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
Do we miss Raul and if so why? My guess is that we miss him because no other is willing to spend so much money in searh for the interesting new MM carts. We were spolied with the easy access to the carts of the month each, uh, month.
Since Raul left us I have hardly seen any new cart whatever. As critical minds we were not willing to accept his 'philosophical' opinions about learnig curves, distortions and hearing capabilities. He may have seen this as a lack of gratitude for his efforts. Looking from the Spanish perspective regarding the pride he is probably right. I miss Raul but not because of his 'carts of the month' but because I enjoyed our disputes.
Just thought I would follow up with some info on the "Strain Gauge" type carts I have known...

The first one I had was Sao Win's FET10 cart, around 1990. It came with it's own Power Supply that provided line level output. I first heard it at a dealer and it floored me at the time. It sounded exceptionally good and was probably the first cartridge system I heard that truly sounded "all of one" from bass to treble and seemed to "free up" dynamics better than the typical carts of the day (I had been messing with Dynavectors and Grados, as I recall). So of course I bought it.

Looking back, some of the FET10 benefit was that it had it's own preamp, so to speak, so that if you had an average performing phono stage (I think I had a Audible Illusions at the time) that was an improvement right there. I had to change tonearms though, I had a Well Tempered arm and it just didn't work well at all in that.

Sao told me at the time that unipiviots and the like weren't the way to go with the FET10, so I picked up a Fidelity Research FR64FX and mounted that to the Merrill heirloom table I had at the time. That combination worked a treat! I ended up selling the FET10 a few years later in a fit of stupidity...

Next; Panasonic EPC-450C II
Lewm - The owner seemed like an interesting guy. Mine is a 1959 Giulietta Spider Veloce.

Cool car Lewm...yes the owner has a horse farm with his wife nearby. I like the episode where he had to fly to Italy to get a part as it "needed to be original". :^) I've a '96 993, the last year of the air cooled that I've owned for 12 years. It reached classic car status with the insurance company 3 years ago so rates aren't as bad now. Will never be sold - god willing.

On a more serious note I hope Raul is ok and in good health.

Cheers
The eloquence of Lew is a mixed blessing. From Dostojevski,
Kant, Newton, Einstein via slate plinths, innumerable TT's/
tonerms then elecrotstatics and tubes we now reached the
domain of the (old) sport cars with special attention for
the Alfa Romeo's specimens. But the sensible Dutch always
regarded those as worthless cars (grin). We all know what
passion means but there is no way to understand this
phenomenon by others.
I first got interested in MM cartridges several months BEFORE I ever saw this thread. I was at the nearby home of a friend who posts once in a while on VA. He was running a Pickering MM, I think the TL4S (does that make sense?) on his Lenco. I went there to hear the Lenco for the first time, and I was just blown away by the quality of his phono reproduction chain, which must suggest that the Pickering was very good. It was then available on eBay for only about $45. At the time, I thought it was ridiculous to think a $45 cartridge could produce such musical accuracy, so I refrained from making the purchase. Like everyone else, I then harbored a bias in favor of MC and based on the idea that cost correlated with quality. So, when I then encountered this thread, I was primed to re-examine my prejudices. Yet, no one, not even Raul, has ever mentioned this particular Pickering. To look at it, you might conclude that it is cheap, plastic, junk. But listen to it, if you can find one these days. Other than anomalies like that, I think Raul (and many others who don't get credit) covered the gamut of vintage MM and MI cartridges over the course of these ~11,500 postings. In the end, didn't Raul "betray" us all,when he ended up declaring first that he liked SUTs (against which he consistently railed for several years) and finally that he preferred MC cartridges after all?

Here is what I think happened over time: I think there was some longstanding problem with the high gain phono section of his Phonolinepreamp that caused him to prefer the sound via the low gain phono section and thus to prefer MM cartridges. (His preamp has two discrete phono circuits, one for low output MC and one for high output MM.) Toward the end, I think he "fixed" the sonic problem with his high gain phono section and thus came to an epiphany regarding MC cartridges. In other words, it was all sound and fury signifying nothing but Raul's own personal Odyssey.

