Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas
Dear Dgob: What I'm appreciating is the very good Technics cartridge design and build quality that IMHO is second to none. Even this Technics facts the stand alone model is superior.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,

I am truly pleased to see that you are appreciating the merits of an integrated cartridge. I am comtemplating having VdH touch up my Glanz G5 and G7 cartridges but need more time to be fully ingrained in what they do in their current and original state. It would then be interesting to compare them to my VdH treated Technics: not necessarily listening for 'a better/best' so much as 'to the differences'.

Thanks for the information and

Happy listening
Dear friends: Yesterday I had the opportunity to heard in my system the Technics EPC-100C MK4.
This is the same model ( same cartridge design characteristics ) than my P-4 mount one but comes integrated with own Technics headshell.

Like the P-4 model this one exude Technics quality on its build. It is on the heavyweight with 18grs+.

This sample was re-tiped by VdH last January and is fully broken.

Own it the Technics EPC-P100C MK4 I was not waiting for any " surprise " with its " twin ".

I mounted on the Grace G-945, almost level but positive VTA/SRA, 1.25grs and ususal impedance/capacitance.

I follow my recording tracks testing process followed by almost the same recordings I used on the Technics EPC-P100CMK4 review.

It is more easy and less boring speak on the main differences between the " twins " than in its similar quality performance characteristics.

It is a great cartridge that shows a little less transparency on the highs, with little less definition on the bass and with little less energy on the low mid-bass and seems to me that the 4P-mount is a little better tracker.
All this performance differences are against the top 10+ Technics twin.

Please don't take these " differences " like a sensible " drawback ", the cartridge has first rate performance and I know for sure that any one ( but the happy owners ) of you will be pleased with. A top 10 ranking level.

Btw, this Technics integrated model is more " easy " to find than the 4P-mount model.

Almost nothing more to add other that was is on the Technics original review.

regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Headsnappin: A little late.
Yes my Grace G-945 comes in that way but I'm using an external tonearm wire directly to the preamp. Lewm advise could help you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I wonder if a RF/EMI/TI shield will make a positive difference with my Exclusive P3 & P10?

I hear absolutely no RFI or anything at the moment 0- in fact the P3 is significantly quieter than my TW Raven AC-3

Dude,

Can you keep it down please...you are destroying my chance of landing a P3.;)

BTW i've been playing my Azden on my slated SP10 Mk2 with a Micro MA505Mk3 arm over the last week and after more than 10 hours, i think it's really started to shine.
I compared it to an old Technics EPC205MK3 with non standard stylus( Jico Sas ) on the same arm and found the Azden to have more tonal weight and natural sounding high, the later sounding a bit bright in comparison.
Dear Downunder, Best to go to M Percy website or to Texas Instrument website and search on "TI Shield". (The TI stands for Texas Instruments.) It's about as thick as the lid of a tin can, easy to work with. It is said to be superior to ERS cloth for soaking up RFI. it's a valid question whether such a shield is worthwhile for any and every DD turntable. The L07D has a platter mat (aka "platter sheet") that weighs over 5 lbs and is made of stainless steel, and it sits on an alu platter. You would think that this mat and platter would suffice to shield the cartridge, but there does seem to be a subtle improvement with the extra shield added. I haven't tried this with any of my other DD turntables.
Hmmm

I wonder if a RF/EMI/TI shield will make a positive difference with my Exclusive P3 & P10?

I hear absolutely no RFI or anything at the moment 0- in fact the P3 is significantly quieter than my TW Raven AC-3

How thick are the sheets Lew?
Ddriveman, Yes. I use "TI Shield", sold in sheets by Michael Percy. I bought a 12x12" piece and cut it in the shape of an LP, then inserted it between the platter and the platter sheet. I have listened to the table with and without the shield in place. IMO, there is a discernible difference; the sound is a bit "cleaner", and the soundstage is bigger, with the shield in place. I raised the question of whether this shield should be grounded, on Tweaker's Asylum, and got a plethora of conflicting responses. So I made no special attempt to ground it. The TI shield is coated with a clear glaze, so I assume it is electrically fairly isolated from the platter and platter sheet.
Lewm,

