Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


Dear friends: who really needs an MM type phono cartridge?, well I will try to share/explain with you what are my experiences about and I hope too that many of you could enrich the topic/subject with your own experiences.

For some years ( in this forum ) and time to time I posted that the MM type cartridge quality sound is better than we know or that we think and like four months ago I start a thread about: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1173550723&openusid&zzRauliruegas&4&5#Rauliruegas where we analyse some MM type cartridges.

Well, in the last 10-12 months I buy something like 30+ different MM type phono cartridges ( you can read in my virtual system which ones. ) and I’m still doing it. The purpose of this fact ( “ buy it “ ) is for one way to confirm or not if really those MM type cartridges are good for us ( music lovers ) and at the same time learn about MM vs MC cartridges, as a fact I learn many things other than MM/MC cartridge subject.

If we take a look to the Agon analog members at least 90% of them use ( only ) MC phono cartridges, if we take a look to the “ professional reviewers “ ( TAS, Stereophile, Positive Feedback, Enjoy the Music, etc, etc, ) 95% ( at least ) of them use only MC cartridges ( well I know that for example: REG and NG of TAS and RJR of Stereophile use only MM type cartridges!!!!!!!! ) , if we take a look to the phono cartridge manufacturers more than 90% of them build/design for MC cartridges and if you speak with audio dealers almost all will tell you that the MC cartridges is the way to go.

So, who are wrong/right, the few ( like me ) that speak that the MM type is a very good alternative or the “ whole “ cartridge industry that think and support the MC cartridge only valid alternative?

IMHO I think that both groups are not totally wrong/right and that the subject is not who is wrong/right but that the subject is : KNOW-HOW or NON KNOW-HOW about.

Many years ago when I was introduced to the “ high end “ the cartridges were almost MM type ones: Shure, Stanton, Pickering, Empire, etc, etc. In those time I remember that one dealer told me that if I really want to be nearest to the music I have to buy the Empire 4000 D ( they say for 4-channel reproduction as well. ) and this was truly my first encounter with a “ high end cartridge “, I buy the 4000D I for 70.00 dls ( I can’t pay 150.00 for the D III. ), btw the specs of these Empire cartridges were impressive even today, look: frequency response: 5-50,000Hz, channel separation: 35db, tracking force range: 0.25grs to 1.25grs!!!!!!!!, just impressive, but there are some cartridges which frequency response goes to 100,000Hz!!!!!!!!!!

I start to learn about and I follow to buying other MM type cartridges ( in those times I never imagine nothing about MC cartridges: I don’t imagine of its existence!!!. ) like AKG, Micro Acoustics, ADC, B&O, Audio Technica, Sonus, etc, etc.

Years latter the same dealer told me about the MC marvelous cartridges and he introduce me to the Denon-103 following with the 103-D and the Fulton High performance, so I start to buy and hear MC cartridges. I start to read audio magazines about either cartridge type: MM and Mc ones.

I have to make changes in my audio system ( because of the low output of the MC cartridges and because I was learning how to improve the performance of my audio system ) and I follow what the reviewers/audio dealers “ speak “ about, I was un-experienced !!!!!!!, I was learning ( well I’m yet. ).

I can tell you many good/bad histories about but I don’t want that the thread was/is boring for you, so please let me tell you what I learn and where I’m standing today about:

over the years I invested thousands of dollars on several top “ high end “ MC cartridges, from the Sumiko Celebration passing for Lyras, Koetsu, Van denHul, to Allaerts ones ( just name it and I can tell that I own or owned. ), what I already invest on MC cartridges represent almost 70-80% price of my audio system.

Suddenly I stop buying MC cartridges and decide to start again with some of the MM type cartridges that I already own and what I heard motivate me to start the search for more of those “ hidden jewels “ that are ( here and now ) the MM phono cartridges and learn why are so good and how to obtain its best quality sound reproduction ( as a fact I learn many things other than MM cartridge about. ).

I don’t start this “ finding “ like a contest between MC and MM type cartridges.
The MC cartridges are as good as we already know and this is not the subject here, the subject is about MM type quality performance and how achieve the best with those cartridges.

First than all I try to identify and understand the most important characteristics ( and what they “ means “. ) of the MM type cartridges ( something that in part I already have it because our phonolinepreamp design needs. ) and its differences with the MC ones.

Well, first than all is that are high output cartridges, very high compliance ones ( 50cu is not rare. ), low or very low tracking force ones, likes 47kOhms and up, susceptible to some capacitance changes, user stylus replacement, sometimes we can use a different replacement stylus making an improvement with out the necessity to buy the next top model in the cartridge line , low and very low weight cartridges, almost all of them are build of plastic material with aluminum cantilever and with eliptical or “ old “ line contact stylus ( shibata ) ( here we don’t find: Jade/Coral/Titanium/etc, bodies or sophisticated build material cantilevers and sophisticated stylus shape. ), very very… what I say? Extremely low prices from 40.00 to 300.00 dls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, well one of my cartridges I buy it for 8.99 dls ( one month ago ): WOW!!!!!!, so any one of you can/could have/buy ten to twenty MM cartridges for the price of one of the MC cartridge you own today and the good notice is that is a chance that those 10-20 MM type cartridges even the quality performance of your MC cartridge or beat it.

Other characteristics is that the builders show how proud they were/are on its MM type cartridges design, almost all those cartridges comes with a first rate box, comes with charts/diagrams of its frequency response and cartridge channel separation ( where they tell us which test recording use it, with which VTF, at which temperature, etc, etc. ), comes with a very wide explanation of the why’s and how’s of its design and the usual explanation to mount the cartridge along with a very wide list of specifications ( that were the envy of any of today MC ones where sometimes we really don’t know nothing about. ), comes with a set of screws/nuts, comes with a stylus brush and even with stylus cleaning fluid!!!!!!!!!, my GOD. Well, there are cartridges like the Supex SM 100MK2 that comes with two different stylus!!!! One with spherical and one with elliptical/shibata shape and dear friends all those in the same low low price!!!!!!!!!!!

Almost all the cartridges I own you can find it through Ebay and Agon and through cartridge dealers and don’t worry if you loose/broke the stylus cartridge or you find the cartridge but with out stylus, you always can/could find the stylus replacement, no problem about there are some stylus and cartridge sources.

When I’m talking about MM type cartridges I’m refer to different types: moving magnet, moving iron, moving flux, electret, variable reluctance, induced magnet, etc, etc. ( here is not the place to explain the differences on all those MM type cartridges. Maybe on other future thread. ).