For Nandric's sake, I will now mention "Newton". He was a great guy.

Dear Geoffkait, I have no interest, and never had any interest, in latter day Alfa Romeo's. Collectible vintage cars are all that interest me, up to about 1965. The post WW2 Alfa's up to around 1962 still reflected the racing heritage and the pre-eminence of Alfa Romeo as it was prior to WW2, in both design genius and appearance. The late 50s Alfa Romeo's were way ahead of Porsches of that era in terms of engine and braking, and I can say this with authority, since I owned about 30 pre-1965 Porsches in my lifetime, up to and including a 550RS Spyder. Of course, I could shoot myself for ever selling the Spyder, but that is another story.
I dunno. Vintage Alfa's are more expensive in northern Europe than they are here in the USA. Some Dutch persons must like them.
Lewm, we discussed the Pickering Tl-4s on page 178. Don't you remember? ;)

Don really liked his. If he is around maybe he will give an update. I also purchased one. The p- mount version. I wasted my tonearm wire clips, squeezing them down. I remember liking it, a little warm, but good. I need to get the wire clip reducers. Anyone remember where to get those?
Dear Lew, First thing first. I am sorry I forget to name
Sartre. This Freud has obviously some 'points' right.
I forget not because of you but myself. I hate Hegelians.
Now about those 'northern' man. The most are blond and for
some unknown reasons very fond of brunettes which are scarce
in the north but abundant in the south more in particular in
Italy. So some of the Dutch married some of those Italian
brunnets. As is 'universaly'(?) the case man buy cars
which their wifes want. As is also 'universaly' known women
have no clue about cars. This should explain the presence of
some Alfa's in the north.
p.178. I will look it up. My friend Dave Pogue still uses his, so far as I know. I don't mean to infer that the TL4S is a giant killer; it's just good enough to have caused me to question my core beliefs re MC vs MM, before I found this thread on Audiogon.
rotflmao !!

Dutch Blonde Husband and Italian Brunette wife "without kids", take their sports car for service. While husband waits patiently in service area looking through the shop window at their "baby", the wife goes to admire the cars on the showroom floor. Afterwards on the way home she says to him, "Honey the salesperson told me that front wheel drive is much better and safer to drive than real wheel drive. Maybe we should sell our rear wheel drive car."?

Husband replies - if God wanted us to drive front wheel drive cars he would have put our feet on backwards.
Lewm kind of inspired me with his saunter down 'memory lane' and the mentioned MMs of yore...👀🎶

With two turntables, six arms and thirty odd cartridges......I have found myself cycling through a group of about a dozen loved units over the last year or so....😊
It's easy to forget those MMs which had their 'day-in-the-sun' on this Thread many years ago....😔
With memory jogged....I quickly attached the Acutex LPM420STR and the Empire 4000D/III and gave each a renewed listen...🎤🎹🎺🎸
As my system has improved since the last time I listened to these two......I can reveal that I was 'floored' by the experience....😘
Both these cartridges exhibit a rich sound full of colour and dynamics yet with an unmistakable 'accuracy' of tone and detail from top⬆️ to bottom⬇️.....which (dare I say it) makes most LOMCs I've heard, sound anaemic....😷
Storyboy,
I think you might be right. There is a finite number of great vintage MM carts and once every major manufacturer is examined, where do you go from there?
There may be one or two that fell through the cracks (was Jico MM discussed?), but the obvious answer is MCs.

For questions about stylus replacement/substitution, one would be better served at Audio Karma. The only new and interesting topic here lately, is from 3ox. Like Halcro we can revisit favorites and change rankings and/or wax poetic.

