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.
@nandric I can illustrate your words easily. This is a picture of my broken AT-ML170 / ATN170ML stylus recplacement. The rest of the gold plated hollow pipe material is the actual cantilever, not the collar of the cantilever, but the cantilever itself. Here is another picture of the working original cantilever. BTW i got very quick reply from Expert Stylus regarding this AT-ML170 cartridge. I was surpriced that Expert Stylus have 48 years experience in manufacturing components, including a range of cantilevers and diamonds (so maybe Don was right about Stereohedron made by Expert Stylus) ! They got over 2500 cartridges serviced every year! It really isn’t a matter of removing a cantilever and fitting a new one. The mass of the cantilever and diamond must be taken into consideration as otherwise the whole dynamics of the cartridge will be impaired. Every cartridge made is built with components of a mass ensuring optimal results, and unless those attempting repair work have the background and laboratory facilities to ensure this, then they should not be considered. The Expert Stylus company manufacture cantilevers in aluminium, boron and sapphire. Their Paratrace profile diamond is possibly the most advanced diamond produced today. This mega rare Audio-Technica AT-ML170 from the 80’s can be refurbished anytime by Expert Stylus in UK for about £290 in 3/4 weeks from receipt of confirmation. It’s quick compared to others. The exchange rate of £ to € is so low at the moment, i think this is the best option. But i will not do that, i decided to sell this cartridge :)
P.S. I saw the alluminum tube ("joint pipe" you are talking about) used as a collar for solid boron rod cantilevers used by Axel, it was Nagaoka made cantilevers with glued stylus tip (he told me once). So when Axel refurbished my Technics 100c mk3, many years ago, he actually installed aluminum collar with boron rod cantilever (glued to that joint pipe). On the original Technics Boron Hollow Pipe Cantilever there is no collar (or joint pipe). I don’t have a cpiture of the EPC 100c mk3, but i do have a picture of the EPC-205c mk4 refurbished by Axel, glued stylus tip and the alluminum collar around the new nagaoka Boron Rod cantilever is visible here.
The old method is definitely better, but modern designers must glue the stylus tip, because the cantilever is solid rod, not the hollow pipe. I hadrly imagine someone can make a tiny hole in the solid rod cantilever, but it was possible with superior vintage hollow pipe cantilevers in the 70s/80s.
@tubed1 if i remember correct the ClearAudio use Audio-Technica generator in their expensive cartridges. It's been said here earlier.
As for the Boron cantilevers i doubt they are hollow pipe, most likely rod. So in terms of cantilevers those modern (all of them) are inferior to the vintage with hollow pipe boron cantilevers and ultra low mass tip. Correct me if i'm wrong.
Friends, The Clearaudio Charisma MM, better than Virtuoso, Maestro? Diamond encrusted Boron Cantelever is the same as Goldfinger. Leave it to Clearaudio to outdo themselves.
Glad you have seen the light JT, and I'm so pleased you find the Victor Z1 to your liking...😎 When the Neo-SAS arrives, please update us with your thoughts on the comparison.... Your's is valuable feedback for all the 'lurkers' of this Thread.
@halcro I just want to tip my hat to all the suggestions in this thread. I picked up a NOS Victor Z1 and have it mounted on a 4point. In a word: incredible. A truly eye opening experience. AND that's without the NEO-SAS stylus that is yet to arrive. As is it's easily doing more for me than the many $2-4000 MC cartridges I've used on the same setup. I'm not prepared to draw any definitive conclusions about vintage MM vs new MC cartridges, but in this case, for a few hundred bucks, it's a little bit sickening to think of how much I've spent for so much less music. So thank you all!
@nandric You’re right, it’s good idea to became a retipper in the end of the day. A.J. Van Den Hul turning 80 this year! Just checked this interview with him. My Dutch instagram friend told me the price is 500 euro to rebuild with Van Den Hul throught his dealer. It is only make sense if the final product can surpass the original.
There is indeed a tiny screw covered by a drop of white glue or paint on the inner side of the ATN170ML stylus replacement assembly.
I remember someone told me the Audio-Technica in Japan can do the job, not sure if they can do anything with this particual model (discontinued long time ago), but they must provide re-tipping service for their clients? So maybe rebuild with original specs (or close to the original) is possible.