For your L0-7D, do you use RFI and EMI sheets between the platter and the mat as suggest on the L-07D website?
I think you can get a male DIN plug made by Cardas from Michael Percy Audio in Nevada City, California, USA. I am sure there are many other sources for such a product, as well.
Raul, does your grace arm have a din with the pins on the armcable, not in the tonearm? I have a grace 707 and the pins are on the armcable and wondered if anyone had a suggestion for an armcable of that type or where I can get a plug to make one?
In my own experience, while the Ortofon M20FL is still a keeper, I did detect a slight upper mid-range grain which I do not hear with the Azden YM-P50VL. Perhaps I did not spend enough time with the Ortofon, and maybe I just happened to nail the setup on the Azden from the start; but it is definitely more resolving, as musically pleasing, and I do not detect any of that slight grain I heard with the M20FL. I still prefer the Ortofon to my Zyx Fuji, but the Azden appears to be another step up.
Dear friends: Looking to VE site I found that the Grace tonearm pictures on the G-945 are similar to my Grace tonearm that I was thinking was the G-940.

I don't know for sure which are the differences ( other than different counterweight shape. ) between the G-940 and the G-945 that's the real one I own.

This post only to clarify about.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Right now I'm testing the Elac and Nagatron cartridge performance.

These are my findings on the Elac:

as you know Elac is a very old German company that betwwen other things designed and design cartridges. I understand they start with cartridge design on the early 60's so around 50 years ago!!!, certainly they know something about.

My Elac cartridge is the 896ESG H24Sp that was the top of the line along the 796 HSp Jubilaüm.

Both cartridges use boron cantilever with VdH 1 stylus. There are other three Elac models that use VdH 2 stylus that was a step down on VdH stylus level, all other Elac ( 795,794,792, etc etc. )cartridges use elliptical stylus shape and that's why in the cartridge denomination always appear an E.

The main differences on those top of the line Elac cartridges are: compliance where in mine is 24cu and the 796 30cu and in output where mine is 4.5mv against 5.6mv on the Jubilaüm.

The 896 cartridge specs are not " spectacular " like other MM/MI cartridges, frequency response: 10 to 30khz, channel balance 28/20 at 1k/10K.

I mounted in the Grace G-949 with a Lustre magnesium ( 10grs. ) headshell, no antiskating, no stylus guard, 1,5grs on VTF, 100K load impedance with no added capacitance and with a " high " positive VTA/SRA.
My cartridge sample is a second hand unit.

The overall quality performance is really friendly: you like it very fast, the music flow easy with good tone where the bass when asking for is not only deep but with very good pitch, resolution, and very low overhang. At the other frequency extreme the HF are all there are extended with out overbright or excess on shine, it is not soft or reticent but maybe a little low on HF energy. The mid-bass/midrange is very good too with great " feeling " on the cartridge performance. I like it.

I like it so much that this will pass to the VdH " touch " cartridge waiting list.
This Elac cartridge is worth to have it and as " ugly " it is ( IMHO ) as good performer it is.
Not easy to find but you and me know that sooner or latter some Elac samples could appear over the net on sale.

IMHO belongs to the level 8 on the cartridge quality performance ladder.

I need more days for the Nagatron 350 report not only because it shows me something especial but because in the next 48 hours I will put my hands on the Technics 100C integrated headshell cartridge that I will have only for a few hours for test it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
The L07D is just the quiet-est turntable I have ever owned. This is not to say that there is any audible noise, rumble or other, to be heard with the Lenco or the SP10 Mk2. But when you listen to the L07D, you can sense the lowered noise floor in the form of a better sense of 3D, very slightly more articulate bass response, and airy high frequencies. The Lenco might give a very slightly bigger soundstage, but the L07D beats my other dd tables in that regard. I could easily live with the Lenco if I had to economize.

No insult intended, but the L07D is way out of the league of the SL1200, IMO of course. This is as it should be given the cost differential and the design goals. Kenwood was looking to build their ultimate product, whereas the SL1200 is a wonderful Chevrolet. It would be more fair to compare the L07D to the SP10 Mk3. The tonearm wiring from cartridge to preamp with the L07D is pretty much old school, with many mechanical junctions in the signal path. I look forward to even better results after I "fix" that.