I made all my very long ( time consuming ) cartridge tests using four different TT’s: Acoustic Signature Analog One MK2, Micro Seiki RX-5000, Luxman PD 310 and Technics SP-10 MK2, I use only removable headshell S and J shape tonearms with 15mm on overhang, I use different material build/ shape design /weight headshells. I test each cartridge in at least three different tonearms and some times in 3-4 different headshells till I find the “ right “ match where the cartridge perform the best, no I’m not saying that I already finish or that I already find the “ perfect “ match: cartridge/headshell/tonearm but I think I’m near that ideal target.

Through my testing experience I learn/ confirm that trying to find the right tonearm/headshell for any cartridge is well worth the effort and more important that be changing the TT. When I switch from a TT to another different one the changes on the quality cartridge performance were/are minimal in comparison to a change in the tonearm/headshell, this fact was consistent with any of those cartridges including MC ones.

So after the Phonolinepreamplifier IMHO the tonearm/headshell match for any cartridge is the more important subject, it is so important and complex that in the same tonearm ( with the same headshell wires ) but with different headshell ( even when the headshell weight were the same ) shape or build material headshell the quality cartridge performance can/could be way different.

All those experiences told me that chances are that the cartridge that you own ( MC or MM ) is not performing at its best because chances are that the tonearm you own is not the best match for that cartridge!!!!!!, so imagine what do you can/could hear when your cartridge is or will be on the right tonearm???!!!!!!!!, IMHO there are ( till today ) no single ( any type at any price ) perfect universal tonearm. IMHO there is no “ the best tonearm “, what exist or could exist is a “ best tonearm match for “ that “ cartridge “, but that’s all. Of course that are “ lucky “ tonearms that are very good match for more than one cartridge but don’t for every single cartridge.

I posted several times that I’m not a tonearm collector, that I own all those tonearms to have alternatives for my cartridges and with removable headshells my 15 tonearms are really like 100+ tonearms : a very wide options/alternatives for almost any cartridge!!!!!!

You can find several of these MM type cartridges new brand or NOS like: Ortofon, Nagaoka, Audio Technica, Astatic, B&O, Rega, Empire, Sonus Reson,Goldring,Clearaudio, Grado, Shelter, Garrot, etc. and all of them second hand in very good operational condition. As a fact I buy two and even three cartridges of the same model in some of the cartridges ( so right now I have some samples that I think I don’t use any more. ) to prevent that one of them arrive in non operational condition but I’m glad to say that all them arrive in very fine conditions. I buy one or two of the cartridges with no stylus or with the stylus out of work but I don’t have any trouble because I could find the stylus replacement on different sources and in some case the original new replacement.

All these buy/find cartridges was very time consuming and we have to have a lot of patience and a little lucky to obtain what we are looking for but I can asure you that is worth of it.

Ok, I think it is time to share my performance cartridge findings:

first we have to have a Phonolinepreamplifier with a very good MM phono stage ( at least at the same level that the MC stage. ). I’m lucky because my Phonolinepreamplifier has two independent phono stages, one for the MM and one for MC: both were designed for the specifics needs of each cartridge type, MM or MC that have different needs.

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

we have to load the MM cartridges not at 47K but at 100K ( at least 75K not less. ).

I find that using 47K ( a standard manufacture recommendation ) prevent to obtain the best quality performance, 100K make the difference. I try this with all those MM type cartridges and in all of them I achieve the best performance with 100K load impedance.

I find too that using the manufacturer capacitance advise not always is for the better, till “ the end of the day “ I find that between 100-150pf ( total capacitance including cable capacitance. ) all the cartridges performs at its best.

I start to change the load impedance on MM cartridges like a synonymous that what many of us made with MC cartridges where we try with different load impedance values, latter I read on the Empire 4000 DIII that the precise load impedance must be 100kOhms and in a white paper of some Grace F9 tests the used impedance value was 100kOhms, the same that I read on other operational MM cartridge manual and my ears tell/told me that 100kOhms is “ the value “.

Before I go on I want to remember you that several of those MM type cartridges ( almost all ) were build more than 30+ years ago!!!!!!!! and today performs at the same top quality level than today MC/MM top quality cartridges!!!!!, any brand at any price and in some ways beat it.

I use 4-5 recordings that I know very well and that give me the right answers to know that any cartridge is performing at its best or near it. Many times what I heard through those recordings were fine: everything were on target however the music don’t come “ alive “ don’t “ tell me “ nothing, I was not feeling the emotion that the music can communicate. In those cartridge cases I have to try it in other tonearm and/or with a different headshell till the “ feelings comes “ and only when this was achieved I then was satisfied.

All the tests were made with a volume level ( SPL ) where the recording “ shines “ and comes alive like in a live event. Sometimes changing the volume level by 1-1.5 db fixed everything.

Of course that the people that in a regular manner attend to hear/heard live music it will be more easy to know when something is right or wrong.

Well, Raul go on!!: one characteristic on the MM cartridges set-up was that almost all them likes to ride with a positive ( little/small ) VTA only the Grace Ruby and F9E and Sonus Gold Blue likes a negative VTA , on the other hand with the Nagaoka MP 50 Super and the Ortofon’s I use a flat VTA.

Regarding the VTF I use the manufacturer advise and sometimes 0.1+grs.
Of course that I made fine tuning through moderate changes in the Azymuth and for anti-skate I use between half/third VTF value.

I use different material build headshells: aluminum, composite aluminum, magnesium, composite magnesium, ceramic, wood and non magnetic stainless steel, these cartridges comes from Audio Technica, Denon, SAEC, Technics, Fidelity Research, Belldream, Grace, Nagaoka, Koetsu, Dynavector and Audiocraft.
All of them but the wood made ( the wood does not likes to any cartridge. ) very good job . It is here where a cartridge could seems good or very good depending of the headshell where is mounted and the tonearm.
Example, I have hard time with some of those cartridge like the Audio Technica AT 20SS where its performance was on the bright sound that sometimes was harsh till I find that the ceramic headshell was/is the right match now this cartridge perform beautiful, something similar happen with the Nagaoka ( Jeweltone in Japan ), Shelter , Grace, Garrot , AKG and B&O but when were mounted in the right headshell/tonearm all them performs great.