SS now makes a complete replacement for Grace Ruby and users say it's wonderful. I don't know the problem with Lew's rebuild, but I suspect it could be worked out with SS.
My apologies for instigating that exchange with the Dutchman who is really a Russian in clogs. I found his misapplication of logic mildly amusing, but I can see how you might not.
Regards,

Re Storyboy's Complaint.
There are about a dozen guys who have been posting here for several years each. By now, I feel we form a "club" of sorts, where we can sit around in this ethereal meeting room and swap stories, ideas, opinions, even if the content strays from the dead seriousness with which the thread was founded. Thus I don't really care what Storyboy or anyone else thinks of the "status" of this thread, whether it is enlightening or not, dead or alive, boring or "pathetic". If one does not like it, one can either stay away entirely or offer up something new for discussion or information that is deemed to be "not pathetic". That said, Storyboy is welcome to hang out if he so desires.
Amen!
'a club of sorts' is like a church community but because of
all those damn atheist we need to use a 'sorts' of other
name.
Lew,
This is a public forum and it's not your place to give permission to hang out. If Raul were to come back, it wouldn't be his place either. If Storyboy wants to comment on the current relevance of this thread, his comment alone is a contribution, without making further contribution.

I have no objection to discussion of vintage cars, vintage preamps or ebola, but this is an analog forum and the subject is phono cartridges. You might think this is an old boys club, but it is only to the extent that those old boys have, or might contribute further.

Have any mono carts?
Regards,
Regards, Fleib: To answer a question you didn't ask in this thread: I've both the Grace F9-E and gold bodied F9-L. Output (relative to volume) travels with the stylus assembly. The manual that accompanied the 9-L gives 3.5mV output for all F9's except the L at 5.5. Output impedance for all is 1.7k Ohms.

There are two manuals available for download at VE. Curiously one states 1.7K Ohms, the other 2.4k. Specs "may change without notice" printed at the bottom. In the cartridge Database the Ruby which was introduced at a later date is shown at 2.4k.

Lew (OT): I've a car enthusiast friend who says one needs two Alphas- one to drive while the other's in the garage. Good luck with your resto.

Peace,
Fleib, Please re-read my philosophical post. I say precisely what you say, Storyboy has a perfect right to hang out here as does anyone else. My point was that if he or anyone else finds the thread to be "pathetic", that person has the option of not hanging out here. After all, he was including your posts in his generalization. I am not sure that Storyboy equates off-topic posts with pathos, but I guess I am guilty of more off-topic posts than anyone else. So I will be the one to stay away until I have something of interest to contribute regarding MM cartridges. Meantime, I would love to find an Ortofon MC2000; if anyone….

By the way, Timel, my very first sports car was a 1967 Alfa Romeo Duetto Spider that I bought used while in med school. I drove it for 6 years in New York City, parking it only on the street in all weather and never in a garage. It was completely and utterly reliable every one of those days until I sold it.
Regards, Lewm: Offered for sale by a college classmate, a 1958 Giulietta Spider Normale, $400. I declined because a broken motor mount had been replaced with a piece of 2x4" lumber and tied down with a coat hanger. Wish I had it now!

Your F9-E rebuild--- Picked up an AT ML150 OCC & had the S. Smith optimized LC/ruby rebuild. Somewhat clinical, exceedingly accurate transient response. Diminished/moved upwards cantilever resonance is a likely suspect. Recalled from a Peter L. comment a number of years ago, (paraphrase) "Some may prefer the elliptical stylus on aluminum cantilever".

Early reviews of the F9-E referred to a forwardness in the hfs. This may account for the two figures given for output impedance, 1.7k & (later?) 2.4k.

Maybe Fleib has an opinion?

Peace,
Hi Fleib, The statement made is: 'I put forth that this
now pathetic thread be put to rest, and let you 2 take to
personal email'. You call this 'comment' and even
'contribution' without being 'contribution'. I call
this qualification without a single argument. Besides his
advice make (also) no sense . I our private emails we are
polite and kind for eacht other. A dispute make only sense
when public. To teach our 'lion' lessons is pretty arogant
from your side. But that is obviously your nature. As far
as I know your background was employee by some HIFI shop.
Greetings Timeltel,
I have one manual for six F9 models including the F, E, and L. Ruby is not included. All have impedance of 2.4K and same output except L is +2mV. I naturally assumed it has stronger magnets. Thanks for confirmation.
I also assumed this is the earlier manual. The F (line trace) is the top with response to 50K, but it seems the stylus is the only difference. There's a response graph for F taken with 100K load. Response is up about 2dB @ 20K, and 3dB @ 30K. It looks like high frequency resonance is around 30K. There is a slight treble droop centered around 8K, but it's very slight. One curious thing is capacitance load was 80pF. There is no recommendation in the specs.