Just to write something here that is actually on-topic, I have decided that the Azden is indeed a great cartridge. It definitely digs "more" out of an LP than does my Koetsu Urushi (but the KU has a certain je ne c'est quoi that the Azden misses), and I am going to guess the Azden will prove to be superior to the Ortofon M20FL Super, based on the testimony of most of you who have heard both. But I do need to re-visit the M20FL. Then I need to move on; I have amassed quite a collection of vintage cartridges, by my standards at least. (Can't compete with Raul in finding these things or buying them.)
Hi Lewm,

You like it better than your tricked out Lenco?
That Kenwood is a direct drive right? Interesting.
In what ways is the Kenwood better than the Lenco, very curious to know. I have 3 SL1200mk2 and 3 heavy platter Lencos, when compared to the Lencos (all stock) the Technics just seem speed unstable. So your opinion on the Kenwoon has piqued my interest :)
Thank you.
I plan to try it on my Kenwood L07D, which as a system ((turntable/platter/tonearm/plinth) is the best thing I've heard yet in my home.
Lew, you well might be right re the Orto M20FL Super. I gave up with its sound on the P3 before spending a LOT of time adjusting the damping or trying another headshell. It probably would sound like butta if I put it onto my Raven, which is a little softer,forgiving.

too manjy carts, not enuf time :-)
Dear DU, Never heard that edginess you ascribe to the Orto M20FL Super. Mine is "like butta" in that frequency domain. Just goes to show how set-up and ancillary equipment can affect the outcome.
Hi headsnappin

the empire 1080Lt is a good sounding cartridge and for the price it is excellent. Compared to say the Ortofon M20FL Super I find the 1080LT to have a better tonal evenness top to bottom and good transparency. the M20FL I have found always has a slight edge in that 2-4k region which i find a bit irritating to listen to.
Whereas my ELAC ESG 795 E 40 is clearly brighter than both, but has a flow and musicality that is infecious. the brightness is up high in the treble region, so it does not really irritate that sensitive area of your hearing.

IMO, well worth the price. does sound better Arse up as well.
Dear friends: Along the Acutex/Technics I'm testing an Elac cartridge and someday next week a friend of a friend that comes to México city will bring with him a Technics non-P-mount but headshell integrated sample and I will have the opportunity to test and enjoy for a few hours.

In the mid-time I'm still enjoying the Acutex but I need to go on.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Siniy123: Maybe you are right about your Empire because in an old Audio magazine ad it comes that MC along the Empire MM Azden YM50 clone.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,
Piezo Japan patented so called "tri-pole" system that goes into ADC TRX series, Azden "flat nose", Piezo YM series.

This is one heck of great company. I strongly suspect that my marvelous Empire MC-5 cartridge (it is MC) has Japanese origins and not Swiss (Benz).
Dear friends: I was thinking these last days ( again and again ) on the quality level performance in the Technics EPC-P100CMK4 and the Acutex 315III STR and what I was thinking is mainly where are similar and where different and the importance of those " where " and how ner/far are those differences and I'm asking me: hey could be the other way around? that people could like more the Technics trade-offs against the Acutex?

Both cartridges have so high quality performance level and are more similar than differents that here maybe was/is a little unnfair to put one cartridge over the other on quality performance level.
It is true that the Technics has not that " live energy " that the Acutex shows ( no cartridge I know has it. ) but it is true too that the Technics has other characteristics that the Acutex can't shows at same level.

Unfortunatelly I can't edit the Acutex review but through this post I want to make a correction ( My mistake, the Technics deserve that correction. ) in the quality performance level of the Acutex in the cartridge ladder level performance.