I have a few broken MM cartridges and i wonder is it worth to rebuild them, both needs a new cantilevers. In stock condition they are superb cartridges, i still have 3 working samples in excellent condition. But i don’t know what to do with broken samples :(
Talking about AT-ML150 with rare ATN170ML replacement stylus (broken cantilever) and mega rare AT-ML180 with genuine ANT180ML replacement stylus (broken cantilever). Only a little part of the original cantilever left inside (about 2-3mil). The original cantilever is Hollow Gold Plated Boron and the original stylus tip mass is extremely low (0,08mm for AT-ML180 // 0,1mm for AT-ML170 ).
Has anyone tried to rebuild those cartridges? I think it must be Boron cantilever and Van Den Hul tip of the lowest mass to be close to the original.
But no one has made any of these hollow boron cantilevers since the 80's.
Just hooked up a Signet TK-7SU using the Audio Technica AT_LH18 headshell and I'm one very happy camper. If you can find a TK-7SU pick one up, use a heavy headshell and you'll be very very happy.
I´m sure Grace F-11 exists as it was for sale on eBay w/ great photos a few years back and I saw it once here on A´gon too (I think a member had it on his cart collection). Google "Grace F-11" and you will find a photo of a gray Grace body with "L" on other side of it, so it´s probably Luminal Trace and an MC, according to VinylEngine cart database. https://www.vinylengine.com/library/grace.shtml
Congrats on your Grace F-14 Excellent, it´s truly a very rare gem. Excellent !
Stylus tip for F-12 Ruby and F-12 Diamond is elliptical, but i have never onwed those models and information can be wrong, because they are mega rare.
My F-12 stylus is clear, model L12B (Line Contact? Beryllium Cantilever?), impossible to find any info about it.
I have plain black stylus on my F-14 cartridge, not sure what it is and can't find any info about it, but the sound is great.
LEVEL II Ruby is 0.2 x 0.8 mil and they call it Super Elliptical (or Hyper Elliptical) or Advanced Luminal Trace.
but LEVEL II MR/BR is Micro Ridge tip and Boron cantilever, i'm sure it's the best combination!
The F-14 LC-OFC was released also with SAP (Sapphire Cantilever) and MR (Micro Ridge) stylus tip.
... and another F-14 RC LC-OFC has rare Ceramic Cantilever with New Line Contact Stylus.
I think the F-11 does not exist, but the F-10 is MC cartridge available in 3 different versions.
And another virtually unknown MC is Grace Asakura-1, 03mV output
(86000 Yen in 1986), replacement MC stylus with Solid Boron cantilever and Super Luminal Trace stylus tip.
I think the Asakura-2 was MM (not the MC, output is 5mV). Beryllium Tapered Pipe cantilever, same Super Luminal Trace Stylus tip, the price for this cartridge in 1986 was 48000 Yen. This model looks exactly like the earlier Grace F-12, stylus replacement also looks like the F-12 replacements.
Asakura-San was the Grace founder and those Asakura-1 and Asakura-2 models are signature models released in 1986 and discontinued in 1988.
And the absolutely unknown model is "Grace F-14 Excellent" - specially calibrated series, i got this one and love it.
Chakster, thanks for detailed info. There was also a Ruby model, what kind of stylus is it Micro Ridge ? Also existed F-10 and F-11, could you enlighten us more ?
@harold-not-the-barrel we have very little info about F-14 models because it’s a short lived series, for example the original F-14 BR/MR was instoduced in 1984 and discontinued in 1985.
F-14 LC-OFC appeared in 1984 and discontinued in 1989.
Before there was F-12 model - the one with Diamond Cantilever (the most expensive Grace ever made) and it was also available for a few years from 1981 till 1983.
The LEVEL II model was there from 1982 till 1988 (and LC-OFC version appeared in 1984).
But the most popular F-9 series existed from 1974 till 1981 and along with LEVEL II it was long lived series.
The mid 80s was hard times for Grace and many others, CD era killed many cartridge manufacturers, maybe those model were not distributed very well, or many not so many units were made. One of my LEVEL II BR/MR has Sumiko sticker, this company was their distributor in the states.
I find it strange that there is so little reviews/opions/writings on those very special TOTL Grace cartridges as they are superlative, despite they were sold for Japanese audiophiles only back in the 80´s
Dear @fsellet: ""
There is much misinformation in this thread.."""
Could be, I can't detect it yet. You posted that enjoyed reading the thread, I wonder why if is " much misinformation " here.
If in reality exist that misinformation level that can be normal because in the thread is reflected each one of us ignorance levels.