If Ruby impedance is 1.7K with no drop in output, it would imply stronger magnets and less inductance. Still, it might be a good idea to keep capacitance low as possible. AT's seem best at 150pF total. This might be a little high for a Grace, don't know exactly why. Resonance seems high enough that it wouldn't matter unless excessive.

Lew,
Assuming you have azimuth correct, I think SRA and resistance load is the solution. I'd drop the rear of a 9.5" arm about 4 or 5mm, more if you have clearance and take it up from there. You might want to check alignment.
If you're running 47K you might not have to load it down, but that would be your only option for excessive brightness.
Regards
Hi Raul If you reading this please come back. I enjoyed your input i bought a AT150ANV and some other cartridges based on your recommendation. I love that cartridge.

I used to follow this thread everyday when you were posting, it appeared you got painted as the "evil genius", for your strong views, but that was what also made the thread a great read. Without your input its never been the same.
Timeltel,
I forgot to ask the specs of the ML150? I thought I had it written down somewhere, but it eludes me. The database has it listed as 2500 ohms, 4mV. It looks to have the same generator as the 170, 180 with only the cantilever being different?

Speaking of cantilevers, in a general way I think more rigidity gives more detail/exactness often at the expense of that relaxed, natural Denon type presentation. Just as you can't emphasize one extreme of the frequency spectrum without relatively affecting the other extreme, more detail can result in clinical rather than natural.

Beryllium seems to give the best results with ATs IMO. It's more flexible than boron so it's a little more like aluminum in that respect, but it's also the lightest. Was the original ML150 stylus broken?

Harold NTB,
There's a thread on Asylum about rise time. Luckydog discusses the problem with quantifying it. I thought you might be interested.

Regards,
Panasonic EPC-450C II is a strain gauge cartridge that hit the market back when 4 Channel Quad was still on the market. I believe it was based on Sao Win's work. Being a strain gauge type and not at all compatible with a conventional phono stage, it required a special box and aye, there's the rub.

My first experience with this was using a Panasonic 4 channel adaptor box that had provisions for the strain gauge (there were also a few receivers so equipped). This was indeed a compromise as the quality of the box was not good, but your only alternatives were a)Jeff Rowland made an adaptor box as one of his first products (I have never seen nor heard one of these) b) There was a tube-type box you could "homebrew" shown in the old "Tube-be or not Tube-be" book (a treasure trove of tune amp/preamp info that I wish I still had a copy of) and John Iverson's (of Electron Kinetics and Electro Research) EK-1 strain gauge preamp which I have had experience and will be the subject of my next post.
Regards, Fleib: Gold plated beryllium cantilevers for 150-180, not sure about the 140 which IIRC is an elliptical.

AT ML150 OCC:

MicroLine stylus
Output voltage 4mV / 1kHz 5cm / sec
0.95 ~ 1.55g needle pressure (optimal 1.25g)
Playback frequency 10-30,000Hz
Channel separation 30dB / 1kHz
Channel balance 1.0dB / 1kHz
Compliance 10 — 10 -6 cm / dyne
Load resistance 47kΩ
Internal impedance 2.5k
7.0g weight

Purchased with snapped cantilever. S.Smith reported a challenging repair, there was very little left to work with. The Optimized LC diamond gives definition to the need for good setup practices, perhaps as demanding as those Acutex LPM 4xx STR carts Henry recently rediscovered :).

Prace,
Fleib, As noted, I was running my re-tipped Ruby into a 100K load (not 47K) with no added capacitance (meaning capacitance due to cable and Miller effect is probably in the 100 to 150pF range). Also as noted previously, I did try both raising and lower the tonearm. Actually, to my surprise, these maneuvers had only subtle effects on the problem I perceived. The OEM Grace Ruby that I also own sounds wonderful under these same conditions. I need to consult with Peter Ledermann; perhaps he will want to have the OCL-tipped Ruby go back to him for a check-up, or perhaps he will be able to tell me that I need to use a different load R and C. Another parameter to consider is headshell mass; maybe I need a lighter mass headshell.