The Acutex 315III STR belongs at 10+ ( not 10++ like I posted. ) level sharing this position along the Technics EPC-P100CMK4: Honor to whom deserve Honor!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Siniy: I understand ( please correct me if I'm wrong. ) that Azden was/is part of Piezo and build the Acutex and some Empire cartridges as other cartridges like the ADC. Azden works for many time like a cartridge OEM.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I see a connection between ADC TRX series, Azden, Acutex and Piezo cartridges - the manufacturer is Japan Piezo company.
Dear Waynefia: IMHO you can try those Ortofon MM/MI cartridges with your Jelco 250, it works fine.
Please do it and then comeback to us and share your experiences on those cartridges.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: By the moment I want to enjoy the LPM315 and after that follow testing other cartridges I want like: Signet TK10, AT 24, AT 160, AKG P100, Empire D4000, Nagatron 350, Elac 896, Grace F9 Ruby, Micro Acoustic 630. So it's a long road.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Driveman: I unfortunately don't have in hand now and I need to try it again. I will report on it.

I know is very good and will be along that cartridge top group.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,

How would you compare the AKG P100ES, one of your previous favourites to the Technics EPC-P100CmkIV, the Acutex LPM315III-STR and the Azden YMP50VL?
Dear friends: Very good and fair price opportunity:
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1278177734&/ADC-ZLM-Improved

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " I suspect you know all this already. " +++++

yes I know it. Next week I will receive a NOS LPM 315IIISTR.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards, Raul: I can understand why you enjoy the Acutex LPM 315. Listening to the LPM 310E-111/M312STR hybrid, comparison to the elliptical reveals the superior quality of the STR stylus, enough so I that have found several of the M315STR-111 for replacements. A gentleman at Vinyl Engine has a small supply and was very helpful. Although he assures me the styli are interchangable in the "long nose" line, v.111, I know for certain the 41x version will not exchange. There is evidence that the 21x line is also dimensionally different, the stylus insert may have a Shure-like quill. The 412STR seems slightly more articulate than the 312 but consequently not quite as timbrally rich.

He has only a few. Cartridge bodies are more common and show up at that auction site from time to time. From the specs I think it probable that the stylus is responsible for the upgrades between models, as in the Orto. OM series. For those interested, if you search Acutex at VE, you should be able to deduce the source. Raul, you are so sharp I suspect you know all this already.

To refresh an earlier post here, the entire catalog can be viewed at:

http://www.turntableneedles.com/search.asp?keyword=acutex&search=GO

Find the M210-11E at the bottom right, click and scroll down to Catalog.

These stylii are rare, the 312 and 315 models will not last and the gentleman was in the process of rebuilding his web site and adjusting prices but agreed to send them at his original "hobbyist" price. I doubled my request. The M315STR-111 is nearly unobtanium now, when these few are gone, well, they're gone. In our communications, he also recommended the M320STR stylus but is not willing to release any of the few he has but is considering it.

Raul, as I understand you have the previous square bodied 320STR, should you find the TOTL "improved" version superior to the "long nose" 315, you may soon be crowning a new king.
Timeltel -- Certainly, I agree with you. If my tonearm allowed for on the fly VTA adjustment I would probably do it for some if not all of my listening. Unfortunately, it does not, so I set VTA using a 180 gram LP, and I live with the compromise on records that are slightly thicker or thinner.

Enjoy!
Lewm, I did not review Acutex but only added an anecdote from a prospector who found one.

Perhaps JB0194(who has a good collection of Pickering/Stanton) will comment further, but yes I am enjoying Pickering XSV3000 retipped with NOS D3000SP stereohedron/quad stylus. XSV displaced Empire 999X/EX on Terminator linear arm. The stylus is still settling in with 75K loading, 1.2g(with brush removed), and slightly negative VTA. This is an energetic & resolving cartridge with excellect imaging and spatial characteristics-- possibly owing to a slight bump in mid-treble as noted by magazine reviews back in the day. It has better LF control than Empire, and is among the several great MM/MI cartridges that split the difference between MM sense of involvement and MC detail. HF is revealing, but I am hoping the treble relaxes a bit and develops refinement. In overall character this one may be closest to P-76, but with better separation & detail.

The quiddity is that my example has output well below spec and more like .5mV-1mV. This is not so bad, as it enables use both with MM and MC phono stages. I don't know if the lower output is related to the cartridge body or the D3000SP stylus.
Dave and I communicate frequently. He is liking the Pickering XSV3000 quite a bit. I did not see his review of the Acutex.
Dear Lewm: Please read the Acutex review and find what Dgarretson found.