Other things that you have to know: I use two different cooper headshell wires, both very neutral and with similar “ sound “ and I use three different phono cables, all three very neutral too with some differences on the sound performance but nothing that “ makes the difference “ on the quality sound of any of my cartridges, either MM or MC, btw I know extremely well those phono cables: Analysis Plus, Harmonic Technologies and Kimber Kable ( all three the silver models. ), finally and don’t less important is that those phono cables were wired in balanced way to take advantage of my Phonolinepreamp fully balanced design.

What do you note the first time you put your MM cartridge on the record?, well a total absence of noise/hum or the like that you have through your MC cartridges ( and that is not a cartridge problem but a Phonolinepreamp problem due to the low output of the MC cartridges. ), a dead silent black ( beautiful ) soundstage where appear the MUSIC performance, this experience alone is worth it.

The second and maybe the most important MM cartridge characteristic is that you hear/heard the MUSIC flow/run extremely “ easy “ with no distracting sound distortions/artifacts ( I can’t explain exactly this very important subject but it is wonderful ) even you can hear/heard “ sounds/notes “ that you never before heard it and you even don’t know exist on the recording: what a experience!!!!!!!!!!!

IMHO I think that the MUSIC run so easily through a MM cartridge due ( between other facts ) to its very high compliance characteristic on almost any MM cartridge.

This very high compliance permit ( between other things like be less sensitive to out-center hole records. ) to these cartridges stay always in contact with the groove and never loose that groove contact not even on the grooves that were recorded at very high velocity, something that a low/medium cartridge compliance can’t achieve, due to this low/medium compliance characteristic the MC cartridges loose ( time to time and depending of the recorded velocity ) groove contact ( minute extremely minute loose contact, but exist. ) and the quality sound performance suffer about and we can hear it, the same pass with the MC cartridges when are playing the inner grooves on a record instead the very high compliance MM cartridges because has better tracking drive perform better than the MC ones at inner record grooves and here too we can hear it.

Btw, some Agoners ask very worried ( on more than one Agon thread ) that its cartridge can’t track ( clean ) the cannons on the 1812 Telarc recording and usually the answers that different people posted were something like this: “””” don’t worry about other than that Telarc recording no other commercial recording comes recorded at that so high velocity, if you don’t have trouble with other of your LP’s then stay calm. “””””

Well, this standard answer have some “ sense “ but the people ( like me ) that already has/have the experience to hear/heard a MM or MC ( like the Ortofon MC 2000 or the Denon DS1, high compliance Mc cartridges. ) cartridge that pass easily the 1812 Telarc test can tell us that those cartridges make a huge difference in the quality sound reproduction of any “ normal “ recording, so it is more important that what we think to have a better cartridge tracking groove drive!!!!

There are many facts around the MM cartridge subject but till we try it in the right set-up it will be ( for some people ) difficult to understand “ those beauties “. Something that I admire on the MM cartridges is how ( almost all of them ) they handle the frequency extremes: the low bass with the right pitch/heft/tight/vivid with no colorations of the kind “ organic !!” that many non know-how people speak about, the highs neutral/open/transparent/airy believable like the live music, these frequency extremes handle make that the MUSIC flow in our minds to wake up our feelings/emotions that at “ the end of the day “ is all what a music lover is looking for.
These not means that these cartridges don’t shine on the midrange because they do too and they have very good soundstage but here is more system/room dependent.

Well we have a very good alternative on the ( very low price ) MM type cartridges to achieve that music target and I’m not saying that you change your MC cartridge for a MM one: NO, what I’m trying to tell you is that it is worth to have ( as many you can buy/find ) the MM type cartridges along your MC ones

I want to tell you that I can live happy with any of those MM cartridges and I’m not saying with this that all of them perform at the same quality level NO!! what I’m saying is that all of them are very good performers, all of them approach you nearest to the music.

If you ask me which one is the best I can tell you that this will be a very hard “ call “ an almost impossible to decide, I think that I can make a difference between the very good ones and the stellar ones where IMHO the next cartridges belongs to this group:

Audio Technica ATML 170 and 180 OCC, Grado The Amber Tribute, Grace Ruby, Garrot P77, Nagaoka MP-50 Super, B&O MMC2 and MMC20CL, AKG P8ES SuperNova, Reson Reca ,Astatic MF-100 and Stanton LZS 981.

There are other ones that are really near this group: ADC Astrion, Supex MF-100 MK2, Micro Acoustics MA630/830, Empire 750 LTD and 600LAC, Sonus Dimension 5, Astatic MF-200 and 300 and the Acutex 320III.

The other ones are very good too but less refined ones.
I try too ( owned or borrowed for a friend ) the Shure IV and VMR, Music maker 2-3 and Clearaudio Virtuoso/Maestro, from these I could recommended only the Clearaudios the Shure’s and Music Maker are almost mediocre ones performers.
I forgot I try to the B&O Soundsmith versions, well this cartridges are good but are different from the original B&O ( that I prefer. ) due that the Sounsmith ones use ruby cantilevers instead the original B&O sapphire ones that for what I tested sounds more natural and less hi-fi like the ruby ones.

What I learn other that the importance on the quality sound reproduction through MM type cartridges?, well that unfortunately the advance in the design looking for a better quality cartridge performers advance almost nothing either on MM and MC cartridges.

Yes, today we have different/advanced body cartridge materials, different cantilever build materials, different stylus shape/profile, different, different,,,,different, but the quality sound reproduction is almost the same with cartridges build 30+ years ago and this is a fact. The same occur with TT’s and tonearms. Is sad to speak in this way but it is what we have today. Please, I’m not saying that some cartridges designs don’t grow up because they did it, example: Koetsu they today Koetsu’s are better performers that the old ones but against other cartridges the Koetsu ones don’t advance and many old and today cartridges MM/MC beat them easily.

Where I think the audio industry grow-up for the better are in electronic audio items ( like the Phonolinepreamps ), speakers and room treatment, but this is only my HO.

I know that there are many things that I forgot and many other things that we have to think about but what you can read here is IMHO a good point to start.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Hi Lewm,

I think listening to big foils may just be a VERY nice compliment to this cart, and in turn I suspect that a V15 III, VN35MR become more noticeably brash. Brashness and "greyness" are related, again it can only think of it in terms of a different harmonic behaviour.

However, with ALL MM/MI carts I do not experience this sort of "harmonic discontinuation", or as some would call it "blackness between the notes" of most better MCs.

Raul might be able to shed some light of his own listening experiences on what I'm trying to get at.