Now, even if it's true what you posted here I'm sure that every single post by each one gentleman that posted in the thread posted information to help all of us and thinking he had a good information and not misinformation. I think no one wants to " hit " here with misinformation.
As I told you, if you have other internet forums where we can learn about all those misinformation please share with us because we want
to be less and less ignorant in many audio subjects. I know some other net forums where Agon is the reference, maybe it's not according to you.
Btw, I think that even if you do not give us the links of other " correct " forums will be apprecaited that you be specific by subjects where you found out all that " much misinformation ".
I was so curious about SPU sound 3-4 years ago, bought one new SPU Classic GM MK2 with Conical tip for my Thomas Schick tonearm which was designed for SPU and Denon in mind. It was the worst cartridge in my life! Heavy monster with huge diamond required very high tracking force up to 4g! I like ONLY how it looks (design) which is beautifull, but the sound is so boring. Like you, i’ve been reading so many positive feedbacks online about this classic cartridge and i have seen so many statement that conical tip is actually very good one and 4g tracking force is also normal. Some people call it "very musical" cartridge as oppisite to high-end cartridge. At that time i had ZYX Airy III with silver coil on Technica EPA-100 tonearm and that was a high-end cartridge. And you know what? I like the high-end cartridges and in my opinion Conical SPU is not musical cartridge at all, but just boring to death. I ried to play Jazz LPs with Conical SPU. I never had any problems with tracking etc, but each time i was thinking about my ZYX Airy III with Micro Ridge tip, because it was fantastic cartridge compared to uninvolving Conical SPU on dedicated heavy tonearm. I have high efficiency system with no crossover (full range drivers, 101db) with Push-Pull tube arm and various phono stages. The conical SPU was the worst cartridge ever!
But i decided to try a better SPU DESIGNED ONLY FOR JAPANESE MARKET and i bought very rare SPU Spirit (LIMITED EDITION MODEL, ONLY 500 UNITS MADE) with much better coil wiring and Elliptical tip. This cartridge was much better than Conical SPU! It was a very good cartridge in the same set-up (SP-10mk2 and Schick "12 tonearm), but i’ve noticed some misstracking on various LPs, so i decided to return the cartridge to the Japanese shop and they accepted my return with full refund, the serial number was 500 and it was the last SPU Spirit in production line.
The stylus tip does metter even for SPU, that’s why i said that the best SPU is the one with Ortofon Replicant Stylus, the model is SPU Royal GM MK2. And this model is extremely popular in Japan. The superiority of the conical SPU is just a myth! Raul used the right word for this phenomena - this is anachronism.
the manufactures is giving the conical option because of the price, there are so many SPU models, but the Conical models are the cheapest. Some people can not afford 2200 Euro SPU Royal GM MK2, but they could probably afford 750 Euro SPU Classics. This is marketing, the reason they are still available is just because it’s a classics, they can hook you up with the cheapest model and then you want to upgrade later.
Let’s go back to the GRACE now:
I have no idea why do you think that F-9D is much better than F-9P? Do you have a picture of the stylus to make sure is it NUDE or BONDED? The difference in price between F-9P and F-9D is just 2000 Yen (not the big deal, still much cheape than all others in F-9 series). It seems like the F-9D is higher in compliance and that’s why the tracking force is lower (maybe the stylus is nude). But Grace stated (by mistake) in all catalogs the tracking force for all models from 0.5g to 1.2g which can’t be true. I assume that the conical styli of professional F-9P require higher tracking force (at least 2-3g). For some reason the price for F-9D in the 70s was even lower than for F-9P, maybe it is also mistake, i’m not sure. But as i said earlier those cartridges are just cheap alternative for those you can not spend more, it is also marketing and that’s fine to have a product for beginners. The F-9D is definitely not a high-end model in F-9 series, but if you would like to believe it’s " audiophile cartridge" with conical tip then no problem.
I don't think we have missinformation in this thread, at least we are trying to spread the light on various missinformation coming from the manufacturers sometimes. I made so many prints in my life and i know there might be typos, so no wonder if the manual printed with typos and it was too late to fix it.
Dear @harold-not-the-barrel : You are safe at 1.5gr. where almost all F14 works. Only the F14BR ask for 1.3grs as ideal but even this one we can use 1.5grs. because is inside its VTF range. The other with different to ideal 1.5grs. is the F14-M-SP that works at 2.0 grs.
Now, the optimum VTF will be defined by you and your room/audio system but will stay around 1.5grs.