The Technics is more hard to find than Acutex. If you really want the " last " analog source the bets one IMHO is this Acutex, so if you make your work I think you can find it.
Forget about the Astatic, Glanz or whatever: here and now IMHO Acutex is The One.

I never give up but you seems to me that already give up before begin the Acutex quest ?????

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: From an after market stylus replacement yes I prefer VdH.

Btw, before you pull the triger on stylus replacement IMHO take it your time with that almost MC cartridge and then decide if its worth on the subject. I own the 981 low output and IMHO can't compare with the best other cartridges in the MM/MI alternative but like always maybe you like it more: who knows? till you test it.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, Do you have an opinion on the LP Tunes stylus assembly vs van den Hul rebuild? I guess you would favor vdH, because I know you do use them a lot, but if you know anything about the LP Tunes stylus, that would be of interest too.

The Acutex, like the best Glanz and the Astatic MF100, is a brand or type I have never seen for sale. Anyway it will take me a year or more to form opinions of what I already own.
Dear Lewm: Till you find the humble Acutex 315III STR.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I was lucky enough (IMO) to win a Stanton 980LZS cartridge on eBay last night. The seller says the cantilever is "straight" and that the stylus looks to be in good shape, but I am prepared for the worst. Does anyone (Raul?) know anything about the following replacement stylus, which is for sale on LP Tunes?

http://www.lptunes.com/Replacement-for-Stanton-D-98S-D-98S-D98S-stylus-p/stad0098s.htm

If I need it, should I consider buying this non-original but expensive replacement stylus, or should I send the original stylus assembly off to van den Hul or some other shop for rebuild?

Funnily enough, this is NOT a cartridge you can feed into your MM phono stage; it has low output even for an MC. But I have a wonderful sounding MC phono stage, and I have been wanting to audition one of these "LOMM" cartridges ever since Raul started this thread and I became aware (again) of the virtues of MM/MI designs. This is my LAST cartridge purchase; I promised myself.
Dear friends: Well, the Timeltel " pressure " asking to try one of my Acutex cartridges give me the opportunity to heard the humble LPM 315III STR model.

What a fantastic and so unique cartridge. This MM/MI analog source alternative is IMHO an endless experience of great " gem " discoveries.

I never imagine that in my " stock " of cartridges I could have a cartridge that can/could surpass the greatness of the Technics EPC-P100C MK4 and this Acutex did/do it.

This is my new " The Best " and with a solid 10++ level in the cartridge quality performance ladder, just amazing!!!

You can read and see it the Acutex in the cartridge review here:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ranlg&1272832599

As always your comments are welcome.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Well I wanted to try some of these MM/Mi carts. on a Jelco SA-250 S shaped standard arm, but I see that the arm is heavy mass arm at 20g. If you believe the resonance tables, the MM/MI carts I wanted to use won't work. Actually it seems to leave out quite a few. I wanted to try for instance VMS-20 E MkII which I have and nOS stlus are available, and also try a M 20FL. So I never really checked into all this until reading around this thread. I am surprised this jelco arm is such a high mass. Even the straight model is 18 g.
Dear Raul,
Here it is:

http://www.vinylengine.com/twisting-your-cartridge-headshell.shtml

I think instead of using the term "tracing distortion" as Seb does, the better term is "tracing error", because we don't know that these angles translate into distortion in any linear way.
Regards, Raul: RE. Effective length, pivot to spindle, cartridge alignment.
Well said. Presuming the pivot to spindle dimension is correct and the effective length is accurate, I cannot see why alignment assumes such mythical proportions of difficulty. Either you have distortion or not. If so find the cause and fix it. It's all front, back, left or right with some up and down in between. I don't see how it could be easier.
Dear Lewm: Could you post the VE link?

Thank you.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hello, Strat1117: Agree with all the above, one exception. VTA/SRA. On the fly VTA with the EPA tonearm systems make adjustment so simple, obsession overrides pragmatism and cartridge changes demand it. Mysteriously, the antique and difficult to adjust Infinity Black Widow hardly ever needs resetting. They just don't make them like that anymore.