The M20FL is supremely good in maintaining the "flow" and harmonic structure by portraying the full frequency spectrum, so at least is my listening experience.

The V15 III, is a bit more artificial by comparison ---- YET I'd just listened to a nice but relatively small upright piano the other day ----------- any rig, ANY RIG! I have heard this far just sounds like a more or less accomplished copy thereof.
This would include some like the Steinway Dipoles by Lingdorf, and the biggest effort of Martin Logan with huge bass arrays running all on the bigges ARC tube monos (like 2 small fridges in size, etc.

Sometimes it make we wonder what we are actually trying to do :-)

Greetings,
Axel
If those buying Nagaoka MP50's can get hold of a magnesium headshell (I find the Denon PCL-4 Magnesium Universal Headshell (8g) best match then the 9g Nagaoka magnesium headshell as second best) that seems to suit the cartridge best and will help with the midrange and resolution on more complex pieces. This can be further improved by using silver cartridge connector cables (I find the Ikeda S50 the best option).

Of course, I use these on my Audiocraft AC3300 tonearm with a range of phono cables (bespoke VHAudio, Ikeda and Analysis Plus silver). However, I think the headshell and connector cable selection will help you get a little more out of the cartridge. Also, I've experimented with VTA and think a slightly positive angle is best.

I use the Dr Feikert protractor (using the Baerwald rather than the Lofgren geometry) initially to set up tonearm distance and effective length and cartridge overhang and off set. I then quickly confirm the cartridge set-up using a Geo disc before giving a final check with the DB Protractor.

When set up like this, it makes for an interesting comparison with the many strengths of the Andante P76 and will hopefully satisfy your musical tastes.

Happy listening
Dear Axel/Lew: Today it is very dificult to me continue to hear LOMC cartridges, more and more the MM/MI experience tell me that today this is IMHO the right analog source. I have to say that I don't have the 100% control on the MM/MI alternative due that is a " new " experience for me against 25+ years with the MC alternative, this fact could tell me that when we can have more " control/know-how " on the MM/MI alternative things will comes better still.

I know that different materials conduct the sound at different velocities what I don't know is if at the cartridge overall level the sound transmission velocity can be hear it ( the differences in velocity. ) and discerned by us like a precise velocity difference, at the end the cartridge " road/distance " where the signal pass is so small.

The differences in cartridge tonal balance ( especialy in the highs. ), brigtness, sparkle, etc, etc many times we can take it like a " faster /velocity " characteristic of one or other cartridge, so I can't be sure about : fast cartridges.

On the other side and talking of continuty the MM/MI alternative has the supremacy here and between other things I think that the fact that the MM/MI are better trackers that permit that the stylus always and I mean always stay in touch with the LP track surface help a lot against the MC that maybe and due that are not so good trackers lose contact at microscopic level.

These are only thoughts and nothing where we can be sure.

Btw, the 20FL is an " aristocrat " cartridge against the lot less refined Shure performance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul,
Please stop making me spend money. I will soon be living on bread and water, but I will have a lot of turntables (5), tonearms (>5), and cartridges (probably about 9 total of all types right now). I actually have recently sold 3 turntables, so I am feeling righteous with "only" 5.

I realize that since I have thus far auditioned only the Grado and the Ortofon M20FL among my non-MC cartridges, I have yet to listen to a true MM type. The Grado calls itself an "induced magnet" type and the Orto is a Moving Iron type. I also have two B&Os, which are both MI. I guess the Andante P76 and the AT20SS are both MM. The Nagaoka MP50 is calling me.....
Lewm, Raul,
I followed that call (MP-50) and so be it. It's like "cherche la femme; or Et Dieu… créa la femme") or "Und immer lockt das Weib".

A beautiful sounding cart has something in common with that "la femme" there is some mystic hidden in those more beautiful ones. Why resist? -- 'Cause: "What you resist persists".

The M20FL is as Raul rightly puts it an "Aristocrat", yes. The Shure is a bit of a hot "trollop" by comparison, but then that's exiting also... :-)

It be interesting to get a take on that MP50 when I receive it --- could be a chirpy Blonde? We shall see.

Greetings,
Axel
Dear Lewm: Well, yes I understand but because almost all are out of production cartridges maybe we can't find it in the near future.

Anyway, the choice to buy or not is a very personal decision.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Axel: Good for you, I'm sure you will like it and like always: your posts about is welcome.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul and other AKG owners: I've read someone recommend that for AKG P8ES (regular or Supernova, the best result was had when loading at 33K. Any experience loading P8ES at loading at 33K rather than at 100K? Thanks.
Dear Selfdivider: I don't have experience other than 47K/100K but the cartridge loading subject is always something to try, listening and decide.

Maybe other member can comment in specific of your needs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I managed to snap that Ortofon M20FL Super for not much money from UK with NOS stylus in package. There was another testing session to test the styli. Both styli found to be in as new condition. Listening was conducted in my office system on Technics 1200mk2. I'm still under the impression of how good this cartridge really is. BTW, great compatibility with Technics.
Siniy123, What tonearm are you using with the M0FL Super? FWIW, the cartridge is "compatible" with my PTP/Lenco, too.
Dear friends: I can't remember whom was the person that ask the performance of the AT-155LC against the AT-ML160-LC/OCC.

Well I receive my 155LC and I can confirm that the AT-ML160 is a better performer in any way.

The 155 remember me the LOMC performance with less than excellent quality performance at both frequency extremes where the AT-ML160-LC/OCC excel. No, I'm not saying is not a good cartridge because it is but in a different " league " that its oldest 160 " brother ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,

"The 155 remember me the LOMC performance with less than excellent quality performance at both frequency extremes"

This is comparing performance from LOMC's like the Titan i, Orpheus L and MCA90? Sorry Raul but unqualified your statement is taking on the characteristics of religious fervor in favor of MM's and is showing precious little objectivity. This has all got a little bit surreal to me as you harden your line firmly in the MM camp. Both MM's and MC's have their place and each and I mean each has their strengths AND weaknesses so really surely the camps can and should co-exist can they not with each acknowledging the strengths of the other while realizing their own shortcomings?

Unfortunately your line of late seems to be that the top MM's(of yesterday mainly) are better in every way to the top MC's of today and really almost if not entirely without flaw. You didn't always think like this if one reads your earlier comments in this thread where you acknowledge the legitimate excellence of the top LOMC. That idea like Elvis seems to have "left the building"
Dear Phaser: You are right. Maybe I have to be more specific and certainly not the A-90 that is very good in those frequency ranges.