That's right, the conical styli were made by Grace for professional
market to use on radiostations, anyone can read about it, search for the
Grace history (Shinagawa Musen Co., Ltd).
Chakster, the F9P was indeed for the professional market (I own one of them) but the F9D was for audiophiles. BTW, tracking force is 1.2 g. There is much misinformation in this thread.
It's not weird for me that even
today exist cartridge designs with conical stylus shape or aluminum
cantilevers designed because they want a low price tag or because
ignorance level of designers. What is weird for me is that exist "
stupid " persons that today bougth it, obviously by ignorance so maybe
not so stupid but very high ignorance levels.
Dear Raul,
It is never a good idea to use the S word (as they say in kindergarten) or call someone ignorant in a public forum. At best, it comes through as arrogance... In the same vein, a casual reader of this forum could view your arguments as excessively simplistic when you, for example, praise the golden ears of Danes in your Ortofon story, only to conveniently dismiss the golden ears or Japanese as idiosyncrasies... Cultural generalizations are rarely a sign of sophistication.
I would never dare questioning the smile of Mona Lisa, even if deep
inside I wished I could see her teeth. I am sure Leonardo had a plan and ultimately good taste...
My post was not about the best design choice today, but referred to the choice Grace designers made back then to offer a conical stylus for audiophiles with their F9D (in addition to their F9P -- professional cartridge). You could be right and it is possible that they were ignorant, but somehow I doubt this... Just as I doubt people buying modern SPUs with conical tips (no, I am not one of them) are ignoramuses.
As I already said, we all have different priorities and approaches. Mine is not to own the best. As a young audiophile, I worked hard to improve my system and read everything I could to do so with the limited budget that was mine. I quickly realized that the enterprise was a money pit. The endless quest was similar to shooting at a moving target, and only got me more frustrated. As the resolution of my system increased, I was better able to hear the shortcomings. All this led me farther away from my goal, which was to enjoy the music I was playing. I quickly learned from my rookie mistakes (to paraphrase you) and decided to focus on getting pleasure from my stereo. This is my paradigm. Not better nor worth than yours, just different. Who knows, maybe the Japanese you frown upon are doing something right after all with their love of tubes, horns and SPUs...
Grace made the decision to offer a conical option with its best cartridge (so did Ortofon, Garrot, etc.) Not only that, they called it a playback standard... That tells me the designer cared enough about the sound produced by this "primitive" stylus. Again, so does Ortofon with it SPU. Clearly, these designers and their happy customers cannot all be deaf.
You seem to be insulting these poor cartridges by calling them OK and inexpensive. But their stylus is conical by design: it is none of their fault, nor choice (otherwise they would have gone for the fancy diamond, I am sure). More seriously, I don’t think that the F9D was cheap in its time.
The "best cartridge" and "conical tip" are two different things and can not be compiled together. The most advanced Grace MM desing is F-14 with Micro Ridge stylus tip. Can’t remember Garrott with conical tip, their best (original p77) was Micro Tracer and now Micro Scanner MKII and Fritz Gyger. The "best" ortofon SPU is Royal GM MK2 with Ortofon Replicant stylus tip (similar to Fritz Gyger). Happy customers are not crazy like us (trying to buy all the best vintage cartridges to test them), maybe they are more happy.
To answer the second part of your post i want to make it clear that "OK and inexpensive" meant not expensive, nothing bad. Check the dealers price in Japan (below) in 1975.
the cheapest in F-9 series: Grace F-9D price: 18,000 Yen Conical RS-9D replacement price: 9,000 Yen
the most expensive in F-9 series: Grace F-9F price: 25,000 Yen Shibata (Discrete-4) replacement price: 12,500 Yen
The rarest grace is F-12 with Diamond Cantilever (98 000 Yen in 1981)
Something much better than F-9 is LEVEL II with Boron cantilever and Micro Ridge stylus (37 000 yen in 1983)
And the next one is F-14 LC-OFC with Boron cantilever and Micro Ridge stylus (49 000 yen in 1985)
Dear @lewm : Any good cartridge design will performs good, as I said for vintage ( but valid too for any today design. ) cartridges: is really dificult to find out one that sounds bad.
It's not weird for me that even today exist cartridge designs with conical stylus shape or aluminum cantilevers designed because they want a low price tag or because ignorance level of designers. What is weird for me is that exist " stupid " persons that today bougth it, obviously by ignorance so maybe not so stupid but very high ignorance levels.