The caveat about changing VTA is that the cartridge is mounted in a DV505 tonearm. Thus, when one raises or lowers the arm with respect to "level", the vertical portion of the tonearm creates an angle with the horizontally pivoting part. In their instruction manual DV intimates that this is not a good idea as far as tonearm geometry; I am not really sure why, and I wonder why they warn against essentially doing what it takes to maximize VTA. The English translation of the original is not helpful on this issue. However, I can imagine that Euclid might know why not to do it.
Fleib - It is interesting to note that the high frequency 2db rise at 20k with the Grace F9 is greater than any of my moving coil cartridges ( Dynavector Karat Nova 13D, Koetsu Black ). Certainly the F9E I owned with original stylus was a little thin and anaemic sounding, a bit wiry in the top end.
Lewm, The Dynavector 505 manual I have simply says the sub arm should be parallel, the word geometry is not used. It may simply be that they believe all Dynavector cartridges should be parallel to record for optimum VTA. One possibility is that the damping imparted by the dynamic tracking force spring may be suboptimal when the arm is not level. The Dynavector 501 manual I have does not make any comment, nor does the 507.
Regards Timeltel,
The database has the 150 w/berrylium and the 170-180 w/boron. Maybe it's a mistake. I was hoping you knew inductance. I'm guessing it's 370mH, but that's just a guess based on the 150MLX - 2.3Kohm, 350mH. But they might have stronger magnets.

I think I have those specs somewhere. I'll have to look.

Thanks,
Hi Lew, I just read the 505 manual or part of it. I see what you mean. Have you ever tried it with the sub arm not horizontal? If it doesn't function properly like that, your only recourse for SRA is to use an angled shim in the headshell. Not exactly convenient for working things out.

I think it would be more productive to consider this a different cart than your other Rubies, and it might well be. Is it difficult changing resistance in whatever you're using for this? It wouldn't hurt to try and it might be the solution. I'd also experiment with a different arm. I'm bothered if I don't have VTA on-the-fly. The 505 would drive me to distraction. BTW, have you tried the stylus on one of your other bodies?

Regards,
Fleib, You wrote, "Have you ever tried it with the sub arm not horizontal?" Yes, of course, that's what happens if you raise or lower the tower at the rear, which is easily done with the DV505 and one reason why I like the tonearm. I've tried it both ways, rear end up and rear end down. As mentioned, this did not do much to ameliorate the problem. The DV505 does have VTA "on the fly" (though I would never adjust it during play). The question is how to interpret the manual as regards the possibility that optimal VTA setting might result in a nonparallel relationship between the horizontal and vertical parts of the tonearm. Since the vertically pivoting part is so short from stylus to pivot, a very tiny change in arm height at the rear adjuster has a major effect on VTA. No, I have not swapped Ruby bodies and Ruby styli. Interesting idea. Do you have a math-based reason to believe that the OCL will sound better with some load resistance other than 100K, when the standard elliptical Ruby stylus does sound excellent at that R?
Regards, Fleib. Had the manual downloaded, lost when the magic smoke escaped from my previous laptop. Found these specs elsewhere, seem to be from reliable sources.

ML140-170 OCC: Coil impedance 2.5 kOhm @ 1kHz.
Inductance: 380 mH @ 1kHz.

ML180 OCC: Coil impedance: 1.4 kOhm @ 1 kHz
Inductance: 240 mH @ 1kHz.

Cantilever for 170/180, gold spluttered boron pipe, beryllium rod for the 140/150.

Raul wrote of the ML180 in this thread, he thought highly of it.

Peace,
Lew, Interesting arm. The sub arm is like the Souther linear tracker. I see no reason other than tracking warps, why you can't stray from maintaining perfectly horizontal arm tube. As mentioned previously, the SRA orientation of the OCL tip might not be in agreement with original F9, and the tip itself might have a more forward orientation. I can't confirm the later, but people have reported such.