What I mean is the " average " LOMC sound. As you can read I'm not saying that the 155LC is a bad cartridge no it is a good cartridge but ( like in LOMC cartridges ) in a different quality performance level.

I prefer the A-90 or Xv-1s over the PC-1 or Orpheus ( original ), IMHO the formers are in different " league " than the other two.

Now the 155LC ( in my system and loaded at 100K/100pf ) music presentation is near a LOMC sound than the top MM/MIs like its " old " brother ML160-LC/OCC.

This is not an insult to the LOMC carrtridges but only a comparison.

Now, maybe I'm a little biased right now because the latest cartridges that I'm hearing are the very top MM/MI like the 160 , AKG P100, Technics 100C, Technics 205MK4, etc, etc. IMHO all these cartridges ( overall ) are a little better than the top LOMC ones.
I don't know if you already have/had the opportunity to hear one of them in your system but if not try to do it, till you have that opportunity it will be very dificult to understand the MM/MI supremacy.

Many of the MM/MI cartridges named in this thread are good like: Garrot P-77, Andante P-76, Empire 1000 ZE/x, At 155 LC, At 20SS, Astatic MF-100 etc, etc but the excellence belongs to only a few ones like the ones I named in this post.

In other post I write that I don't have 100% control over the MM/MI alternative due that is " new " for me and maybe this is too what is happening with other people ( like you ) that till today does not have the in deep know how in this alternative like the in deep know how in the LOMC cartridge alternative that all of us are tryying for so many years in a row.

IMHO I think that many of us ( including me ) need more time on the MM/MI research alternative.

Today I know that I prefer it over the LOMC alternative and not because this one is bad but because the MM/MI one is nearest to the music.

Phaser try to find ( Asia. ) a Technics U205CMK4 and I'm sure that when you hear it your " vision " on the subject will change in many ways where you can understand what my posts means: hearing is believing!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, I'll keep an open mind so I will keep on the look out for a Technics U205CMK4 but I don't like my chances of finding one.

In my very limited recent MM experience - 30+ hours with both the Empire 1080 LT and more recently the Garrott P77 both of which I liked even though they have different sonic characteristics, the weakness for me with both these cartridges is that neither presented live recordings with the sense of realism I get from a good MC. For me their was a lack of ambient detail and this made live recordings less of a "being there" experience. Maybe the Technics will be different.
Excel I think you will really like the MP-50.
It is the only MM cart I have heard so far that combines a nice 3d image combined with transparancy and life of a LOMC.

That said, compared to the recently released Ortofon MC A90 it is just another good sounding cartridge.
The A90 is truely a fantastically natural and pure sounding cartridge, and is priced well below the top models of the competition.

If you like the way your system sounds, you will luv the A90.

enjoy
Dear Phaser: I would like to understand what you mean. Could you tell me which recordings and tracks are you refering?

In the other side the 100K/100pf cartridge loading could help about.

Anyway, I can see that you don't dislike at all the MM/MI experience.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul I use two records as my "live" references. Firstly there is the the LA4 "Scores" and the second is the 33 1/3 version of The Bill Evans Trio "Sunday at The Village Vanguard". With both these recordings I cannot get as close to the performances with either of the MM's I have tried. With my Orpheus in particular there is a very believable presentation and with the MM's it's more like I am listening to the recording. Yes I do like both MM's and actually prefer them to MC's on some material. It is just that I do not prefer them on all. FYI, my Orpheus is damaged and I am looking for a replacement at the moment including the Ortofon MCA90 Downunder is so enthusiastic about. I currently am running a Transfiguration Phoenix along with the P77. I run two table/arm/cartridge combinations.
Hi Raul,
Of the two categories you mentioned above, the "very top" and then the ones that are "good" but do not quite make the "very top" which category do you think the Nagaoka MP-50 "Super" goes in?
Thanks,
-bird
Dear Phaser: Thank you. I have the Bill Evans one. I will try it and share my thoughts about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Phaser, thanks for mentioning that Bill Evans. I have it in mono on ABC/Riverside and stereo on Japanese Victor/Riverside. This morning they both sounded quite vivid on lowly Empire 888E. BTW I just substituted a brass pedestal for delrin on my linear air arm. What a difference this made! These inexpensive MM cartridges are good enough to report well after subtle tweaks to arm & TT.
Dear Birdliver: I don't hear the 50Super for some time but what I already experienced with IMHO it is somewhere between both performance levels.

I have to test it again.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
I have one of the NOS M20FL Supers coming from the German seller on eBay that Raul has pointed out. I think it will work well with the EPA 500 A501H wand. The NOS M20E Super is tempting as well but the cartridge db lists dynamic compliance for the E at 40 and static compliance at 25. Shouldn't this be the other way around? I thought dynamic compliance was usually about 1/2 static compliance. What tonearms are light enough to work well with a cartridge this highly compliant? Even the A501E at 6 gms would seem to be a bit heavy.
Dear Sonofjim: Yes, the dynamic compliance on the E is 25cu. The latest time that I tested was in the EPA 100 and works really good. I don't thimg you can have trouble with your 500, yes maybe there are some other tonearms that could match in better way but remember that the tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency can't tell you its whole overall quality performance, that spec/value only tell you that the resonance frequency is inside/outside and ideal frequency range. Of course that this is important but through many years I had and I have still experiences where the frequency resonance is out of that range and the performance is very good: could it be better when the frequency response is right on target?, could be, yes.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Siniy123: Sorry, I don't have any info other that the one you have that I think is by different model, I can't be sure due that Audio technica made its commercial work in different countries with similar cartridges but with little changes in the name of the models ( maybe with little changes in the design too. ).

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Phaser: Not been at your place I can't say where is the problem in what you are hearing, I only can speculate about.

I'm with Dgarretson. I already heard the Bill Evans recording with tree-four cartridges ) including the 1080. ) and what I experienced are nothing but first rate quality performances.

The cartridge set-up ( starting with using a matched toneam and no less important the cartridge impedance/capacitance loading. ) always makes a difference as a difference always makes the phono stage.

I don't think that your ears differ too many from Dgarretson or mines or other thread contributors and that's why I speculate on what I posted.