Now, what is true is that those vintage MM cartridges was and even today very good overall designs where some of those cartridges can compete with today LOMC cartridges and this is an achievement.
That's right, the conical styli were made by Grace for professional market to use on radiostations, anyone can read about it, search for the Grace history (Shinagawa Musen Co., Ltd). The word "professional" in audio does not mean a better quality, but special needs for radiobroadcasters and radio deejays / club djs (don't forget about Grace "Disco" series designed for club DJs in the 70s). Those old Conical tip required much higher tracking force, it is more durable for everyday use on the radio or in the clubs, it's cheaper to replace styli every month etc. Those styli are bonded, not nude which makes them inferior by default. And yes, the conical stylus is more forgiving to setup errors, it does not require absolute alignment and this is the reason why conical styli are still dj standard (like 9mV Shure M44-7 that works fine with 3-5g tracking force)! Any other styli will be bent, worn and broken if used by djs. This is all good for professional needs when you play record near 200-2000 dancing and jumping people and your turntable is shaking and you use 3-5g tracking force to avoid skipping in process, but not necessary for home use in high-end system @fsellet
In this post about conical styli i'm just trying to put the facts together, it's up you what kind of styli is better for your ears. When i bought my NOS Denon DL-107 MM cartridge i was impressed by the sound quality of that nude and very well polished conical stylus,but it was long time ago. Since that day i have tried many cartridges and i would never go back to the Conical stylus, but it's just me. The music i'm into is very well recorded in the 60s, 70s and early 80s on original pressings, conical tip never gave me satisfaction compared to LineContact, Hyper Elliptical, Stereohedron, MicroLine, MicroRidge etc.
Conical stylus is old school, some people still plays 78rpm vinyl using cacti stylus, but who cares?
Even Ortofon released their best SPU Royal GM mk2 with Ortofon Replicant stylus after all.
Dear Raul, I take your point, but keep in mind that I did not purchase the pre-fabricated ruby/OCL stylus assembly from SS. Rather, I had them rebuild my original stylus assembly. Therefore, it may be that my sample retains the original suspension; I don't really know for sure. I bought the cartridge on eBay with NO cantilever and stylus. It was as if someone had taken a tweezers and neatly plucked out the cantilever; the rest of the cartridge, including the rubber sleeve into which the cantilever fits, looked like new. I then sent it to SS for the re-tip.
Speaking of conical or spherical styli, I remember when elliptical styli hit the market and everyone moved in that direction. Somewhere around that time, Harry Pearson declared his love for the Decca 4RC (spherical tip) cartridge. He was very influential at that time, and he turned many back to conical/spherical, for a while. One of my friends had a 4RC; it was darn good in the midrange.
Dear @chakster @fsellet: Today conical stylus tip and aluminum in cantilevers is only an anachronism.
Conical stylus shape is a way inferior to latest years line contact type stylus shapes. probably the only advantage on conical shape is that's less sensitive to SRA/VTA changes or other changes in the cartridge set up.
Conical was the standard in the old times but that does not means is rigth. Things are that in those times line contact shapes was not appeared yet.
Denon 103 was the cartridge that I think gave more popularity to the conical shape but we have to think that that Denon design was builded for broadcasting use not for audiophiles, even that some designers followed with out good reasons.
Same with aluminum, today nothing justify the use of aluminum cantilever but only to have lower price tag.
I know that some designers swears for conical and aluminum and for me is only because their ignorance levels on what are the cartridge needs and the why's of.
The Ortofon SPU design is a design for the japanese market ( mainly ) where audiophiles have a very special and different idiosyncracy than many of us. Way of thinking very different.
well, i'm sure it's OK and inexpensive cartridge, but with direct
comparison Conical/Spherical stylus is always lose its charm when the
Shibata/LineContact, MicroRidge/MicroLine can be used instead.
Dear Chakster, thank you for reinforcing my point so beautifully! Clearly using a conical stylus in a top of the line cartridge is not a call driven by marketing. As you and others have shown, many audiophiles are prejudiced against conical styli, yet knowing this, Grace made the decision to offer a conical option with its best cartridge (so did Ortofon, Garrot, etc.) Not only that, they called it a playback standard... That tells me the designer cared enough about the sound produced by this "primitive" stylus. Again, so does Ortofon with it SPU. Clearly, these designers and their happy customers cannot all be deaf.