I can't give you a mathematical reason for loading down, other than it's your only option for brightness with respect to LCR. Inductance is probably around 300 - 325mH, but adding capacitance will not help. A cart with lower high frequency resonance would normally get brighter as that resonance is lowered into the treble region, but that's not the goal anyway. LCR manipulation is specific to mechanical response and everything except playing with resistance is contraindicated. Mechanical response could be different with a different cantilever and tip.

There is a quasi-mathematical reason to try loading and stylus swapping. Albert Einstein said, insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results. If I remember correctly this is a NOS body or something like that? It could be a dud. You have a couple of good exemplars, so..... you could see what it takes to get results with a known entity.

Regards,
Regards Timeltel, Thanks for the specs, most interesting.
It seems that the neighborhood of 240mH is the practical limit for AT inductance lowering. Beyond that it gets too bright for the mandatory 47K load recommendation, but that doesn't entirely explain Signet.
Did you ever have a TK9Ea or 9LCa ? 550 ohms imp. 85mH tapered beryllium.
The 10ML also has 85mH. When new the 10ML II could make your ears bleed. Just wondering if you've ever messed with one of these?

Regards,
The issue with the OCL-modified Ruby is not so simple as to label it only "bright", a character that can indeed be tamed by adjusting VTA, in most cases. I would say there is more to it than that; but now it has been so long since I listened to it that I have to start over in my assessment. But most assuredly you are right that it is reasonable to play with all possible parameters of load and SRA.
Hi Fleib,

I'm not sure about the Professor....but I've "messed" with the Signet TK10ML....and your description of "ear-bleeding" is apt....😱 👀
It was one happy day when I packed and posted this impostor to another unsuspecting victim....😜

Of happier experiences.....I recall you recently bought a Signet MR5.0Lc...❓😎
I've just revisited mine on a Yamamoto HS-1AS wood headshell....loaded at 40K Ohms and 100pF capacitance...and I find it delicious...😘

Regards
Dover, Good point. The warning may simply relate to the possibility that the VTF will change if the vertical and horizontal parts of the arm are not plane parallel. That's no big deal to fix. In any case, I did ignore the warning and have tried changing VTA, which obviously requires one to violate the "rule" they put forth.
Hi Lew,
It seems to me that VTA/SRA has more to do with harmonics and loading is more about bright/dull. Of course they're interrelated. Wondering what conclusions await.

Regards,
Hi Dover,
The Koetsu Black is within 2dB, 20 - 20K ?
That's the Goldline? The older Black seemed to have more bass than + 2dB, made it sound "mellow/lush". Their redesign really made a difference.

The Ruby was loaded at 100K and that's less rise than most MCs. I never owned one, but it seemed a little forward at first listen. In that respect one has an advantage with loading a MM.

Regards,
Hi Nandric,
You must have been angry when you wrote your last post because it's semi coherent. Once again you have me saying things I didn't say. Yes, I was somewhat embarrassed by that last set of exchanges between you and I on a public forum. Now you want to start again? Why is this nonsense worthy of everyone's time?

In the past you called me a clerk and now I'm arrogant, an arrogant ex clerk I suppose. Well, I know what I know and I know I never worked as a clerk. So what does that make you, mistaken? I worked in two different high end stores and was the "turntable guy" and the record buyer in probably the busiest high end store in the US. Besides working all day with record players I did such things as calling Scotland and buying out the Lyrita inventory. Now you know part of it, but who cares? This ended 25 years ago, why is this an issue? I was also cofounder and vice president of American Hybrid Technology. You can still buy the same phono stage, only now it's called Walker.

I also took a couple of logic courses in college. I might not be a logician but I know some faulty logic when I read it. I'm asking you to cease further name calling and personal attacks. When I said you are a lawyer and skilled at persuasion, or something to that effect, you took it as an insult. It was a compliment. Some of our most revered people like Abraham Lincoln were lawyers.
Storyboy was right. This BS is inappropriate. If you have further problems with me not concerning cartridges, send me an email.

