me to put wide light on this subject I really appreciate that but till today I can't find any precise process that can help on that specific subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Timeltel,
The Sigmutt is very slightly laid back in the mids and the resolution throughout the range is exemplary. I do like it very much and it makes it hard to listen to my other carts, not a bad thing. I do have mostly solid state gear with a tube line stage that is not "tubey" sounding, more fast and detailed. That is what I like about it. I do want to emphasize "slight". I really do appreciate your input, it is very valuable.
I was just reviewing the specs of my Sony XL-MC104 HO MC cartridge... (which is a very sweet sounding cartridge...)

Having just measured the cartridges inductance (0.6mH) I then plugged it into the Hagtech calculator - and with an inductance of 100pf... the resonant frequency is 650kHz...

The F/R graph that came with it however, shows a peak at around 30kHz - presumably the cantilever resonance...

Seems to me that if we can take an MM / MI and move the e-resonance out to 30 or 40kHz (or higher) the benefits of MC would acrue alongside the advantages of MM/MI.

I will be trying my Empire 999 (360mH) with a C load of 65pf later this week (or early next week) and trying it with different loads to see what happens.
360mH + 65pf = resonant f of 33kHz

One of the issues I have is that once it moves outside the audible range (20-20kHz) I no longer have a test source that can measure anything .... my current pink noise track (HFN test record) is apparently unreliable past 16KHz and certainly not designed for use past 20k.

This thread got me working on the loading + low C exercise, as a result of which I now have one of my TT's +Cables down at 51pf (!)- which gives me lots of scope to experiment - although it is also a pain with locating the Phono stage. (Short cable).

bye for now

David
Regards, Raul: I have great affection for the old Pio. Weighs 79 lbs. & consumes 1400 watts AC, when pushed it'll heat a room. As there are no neg. feedback circuits, the phono section is quiet & clean, maybe a little too much so for some. Adjustable for cap. & res., how handy! After thirty three years (new, 1979) one gains a measure of familarity, small differences in source are apparent. TOTL and nearly the price of a VW when new, the old vetern still performs fairly capably. IMHO, anyway.

Cantilevers & styli: An advantage, this being the propensity to "swap" styli has resulted in numerous styli for the same cartridge, wether it be AT, Signet, ADC, Shure, Empire, enough to have some awareness of the difference. My perception is, as posted earlier, the stylus for character, the cantilever for quality. None the less and as you say, performance is a consequence of all factors. Raul, please continue to express your thoughts, perhaps we might learn a thing or two?

Headsnappin: Regards. I really don't hear the Sigmutt as having diminished mids, rather one of it's best features. Wonder if it's system (my antique SS gear, aren't you running tubes?) or loading. Halcro?

Dlaloum, thanks for the follow-up.

Peace,
Dear Timeltel/Lewm: On the cantilever subject I still consider the cantilever as a critical " factor " either because is the " one " that carry the stylus is the one IMHO with a higher resonance ( mechanical. ) " responsability " is the one maybe with the higher design options and always put its " sound signature " .

There are so many cantilever options: rod, tube, deposited gold, blended materials, boron, Al, beryllium, length, weight, etc, etc that in someways preclude a precise answer to the question: which the best cantilever? or best material or best lenght.
In the other side we have to take in count the whole cartridge design where the cantilever/stylus/suspension is a sub-set as I posted somewhere.

The Empire cartridges is a good example of that where used Al build material cantilevers but outperform several other cartridges that are using " exotic " cantilevers.

In the past Timeltel ask me about cantilever sound signature and today, even that it has, for me is really hard to tell a sound signature cantilever due to build material.
Maybe because I heard the cartridge performance as a whole and don't " dissect " ( I can't do it yet. ) if in two cartridges with different build material cantilevers what belongs ( on quality performance differences. ) in specific to that cantilever and not to a different stylus shape or cantilever lenght or different kind of cartridge suspension.
I can't understand yet how you ( Timeltel ) can do it on precise way.

Btw Lewm, I will email you an article about " equivalent mass ": fact or fiction?. It is interesting to read the concept and how treat the cantilever subject on its overall contribution.
Gentlemans I can't paste here because I have it in " adobe reader " format and I don't know how to do it other than email it.

Timeltel, all what you are hearing is still through your Pionner? or you add something different as phono/line stages: thank you.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
One man's MM/MI endpoint:

For context purposes:

I've recently upgraded to an SP-10 MK2 in a nice multilayer baltic birch plinth, the table restored by Dave Cawley in the UK including his own PSU. The arm I chose is a rewired Victor UA-7082, with LP gear 8 gram headshell to keep effective mass as low as possible. My phono stage is a Bottlehead Eros upgraded with Cardas caps and added Lundahl output trannies.

I ran several vintage and current model carts with these observations:

Current model Clearaudio Maestro and SoundSmith ebony Voice both excel at detail retrieval. Both are a tad "hi-fi ish" for my taste as I prefer reproduced music to err a bit to the warmth over brightness. The SoundSmith takes more work to optimize. Overall, very similar sound to my ears.