You seem to be insulting these poor cartridges by calling them OK and inexpensive. But their stylus is conical by design: it is none of their fault, nor choice (otherwise they would have gone for the fancy diamond, I am sure). More seriously, I don't think that the F9D was cheap in its time. FWIW, it does outperform the more expensive F8F in my system (yes, I double checked the model number. ;-)
The point of my original post was not to disagree with you or others here, but simply to say that we do not need to necessarily seek the most expensive cartridge in any given line. It can, but will not always be the most satisfactory. Everyone respond differently, and like Lewn said, we have different systems, different tastes or priorities. You, Raul, and others here have shown that it is worth trying these cartridges for ourselves. Thank you for that, and for sharing your knowledge. There are many great surprises out there. Going back to the Shure M3D, for example, I had not idea a cartridge designed in 1957-58 could sound so good. It was a revelation: amazing bass, most natural highs and open midrange and great soundstage. As Shure moved to other designs, the M3D was kept as a cheap option in their catalog, but originally it was one of the most expensive cartridge money could buy, and their star. The vagaries of fashion and marketing...
Anyway, good luck with your Grace's.
Raul, we all need luck, not just my Graces.
This is on a highly tweaked Lenco using a Dynavector DV505 tonearm and lightweight headshell.
Lewn, re-plinthed Lenco here too, with Sumiko "the arm".
Dear @chakster : I don't think the Ruby is overpriced against that Grace aluminum cantilever used in the other models.
In the other side we have to think that in all those time diamond/ruby/saphire cantilever materials was almost " exclusive for the very top models that came with a high tag on it.
@lewm , the SS Ruby work in the Grace means is a different cartridge design because the compliance on the SS is not exactly the same as in the original Ruby, the SS comes with new suspension/dampers, the ruby cantilever overall dimensions are not exactly as in the original and the SS comes with different stylus tip. So, from the point of view of cartridge design both are way different cartridges and can't performs the same.
Dear @fsellet: """
Besides, the curve which appears on the manual is RIAA equalized and still rises in the upper frequencies... """
that's exactly why that rising in the hf are welcomed.
When the inverse RIAA is applicated the eq. goes down/fall to infinite in those hf and this makes that hf and harmonics can't shows it at its best because that eq. The raising in hf is a good thing for any audiophile with a decent audio room/system.
Raul, "Many years ago Ortofon made several tests with their " golden ears " groups of audiophiles/musician and non-audiophiles gentlemans looking for the best frequency response in their cartridges and its conclusion was that over several of those controled tests all those gentlemans prefers the 3.5db hf rising in Ortofon models that the same cartridges with flat response."
As Fred mentioned, this seems to support the preference many hi-end hobbyists hold for MC cartridges. But then isn't that also a contradiction to this entire posting?
chakster, "but with direct comparison Conical/Spherical stylus is always lose its charm when the Shibata/LineContact, MicroRidge/MicroLine can be used instead"
This may be true for your taste, but it is not fair to imply it for others. There are a great many serious listeners who enjoy playback with conical styli, and not just Art Dudley. Even the venerable J Gordon Holt, toward his last days as publisher/editor of Stereophile used a conical tipped Shure V-15 Type V as his reference cartridge. And he judged utilizing comparisons against master tapes of symphonic music he made himself.
Opinions are fine, and may sometimes be helpful to others, but none of us should assume all others may/should hold the same preferences as ourselves.
I am amused at the certainty with which Chakster and Clearthink dole out advice to those willing to absorb it. Since no two of us own the exact same system, and since (thankfully) we all have different brains, it is probably best to make one's own evaluations, using the gossip printed here only as a guideline. If 3 guys say the same thing, I might take that seriously.
I have had very good results by having SoundSmith re-tip a Grace Ruby using their top of the line LC stylus (OCL, I think is their acronym) and the sapphire/ruby cantilever. Just a suggestion; you could probably do the same with any F9 series for a very similar excellent result. I have another Grace Ruby still with its original stylus, so I have been able to compare the two configurations; the SS version sounds better in most ways, to me, on my Beveridge-based system. This is on a highly tweaked Lenco using a Dynavector DV505 tonearm and lightweight headshell. On the same system, using a different turntable and tonearm, the Acutex LPM320 has become a habit. Phono and line stage is Manley Steelhead.