Regards,
Regards, Fleib: I've both the TK-9LC & AT-22. Both are able to capture nuance and detail and well suited to orchestral and chamber music. ML styli sometimes seem overly analytical, much prefer Shibata, HE, or preferably, LC on beryllium. Highly regarded by some, I've not sought the TK10ML.

Halcro--- also have Signet 5.0 Basic and 5.0E carts, they seem a little on the "hot" side, especially the Basic. After your 5.0Lc comments, wondering now why I've not been tried either with an ATN155Lc stylus? Thanks, Henry.

Peace,
Regards Professor (Timeltel),

Ahhh....the trusty ATN155Lc...😜
Probably my favourite stylus assembly of all time...😎👍
It should work a treat especially if you mount the cartridge in either the wood Yamamoto or Ortofon LH8000 which I know you love....😀

I've found that arm parallel (or ever so slightly down) works a treat🎶
The 'highs' with this cartridge are the most delicate, transparent and ethereal I have ever heard....so I can readily understand how it may sound "hot" with anything but the BEST set-up....😖
Perseverance will be well repaid I hope.....good luck...😎👍

Regards
Regards Timeltel, Halcro,
I bought the TK10ML II new in the '80s before I knew anything about loading. My MM phono input was 47K and I could select from three capacitance settings which seemed to do nothing with this cartridge. I played with VTA, checked alignment etc. I think I sold it before it was even broken in, a decision I now regret. How could this cart have response on test reports that looked like a ruler line, and sound like this?

The AT22 - 25 and Signet 9 and 10 series all had 85mH inductance! Dlaloum tells me they had toroidal type coils and were sort of experimental TOTL types.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=88878.800

"The AT22-25 and TK9/10 were a generation earlier, they were more expensive to make due to having true torroidal construction... all the rest of the VM series have always used para-torroidal design - so the earlier generation were magnetically superior - but the difference may have been very minor.

The shorter cantilever on the ATML series made a bigger difference I think, than the torroidal structure on the earlier series...

Seems to me the ATML180 is up there as one of the all time greats.

My own measurements of the TK9 show a noticeable midrange trough (not a bad one, but not the best I have seen either) - which is caused (I think) by a combination of magnetic losses and cantilever flex losses - the low inductance is reflected in the high end rise to a resonance beyond the audio range (cannot recall right now the frequency - would have to look up my measurements).

The higher inductance of the ATML allows it to achieve a flatter frequency response at the high end - would love to get my hands on one to measure - and see what the midrange trough looks like... I have a feeling it will/would do better than the earlier series or the AT150 - mostly due to the shorter cantilever."

Low inductance carts are generally harder to load, but have great potential. All thing being equal, a shorter cantilever will have a higher resonant frequency. The Grace F9F has about the same HFR as a 6mm boron cantilever.
Higher inductance MMs are voiced so that electrical resonance (LCR) moves HFR to a frequency that compliments response. If a MM has extremely low inductance, playing with capacitance loading is fruitless, but potential for transparency and resolution is high.

I recently purchased a Signer MR 5.0ML. This series has the same stylus fitment as the current 100/120 series, but the plastic stylus holder is a little taller and must be trimmed slightly to use on a 440/150.
I tried the cart at 50K and 47K and it was decidedly uninvolving, underwhelming. I didn't expect much because DC was out of spec and it was inexpensive. Luckily, the stylus still has some life and sounds great on my 440. The stylus is beryllium/ML. I bought it for the stylus and got lucky.
The MR 5.0 entire series has the same generator as the 440. For years this was the go-to motor for many ATs. Carts like the 160 have the same motor, and numerous others.

Regards,
Hi, Halcro: I'd tried the 5.0 with an AM20 (3 x 7 nude elliptical), not sure why the 155Lc never made it to the 5.0?

Fleib: The Signet 5.0 carts (from Signet spec sheet) are 550 mH & 750k Ohm, 5mV output for all. "Para" denotes alteration or modification. Current AT carts with "Para"toroidal coils are the 150MLx, 440MLa, 120e and 100e.