The other side, due that these MM/MI cartridges are very old, is that your samples were not overall in good shape and this could be.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, I appreciate you looking into the issue I mentioned but I did not say that the performance with the MM was not good just that it is not as good as with a MC. I compared these recordings and another more modern choice "Particia Barber Live A Fortnight in France". Same result, the MC clearly revealed more information and hence made the presentation seem more realistic. To be fair I used two different arm/table combinations. A Vector 4 on a Basis Debut Vacuum with Synchro Wave PS had the P77 and a GPA Monaco/Tri Planar had a Transfiguration Phoenix. I swapped the carts between the arms and the results, while showing some differences between the two table/arm combinations still revealed the MC to be the more revealing of the two by no small margin. Was the MM nice to listen to? Yes for both table/arm combinations. I stress that I have spent as much time with each cartridge trying to optimize its performance and I cannot see that I would set up the MM better than the MC or vice versa. I used the same phono stage, the Audia Flight for both cartridges.

I think T-Bone described the P77 as sweet and I would concur. It is sweet and not ruthlessly revealing. Very powerful bass and for my tastes a little forward in the midrange but overall a very pleasant experience.

I must ask. When you listened to the Bill Evans album did you do so with both MC and MM or just different MM's? It seems as if you listened to several MMs and each of these delivered performances you found appealing. That is great but only by listening to an equally well set up MC can you conclude that one is superior to the other in your system.

Other MM's may as you contend offer truly outstanding resolution. I haven't heard them so I can't say they don't. What I can conclude from my own experience is that I concur with almost every Audio journalist in the world who contends that MC's offer more detail and higher resolution than MM's. I don't believe they are part of a pro MC conspiracy or that they are self deluded. I think this is what they hear. It is what I hear.
Dear Phaser: +++++ " When you listened to the Bill Evans album did you do so with both MC and MM or just different MM's " +++++

good point and yes I heard it with both kind of cartridges but I don't do it with the Garrot.

+++++ " stress that I have spent as much time with each cartridge trying to optimize its performance and I cannot see that I would set up the MM better than the MC or vice versa " +++++

this is critical ( set-up ) to make a comparison especially with top audio systems like the one you own.

I'm sure that you like me made the right MC cartridge loading set-up and in your case the MM/MI loading set up was not ( IMHO ) the best for the cartridge shows its best.

This loading set up does not makes a night and day difference but give that detail and " recovery " information that you are talking about with the MC. I can remember that Dgarretson point out in precise manner this critical subject and I have to say that as better is the audio system as critical is this set up factor to make comparisons and to be more fair in that comparisons.

Now, that Garrot in my today opinion is a good performer but miss the ultimate quality to be at the top with other MM/MI cartridges.

I would like that Lewm could share his latest experiences with the Ortofon M20FL Super that IMHO is a little better than the P-77.

+++++ " What I can conclude from my own experience is that I concur with almost every Audio journalist in the world who contends that MC's offer more detail and higher resolution than MM's " +++++++

IMHO the trouble with them is almost the same that with other people ( like you ): they don't try it yet any of the top MM/MI performers with the precise cartridge set up.
Not only that but almost all of them maybe already listening 2-3 MM/MI cartridges ( with wrong set up ), they need to try 10-15 ones with the right set up.

But, you can read too that there are a few reviewers ( I name it in the thread ) that use the MM/MI alternative and their opinion on the subject is a little different over the reviewers that prefer the MC ones because in reality these reviewers have no precise MM/MI experiences for make a statement on the subject.

I can't find it but somewhere in this tread a person posted a link where we can read that not only some ( few ) reviewers likes the MM/MI alternative but recording producers made the monitoring of their recordings through MM/MI cartridges.

Phaser, IMHO I think that the most interesting subject in this thread is that the MM/MI alternative is still alive and is a good alternative.

My conclusions are a little different from yours ( mainly ) because I already test 40+ MM/MI cartridges with what in my audio system ( today ) is a good cartridge set up ( that could change in the future: who knows!. ). I have to add: with a dedicated phono stage for each cartridge design: MC and MM/MI that copes with its each one cartridge design specific needs.

You experiences about while are very good I think are/were a little limited till today.

For me the important subject is that you take the time to make a " research " on the MM/MI alternative and that, one way or the other, you like it too.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi, I have been reading this thread for it seems like forever now and at the same time looking for cartridges. It seems as though the supply and demand theory is pushing these mm to a point where I am not willing to take a chance on purchasing one. There are exceptions I know but the time just to find one, wonder if it will work with a headshell that doesn't seem to be readily available, and the effective mass of an arm with a removable headshell that is not available and only a couple of people willing to post a response to the question of what it is makes me wonder if it is all worth the effort. With that said I know I can keep looking for the components and try different combos until I find the one that sounds great. Is this how it all works? I also notice that these mm are not compared directly to lomc's, have I missed something? I know my experience of listening leaves me with an opinion of which is better a or b however my memory is not adequate to remember as though I were performing an a b listening test in present time.
What prompted these thoughts is the fact I started a SP 10 MKll project a while ago with the idea that I would be able to see if my Michell is really as bad as I have heard. The best way is to do a comparison myself and putting all the parts together is turned out to be a pain in the a--.
Please tell me where I am mistaken about my thoughts. One parting thought, I have been looking for a headshell for my grace 940 and was offer a couple of them for a fair price. I purchase them, one being a audio technica and the other a grace,who knows the model. The AT has no adjustment for the cartridge, and the grace turned out not to have the finger pick up all of which was not disclosed when offered to me. I am frustrated.
Rnadell, we can post a question about latest Dynavector or Ortofon cartridge and get tons of responses from fake users such as dealers, reps and PR people. Higher cartridge prices gives you more responses on this forum. Should it be other way around? With these excellent MM/MI cartridge we are on our own. It is up to us to open our minds and invest those money and try them. More then often it will be less then $300 for NOS TOTL cartridge from 70s or 80s. Have you tried Ortofon M20FL Super, which is readily available for $180? It is joy of a cartridge. Same for me is ADC TRX-1...No, you will not find them in you local "high-end" store. But today, armed with internet and great forums, out world if "bigger" then audio publications and industry trying to imply.
Dear Rnadell: +++++ " I'm frustrated. " +++++

well I can tell for sure that any one of us were frustrated many times in different audio subjects over our audio life and all those frustrations were part important in our each one audio learning curve. We have to learn how to take/learn advantage on our frustrations and instead to be frustrated we have to think that we learn something.