@fsellet well, i'm sure it's OK and inexpensive cartridge, but with direct comparison Conical/Spherical stylus is always lose its charm when the Shibata/LineContact, MicroRidge/MicroLine can be used instead. For those who are into vintage vinyl (like myself) it's important to reach the virgin part of the used records deeper in the grooves, untouchable by Conical tip, because most of them have been played by Conical styli over the years. It's easy to bypass the worn part of the grooves by using at least LineContact or better styli, which goes deeper in the groove. Another reason is much wider frequency response etc.
The original F-9U is not Conical, but LINE CONTACT type (similar to a cutter stylus according to manual) and your quote is about F-9D and F-9P (they are conical for broadcast use).
Dear Chakster, You are absolutely right, thanks for correcting my mistake. F9D is the one. Better than interesting in my opinion...We will agree to disagree... Best, Fred
... currently use an F9U with a conical stylus. Here is what Grace said about it: "Grace deems the F9U a playback standard and recommends it with pride to music lovers, audio enthusiasts and professional users."
The original F-9U is not Conical, but LINE CONTACT type (similar to a cutter stylus according to manual) and your quote is about F-9D and F-9P (they are conical for broadcast use).
Finally, several members have said that Grace recommended loading their cartridges at 100 k ohms, however the manual clearly specifies 47 k. Yes, the measurement that is printed in the same manual (of an F9E) was made at 100 k, but it also shows a rise in the upper frequencies, which I assume would not be there at 47 k. I would appreciate clarification of this point.
If you’re looking at Grace catalog on vinyl engine where all the models are listed on two pages (except Ruby) you will see that the measurement made ONLY for the top of the line Grace F-9F Discrete-4 designed for CD-4 (Quadraphonic) records and that’s why this model with Shibata Type Stylus loaded at 100k as it should be loaded to reproduce CD-4 records with high modulation. Frequency response of the Grace F-9F is 10-60000 Hz (the next one is F-9U 10-50000 Hz) Those models must be loaded at 100k. The rest of the models in F-9 series does not reproduce high frequency that much (below 45 000Hz for F-9E and much lower for the rest of them).
I think it was me who said those Grace must be loaded at 100k, but i don’t care about F-9E model (and others with elliptical or conical tip), because the F-9F with Shibata is much beter cartridge and 100k on preamp is a must have for it (Overall capacity: 80pF , 1.2g tracking force)
Did you ever listen to the F-9L or F-9E (elliptical) or did you never bother with them? Would you guess that the F-9E or F-9L might also be better than the F-8L?
Yes, i have tried most of them and already posted about it here. The best one in F-9 series is F-9F with Nude Shibata type stylus designed for CD-4, the next one is F-9U with Line Contact type stylus. The most popular is F-9E with Elliptical stylus and the most expensive is good looking F-9 Ruby with Elliptical stylus and Ruby Cantilever (the reason why it’s expensive or "overpriced" as i said). The rest of the models in F-9 series are not interesting at all. I don’t like the sound with Conical styli, no matter what manufacturer made it (so i don’t like the sound of Denon DL-103 or Ortofon SPU with conical styli, no matter what other people think about, those cartridges are extremely popular for some reason, but in my opinion they are not interesting at all).
The Grace F-9 is OK untill you will be able to check the LEVEL II, F-12 and F-14 made in the 80s. Those High-End Grace models comes with BORON cantilevers and MICRO RIDGE styli, there are optional Beryllium Cantilever / Line Contact stylus for F-12 and others, depends on the type of the various original stylus replacement. The Grace F-12 are impossible to find cartridge, while the LEVEL II and F-14 are uber rare and normally very expensive even in Japan. Those models are state o the art MM phono pickups, so the F-9 Ruby with its elliptical tip is just mid level model compared to top of the line Grace LEVEL II, F-12 and F-14 LC-OFC models. There is also special calibrated model called "F-14 Excellent" that you will not find in any catalogs, and i’m a proud owner of it. The potential of Grace was far better than F-9 Ruby, but unfortunately F-14 LC-OFC was the last high-end MM cartridge from Shinagawa Musen Co. LTD in this world.
P.S. They are also made Grace F-10 MC model, but i never tried this one.
Dear @fsellet: I think that what other people try to say it’s not that
the Grace are not worth seeking but that there are other better options.
As a fact is very dificult to fine out vintage or today cartridges that
really can sound bad.
The fact there is is something better does not diminish the Graces' achievements. In fact, this is a statement we can make about ANY cartridge. This long thread is a testament to this: you and others (and I) always find something we like better... My point was that we can live with very good, or great, without spending millions...at least for a while... I do agree with you that most of these vintage MMs are surprisingly good sounding (but I have tried only a fraction of what you have tested).