That 440MLa--- picked one up when they were introduced. Like your TK10ML, perhaps five hours on it. 4mV & 3200 Ohm output inductance with a noticeably bright midrange. (Available.)

Peace,
Hi Timeltel,
I guess the database threw me another curve. 550mH and impedance 750Kohm?? Is that a typo?

The 5Ea, 7Ea, 7LCa are all 5mV, 550mH, 800DC,
900 impedance. That's from a Signet spec sheet. Apparently nice relationship between DC and impedance. Impedance is resistance with reactance figured in. Reactance includes the affects of inductance or capacitance.

The 440 OCC is 5mV, 490mH, 790DC, 3200 impedance. The MLa is 4mV, everything else the same. 150MLX - 4mV, 2.3K impedance.
Looking at the relationship between DC and impedance is confusing. One would think the TK7 with more inductance would have greater impedance than the 440 or 150. Impedance is specific to 1KHz though, which could make a difference?
They might have changed the way they calculate impedance?
Clearaudio only lists DC and they call it impedance.

The 440 has a cantilever resonance around 16KHz which reinforces a rising high end and tends to give an unfortunate brightness loaded at 47K or more. I got acceptable response loaded at 32K, 150pF. I tried a 140LC stylus and no discernible difference. It sat on a shelf until I tried a 152MLP (beryllium/ML) stylus which transformed it with very nice performance at 47K.

My sample of the MR5.0 is nearly 830DC in one channel. Is that spec 750DC?

Regards,
Regards, Fleib: Off to a dinner engagement last night so a hurried post. Apologies.

The Signet 5.0 stats were from a stored download, a search turns this up, post #4:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=577672

A few to add to AT's paratoridal coil carts: 5v, 7v & ANV150.

Peace,
Thanks Tom,
780DC is pretty close to those other Signets.
I think virtually all AT V magnets are paratoroidal. It's the TK9, 10, and AT22 - 25 that are supposed to be true toroidal.
The difference is in the way they are wound. Toroidal are donut shaped and the wire is wound from inside to outside, instead of around the outside of a circle. I don't know the difference in windings between these toroidal and paratoroidal.

There's an interesting interview here by Roy Gregory:
http://www.symmetry-systems.co.uk/Images/pdfs/Michel-Reverchon.pdf

Michel Reverchon talks about phase. Specifically, the need for phase integrity and extended bandwidth. There are implications for all kinds of music reproduction including phono, but that's for another day.

Regards,
I was thinking, there might not be much interest in phase as it relates to a phono cartridge. People seem to want cart recommendations and have little interest in technical matters so I'll just say this:
I base my conclusions on Ortofon measurements of phase in phono carts as appeared in an Audio mag article in 1983. These are actual measurements, not theory, and that's why most EEs get it wrong. Phase shift is determined by mechanical properties, high frequency resonance and mechanical damping. Electrical resonance only modifies this in MMs and has no affect in MCs.
http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=33679

The thing is, if you consider this in "ultimate" terms, our older records were mastered using tape and phono carts to check SQ. Perhaps that helps explain playback preferences?

Regards,
Fleib,
Thanks for posting the link to the article on phase response in MC's/MM's.
It does go a long way to explaining differences of opinion, listing preferences and system attributes will play a significant role.
Here is an interesting video that highlights similar issues around phase preservation, and its impact on sound reproduction - although the video is 20 minutes it is well worth a look.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgK87tmRVeY
Hi Dover,
Nice little primer on harmonics. Energy storage in speaker cables? Seems to be more about amplitude than phase, but I guess it could be both if they talk about arrival time. I didn't watch the whole thing. As Lebowski might have put it, Dude doesn't abide passive electronics in speaker cable. A zobel for ultrasonics might be the only exception and that could be considered a speaker crossover addition.

There's a better solution IMO. Put your amp between your speakers and use short speaker wire. A long interconnect is easier to optimize. It doesn't carry the current that speaker wire does. Interconnect still has capacitance and inductance, but with the exception of phono cables, I think it would tend to be less easily compromised in long runs.

Regards,