Vintage carts I tried are the Stanton 981HZS, Pickering XSV5000 and Ortofon VMS30 MKII. The Stanton nicely juggles detail retrieval with dynamics and most resembles the Clearaudio and SoundSmith in character. The Pickering excels in smoothness and really fleshing out the midrange, putting it in the room better than all the others. This, however, comes at the cost of a relatively recessed top end which I can live with. The VMS 30 MKII really shines with my table/arm/headshell/phono stage. It falls short of the Pickering in midrange body, yet betters the others in this regard. Its detail retrieval nearly equals the others as does its overall balance.

All of these carts are very nice performers in my system. I'll be sticking with the VMS30 simply for cost in these difficult economic times, and will hold on to one each of the XSV5000 and HZS981 of which I have duplicates. I could enjoy many years with any of them if money was no object.
Yep ... what about:

MF Astatic series - MF200 = 90mH
Elac ESG896 & ESG870 = 200mH
Elac ESG791 = 250mH
Grado Prestige series = 45mH
AKG P15/P25/P8 = 150mH
Empire 66 = 225mH
AT180ML = 240mH
Empire 3000-I = 280mH
Empire 2000E = 300mH
Shure V15V = 330mH
Empire 4000XL I/II = 330mH
Empire EXL-10 = 350mH

Lots of options - some of them as rare as hens teeth (which do indeed exist!)....

But the Empires are not that scarce, nor are the Grado's

I should have a needle for my EXL-10 in the next week or so... And I am considering a Grado as well so I can hear the "grado sound" as well as experiment with a low inductance MI.

I only just picked up a meter with inductance measurement capability.... I am somewhat horrified by the variance in inductance within reputable cartridges....
I am seeing far lower variance in resistance - which is less critical for frequency linearity - than I am seeing in Inductance. (Which explains why so many cartridges read quite differently for L & R channels on a F/R chart)

Switching from 500mH down to 300mH can have a massive influence on extension....
All you MM/MI lovers with an FR-64s/66s or those who have a high-mass arm and want a low compliance cartridge......
There is an FR-6SE for sale on Audiogon classifieds at the moment.

Now with all due respects to Professor Timeltel and the wonderful Signet TK5ea and TK5/155LC, the FR-6SE in my FR-66s is probably the heavyweight champ in my cartridge collection at the moment.
It not only does everything the TK5ea and ZYX UNIverse do but manages to put a giant fist through your chest and squeeze your heart as the music plays.
A rare emotional experience.
Dlaloum,
Thank you. Very clear. I agree. The trick is finding carts with structurally low inductance (i.e. fewer coils and low internal impedance, nececssarily leading to lower output?). This sounds like a Technics 100C...
Hi Timeltel...

apparently Ortofon have been pushing the Linear Phase wagon for many years.... it was mentioned in a Gramophone review from the 70's or early 80's I was reading... "Orthophase"?

A number of people have stated that getting Phase right (Linear phase) is more critical to microdetail than Linear Frequency Response...

Apparently MC cartridges as a genre have fewer phase aberations than MM/MI cartridges... (I have seen this mentioned a few times, but little supporting data)

Also saw some mention of requiring 4x to 10x the Frequency Response to ensure Phase Linearity (hence the 200kHz) - but the wording there was "frequency response" no frequency linearity was mentioned (ie no +/- db) so we might be talking about having a slowly drooping amplitude response with some remaining level at 200kHz (would -30db do? -50db? - don't know)

There is also some discussion about phase issues caused by the cantilever.... and particularly at the cantilever resonant frequency. (A good reason to design the cantilever resonance outside the audible range!)

Adding all these up, it seems that what is desirable is a combination that moves the electrical resonance out as far as possible, and if at all possible eliminates (or massively reduces) the electrical resonance. (the resonance is always followed by a massive drop off in level - so if extension is the goal....)
This implies:
1) Very Low C - maybe lower than 100pf?
2) Careful use of R loading (too much R raises the electrical peak, and exagerates the following level drop)
3) Selecting cantilever design for resonant frequencies as far above 20kHz as possible (back to discussing stiff light cantilever materials, and shapes)
4) Inductance as low as possible - interacts with R & C - lower inductance results in more extended F/R - resonant peak is pushed further out.

Like I mentioned before, much of these criteria sound like Quad cartridges/styli.

Playing with the Hagtech loading calculator is quite fascinating.... watch what happens when you drop inductance and capacitance.... a C of 50pf with an I of 300mH provides a F/R of over 40kHz. - suggested R is 77.5k ohm.

It also seems to me that the proposed setups that people rave about on this thread, and the most popular vintage MM/MI's also frequently meet these criteria!

Perhaps the secret of MC's success is the relative effortlessness of achieving an electrical resonance well outside the audible range (due to very low I ). Whereas with the MM/MI's this is difficult to achieve.
Is there a justification in there for LO MM/MI's?? (eg: Soundsmith Sussurro) - Fewer turns of the coils = very low I / mH... = very extended F/R, with Resonance pushed out far enough that phase becomes linear (more linear?) in the audible range.

Just thinking out loud... while searching for more data on the phase linearity related aspects....