Now, the 9L is different in its output level that instead to be 3.5mv is 5.5 mv, that’s why the difference in the measures
.
Yes, I do understand the connection between measurements. I was mostly curious to hear about the end result of adding a few turns in the coil. the F9L is the only one in the series that has a higher output. Surely, Grace would not have given us this option if they had not been convinced of the benefit of doing so. The F9L did not come with a conical stylus either, but a fancy cut... My experience is that generally (but not always) a higher output often results in subjectively greater dynamics, at the expense of resolution. All F9 styli are interchangeable; I wish Agoners who have tried switching styli between the regular body and the F9L would comment on the resulting sound difference...
100k is the best way to load the F9 and that hf rising is welcomed
because when the audio signal pass trhough the pho0no stage inverse RIAA
eq the high frequencies goes down around 18-20 db to the infinite and
this means that the eq. does not stops at 20khz but in theory goes over
the RIAA eq. curve
I am not questioning that 100k sounds better. I do not know because I do not have this option on my preamp, but I am saying that that is not what Grace said. Besides, the curve which appears on the manual is RIAA equalized and still rises in the upper frequencies... Now, the Ortofon story is interesting, maybe that is why so many people like MCs over MMs. On the other hand, I trust my ears (no they are not golden) and my favorite vintage cartridge is a Shure M3D (first iteration) with the original N21D stylus. This was the very first stereo MM in the US. It measures horribly and sounds heavenly....just the opposite of CD...
Dear @fsellet: I think that what other people try to say it’s not that the Grace are not worth seeking but that there are other better options. As a fact is very dificult to fine out vintage or today cartridges that really can sound bad.
Agree with you, Grace carttridges are very good performers.
Now, the 9L is different in its output level that instead to be 3.5mv is 5.5 mv, that’s why the difference in the measures.
100k is the best way to load the F9 and that hf rising is welcomed because when the audio signal pass trhough the pho0no stage inverse RIAA eq the high frequencies goes down around 18-20 db to the infinite and this means that the eq. does not stops at 20khz but in theory goes over the RIAA eq. curve and this very high equalization makes that the high frequencies lost the airy and transparency and definition that in some ways it will be recovored by the high rising the 100k load shows at that chart. So, it’s not something wrong but as I said: welcomed.
As a fact and for that same reason non flat cartridges but with hf rising over 20khz always ( every thing the same. ) sounds better and nothing wrong with that but an advantage.
Many years ago Ortofon made several tests with their " golden ears " groups of audiophiles/musician and non-audiophiles gentlemans looking for the best frequency response in their cartridges and its conclusion was that over several of those controled tests all those gentlemans prefers the 3.5db hf rising in Ortofon models that the same cartridges with flat response. Till then that’s the way Ortofon designed and design its cartridges.
I have enjoyed reading the thread, and wanted to chime in in defense of the Graces (saving Grace). Anyone interested in vintage cartridges reading the above comments might be under the false impression that they are not worth seeking....
They are great cartridges and should not be dismissed, regardless of the type of stylus. I have enjoyed an F8F and currently use an F9U with a conical stylus. Here is what Grace said about it: "Grace deems the F9U a playback standard and recommends it with pride to music lovers, audio enthusiasts and professional users." I understand that this is, to some degree, marketing hype, but I find interesting that Grace kept a conical stylus option (in fact 2, with the F9P) in its top-of-the-line cartridge stable.
I recently acquired an F9L body. The coil measurements are different from my other F9. Could any of the Grace fans give us some info about this cartridge?
Finally, several members have said that Grace recommended loading their cartridges at 100 k ohms, however the manual clearly specifies 47 k. Yes, the measurement that is printed in the same manual (of an F9E) was made at 100 k, but it also shows a rise in the upper frequencies, which I assume would not be there at 47 k. I would appreciate clarification of this point.
Henry, Thanks. I think I will pass on those elliptical Grace F8L / F9L.
Pryso, Thanks for the recommendation. I'll try to find a copy of this sound track.
Out of curiosity and regarding Chakster's comment about sharing interesting auctions listings: if I find something on auctions.yahoo.jp which is also on jauce.com (available for worldwide bidding) that might be of interest here but that I'm not going to bid on, would people like me to let them know? Or is everyone already making regular searches of jauce.com?
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