I agree with what Siniy123 posted about: we are on our own, the whole high end audio industry does not care about because they normaly care about busine$$ ( like the MC cartridges. ) and the MM/MI alternative is no busine$$ for any one of them.

+++++ " I also notice that these mm are not compared directly to lomc's, have I missed something? " +++++

I think yes, you have to read over the thread: there are several LOMC cartridge comparison by different thread contributors.

About the headshells you buy the AT ones that I know comes with adjustment top the cartridge, example: the MG-10 for overhang ( no azymuth. ), the LS/T-12 overhang and azymuth, MS-8 the same as 12, etc, etc, I don't know wich model you get. The Grace one has no finger pick up?, no big deal I use every single headshell with out it because it is an additional distortion source.

Don't worry too much about effective mass and the like with these MM/MI alternative, I can tell you that till today and after more than 40+ test with these kind of cartridges all perform very good and probably many of the tonearm/cartridge combinations that I used were out of ideal resonance frequency range I can't say for sure because I never care about: I care for what I hear. Certainly many of those cartridges could perform a little better if I been/be more precise but till today I'm lucky about. I know this attitude is not an orthodox one but the life is to short and I have to use my time in my audio system hearing and enjoying music.

Go a head, we all are in learning MM/MI cartridge process where we have success and sometime bad experiences that makes we feel: frustrated.

Anyway, yes IMHO is worth to do it and this is the way it is!

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
CART SUGGESTIONS REQUESTED. Well, my situation is somewhat like Rnadel. I have read through this long thread and hope to benefit from it. I was recently laid off here in SC, and only have a stash of a few hundred dollars that I can devote to a new cartridge(s). I recently completed my own home made record cleaning machine and am hearing really clean records again. I got back into vinyl about 16 months ago after a long absence, but still have my collection and have been picking up thrift store & flea market finds, most in very good condition after cleaning.

Here is my equipment: Salk Sound V3 speakers, Cary Cinema 5 amp, Yamaha HTR reciever, with phono input, used as a pre pro, (and its at the top of my list to be replaced as soon as am working and have positive cash flow)
I still have my Series 20 PLC-590 direct drive TT with a PA-1000 carbon fiber arm, that currently has an AT150MLa mounted in it. I have been told that the PA-1000 is a high compliance tone arm. Some PA-1000 specs listed are: effective length 237 mm, overhang 15mm, offset angle 20 degrees 40 minutes, usable cartridge weight, (With original series 20 headshell) is 4g to 15g.
Just before getting laid off I bought a Phonomena II phono preamp with adjustable cartridge loading, but have not hooked it up yet. For headshells, I have a standard Rekokut aluminum headshell that the ML150 cart is in plus the original Series 20 (carbon fiber?) headshell which weighs 10.2 grams and an ADC magnesium headshell that weighs 7.9 grams and a JVC headshell that weighs 9.1 grams.
Of the outstanding MM cartridges mentioned here, which ones that are still obtainable in the US from a source or regularly for bid would you start with? The Nag. MP-50, Andante P-76, B&O MMC1 or MMC2, the Ortofon M20FLSuper, one of the AT carts mentions such as the AT20SLa, or other? And, which headshell would you use.
Any help from any of you guys with good systems and experince will be appreciated.

PS: on a used headshell I bought recently, came an Ortofon cartridge body, but no stylus. The housing a retangular silverish metal and the front face slopes toward the back at the bottom and the bottom slopes up toward the back. The combination mounting plate and pin plate is black (plastic?) and the pins are gold plated. There are two recesses in the top. One recess says ORTOFON DENMARK, and the other says SEVERAL PATENTS. Is there any way to identify this model and would it be worth finding a stylus for it?
Thanks in Advance
Sanlanman,
I was frustrated for years because I couldn't find a cartridge/arm/table combo that made the majority of my large LP collection sound engaging enough to me so I could enjoy the performance/artistry instead of listening to things I didn't like about the setup I had at the time.

Then after going the $$$$ route of a new high end table/arm I found out that all that money for a table/arm didn't automatically make for listening enjoyment so I bought more vintage turntables that turned out to be a very good investment if anything.

Now that I'm forvever settled on electronics and speakers I was looking for that finishing touch of the right vinyl front end or maybe 2 or 3 setups that floated my boat in different ways.

After reading pretty much this entire thread and having used MC's for some years I decided to seriously audition some of the many old MM's I already have because MC's I tried weren't vinyl heaven but one comes close. (Miyabi)
In playing with my Empire 4000 D/111 and ADC XLM MK11 I heard things I liked but no full monte.

Reasoning that these two cartridges would be happier in a lower mass arm than my SME 3009 S2 Improved, I pulled out my Thorens TD147 that served me so well back in the 90's.
Much to my amazement the Empire 4000 D/111 in that table seems to be the full monte for me but time will tell.
The ADC in that table sounds good too and adding 1/2 gram weight to the headshell, then rebalancing, made it sound even better. (smoother)

The Empire is far more dynamic if not bold in it's midrange presentation yet well balanced enough to sound smooth enough and so far it's doing everything I want, even letting me hear things I've never heard before on some LP's.

The setup has tons of PRAT so, so much for the idler drive fad as them being the only thing responsible for PRAT because the lowly belt drive TD147 is sounding pretty darn good to me like it did years ago so why did I "upgrade"?

If I hadn't have heard the Empire in that table I'd probably be happy with the ADC XLM MK11 Improved.

There's little doubt in my mind that there are some old MM/MI cartridges that are clearly worth while but we all don't like the same kind of sound and we all don't have the same equipment so it's trial and error just like with MC's BUT the old MM route is generally less expensive because most people still put a higher value on MC's, new and used.

IMHO, total system synergy to your personal sonic taste needs to take place so there are many things besides a cartridge to deal with although they are a "voicing tool." Back before cables, caps, tubes and 40 pound plinths for idler drives became a $$$$$ business, the simple and cheap way to change the sound was to buy a new cartridge so it's not an incorrect approach, maybe just not a complete one unless the associated equipment is right for you too.

Back in the day when the Grace F9E was all the rage I got one and hated it so it went back for an Ortofon 540 that pleased me at the time with the equipment/speakers I at that time.

If your speakers or RIAA comp has a dip or peak at 3KHZ then a peak or dip at 3KHZ is a plus in a cartridge so it's all a crap shoot to some degree but the better MM's do seem to stand out more.

I see your in SC too. If your ever in the Aiken area your welcome to come by to hear what I like but time will tell if the TD147/Empire is what will continue to make me happy.

I did change the phono 2 input on my preamp from 47K to 100K for the Empire because it was designed to work into a 100K decoder (quad) and that opened the sound up for sure.

This is just my experience so maybe there's some food for thought for you here?
Dear friends: Worth to own it:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Bang-Olufsen-MMC-1-PHONO-CARTRIDGE-RARE-MMC1_W0QQitemZ290373706990QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item439b9f24ee#ht_1632wt_1165

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul, I got my Grace Ruby back from Soundsmith (it took about 6 months!). Anyways, I have been listening to it and I like it better than the P-76 already. It's more lush and bigger sounding. Although a little bit more noisier. I consider myself very lucky to have 2 of the best MM cartridges. And thanks for your thread, I didn't have to spend a lot of money either.
Hi All,
I just did another 1 week cross-check between my Ortofon Windfeld and Ortofon M20FL Super. There where some questions raised whether some LOMC vs MM~MI x-checking had occurred --- well yes.

The M20FL has clearly better harmonics, better stage, same speed, and more flow, just to keep it simple. The Windfeld has *no chance* --- unless one has no ear for what makes some of the music, and confuses it with mere ~resolution~. The M20FL has that too by the way. As far as I'm concerned it's a -no contest-.
Greetings,
Hi Axel

I am sure you are hearing what you are hearing, however system setup and tonal qualities will play a major part in any ultimate musical output.

I would say that the total SS amplification chain you, Raul and others use may make the MM's sound better in your systems vc MC's which may be a bit too revealing. the tonal character of your table IMO may also make you lean towards MM sound.

Bottom line, there is clearly many ways to musical satisfaction and there is no best, only best for you.

BTW, you owe it to yourself to hear the new ortofon MC A90 - now that is a really great sounding MC and I find it very hard to believe that any MM would sound as pure and transparent to the source as this.
Downunder,
yes all you say has merit, and all I forgot to put was the always required mantra: YMMV :-)
Axel
Axel and Downunder, I have been doing an analogous comparison to Axel's, listening to the Ortofon MC7500 and the Ortofon M20FL Super. The MC7500 was in effect replaced by the Per Windfield but is different in construction. The comparison is confounded by the fact that they are on two different tts (Technics SP10 Mk2 vs Lenco/slate, respectively) and in two different tonearms (Dynavector DV505 vs RS-A1, respectively). I am using an Ayre P5Xe for an MM phono stage, and straight into my full-function MP1 for MC. Yet I think I can listen through to the differences between the two cartridges. The M20FL throws a bigger image, which I love, but I think this has a lot to do with the DV505 and the Lenco. Image size (big) is a particular forte of the Lenco. The M20FL gives a more "real" or more pleasing piano tone. I think that is actually due to the cartridge itself, probably it is tracking better in the Dyna than is the MC7500 in the RS-A1. The M20FL makes known good LPs sound fantastic, more vivid than I have ever heard them sound. Yet I cannot fault the calmer and very accurate presentation of the MC7500. Obviously, I need to find a way to eliminate the variables in order to draw truly valid conclusions...
Lewm,
it may be of interest that *ALL* M20FL super characteristics you mentioned are exactly as I find them:
- bigger image
- more "real" or more pleasing piano tone
- makes known good LPs sound fantastic
- more vivid

Note: >>> cannot fault the calmer and very accurate presentation of the MC7500, <<<

I personally fault the Windfeld for being colder and less involving. So much so, that some records sound just plain boring, though very resolved.
Playing the same LP with the M20FL brings the apparently "dead" record to life, so they can go back into my "handy", close by, collection and not one floor up in a shelve.
Greetings,
Gee guys, looks like I will have to open up my Ortofon M20FL and have a listen. sounds like it has a musical presentation vs accurate which is always nice.
Will be interesting how it sounds compared to the Nagaoka MP50 as it to my ears is the best sounding MM I have yet heard, and it is readily available.

for me at this time the MC A90 is the best cart I have heard, even thou playing around with inexpensive MM's is fun.

I guess that is the advantage with mutiple tables/arms etc.

enjoy
I'm amazed how you guys compare Ortofon M20FL Super to cartridges 10x its price. In M20FL I can hear a signature of its simple alloy cantilever, which takes nothing from its great and memorable performance. I only wish Ortofon made MI with beryllium tapered pipe back then.
Fun thread Raul, yes multiple arms, tables and cartridges however no worries anyone here catching up with you.

I just brought home a modded Technics SP 10 MK II which included a great Technics EPA-100 arm.

Before I get around to mounting a bronze arm board and Phantom on to SP 10, I would love to play around with this nice arm.
Funny how VTA on the fly seamed new to many people this decade...

Any recommendations for a MM cartridge that will go well with this Technics arm?
Siniy123,
y.s.: "I can hear a signature of its simple alloy cantilever"

Guess what? The signature of those boron cantilevers are on my list since some time, as to why ALL my higher priced MCs do sound so uninvolving.
(The A90 has EXACTLY the same motor than has the Windfeld acc. to Ortofon only a very different, stripped down body. Yes, that body also makes some of that music too.)

Boron gives you the "idea" of some more detail... it sure gives you also some messed-up harmonics - I'm pretty sure about this by now.

It's a whole subject on its own and some small cart makers have turned their backs to those boron sticks.
Go figure.
Greetings,
back in 70s and 80s I don't remember boron rods weren't used much. Mostly it was boron pipe or tapered boron pipe.
Dear Stilskin: That TT/tonearm combo by Technics is very good. The EPA-100 can match very well with the Nagaoka MP-50 but it will do fine with the Ortofon M20FL Super named here. In this case with a lower weight headshell than with the Nagaoka.

These MM/MI cartridges are really " surprising " because I try several ones with out " figure "/concern on the best tonearm for it and almost always performs great.

Other very good MM/MI example is the B&O MMC2 one.

The good news is that you can buy all them ( NOS ) right now for less than: 1.5K!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, Thank you for the recommendations, I will check them out.

This is putting FUN back into this hobby for me!
Having played ADC TRX-1 for more then 1 week I have to attest that it very fine cartridge: excellent tracker and loaded with drama. As with good drink, you will definitely remember remember last night listening session. Highly recommended.
Dear Toufu: Glad to hear that your re-tipped Ruby in on its " way " again.

Btw, for what you remember which are the differences ( is any ) between the original Ruby and this " new " re-tip that was not a true original re-tip?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.