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
Siniy123, What is the "signature" of the alloy cantilever? Can you put it into words for me? I don't even know what metal or metals are used in the cantilver; a search for the information on Google turns up nothing. Apparently Ortofon stopped making the FL stylus assembly some many years ago. The replacement assembly they now recommend is the one for the E version. Just wondering.
Dear Downunder: ++++ " I would say that the total SS amplification chain you, Raul and others use may make the MM's sound better in your systems vc MC's which may be a bit too revealing. " +++++

this is at least the second time that you post in similar way and IMHO I think that some way or other you have a misunderstood or not a precise information on the subject, let me put my thoughts about:

first I don't want to create a controversy on SS against tubes or other electronic alternative designs, so I will speak in a " general " way:

IMHO as more accurate and neutral ( lower distortion/colorations/noise. ) is an audio design as more resolution and revealing performance on the source quality.

No, the MC are not more " revealing " but has a higher distortions ( due too many factors like tracking distortion where the MM/MI are a lot better or its high frequency ringing, additional gain stages, etc, etc. ) and in audio systems that are more accurate those high distortions comes out.
In a less accurate audio systems those distortions are hide through the less resolving and more " colored " system.

So, IMHO what Axelwhal, me and others are hearing is precisely that: are " nake " it the real LOMC quality performance where I agree the top MM/MI has one step a head.

Donwunder, for many many years the King ( LOMC cartridges ) was alone with no one and nothing that can/could challenge it. Ours audio systems and ears were totally equalized to LOMC ones, the audio system set up in all our home systems were made for an overall set up right on target for and only for: LOMC cartridges, even the phono stages almost all were designed to cope not the MM/MI needs but the specific ones for LOMC cartridges.

It is a huge merit that with all these big disadvantages the humble MM/MI cartridges performs so well.

Your system goes around LOMC cartridges, you don't made the system set up for MM/MI's.
What if your set up was made specific for MM/MI's? do you think that your MP-50 could performs better that what you are hearing? do you think that if your phono stage was designed to cope the specific eeds of your MM/MI cartridges what you are hearing can/could improve?

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

I have to disagree with your statement. IMHO certainly is the best ( everything the same ) and in the case of MC and MM/MI these ones are a head ( the best. )

The fact that you are not hearing at its best the MM/MI cartridges you own does not means that these cartridges are not better of what you are hearing, it is only that these cartridges are showing ( through its performance level ) the limitations of your system due that your system overall set up don't match its specific needs: that's all.

Anyway, even in those not favorable conditions ( one way or the other ) you are enjoying the quality performance of these MM/MI cartridges

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul states "No, the MC are not more " revealing " but has a higher distortions ( due too many factors like tracking distortion where the MM/MI are a lot better or its high frequency ringing, additional gain stages, etc, etc. ) and in audio systems that are more accurate those high distortions comes out.
In a less accurate audio systems those distortions are hide through the less resolving and more " colored " system".

So basically, everyone who hears what you hear has a resolving system, knows exactly how to set up MM's to perfection and so can clearly hear their innate superiority over those silly expensive MC's which, just to ensure all is right within their world they also know how to set up to perfection so that they are able to hear the obvious imperfections of those same MC's. No measurements needed to support this view, it's just obvious.

Everyone who doesn't hear what you hear or disagrees with you has a low resolution, highly colored system, doesn't know how to set up MM's or presumably anything else and so has to make do with highly distorted signals from ridiculously expensive MC's to trick themselves into thinking they are hearing something approximating real music. They never actually do this, however because they are not using fully optimized MM's and so can never hear the ultimate truth from those LP's of theirs even if their system didn't suck. Which it does because otherwise they would be using a MM. Circularity of argument is intended just is case there are any philosophers out there.

Has that just about got it?
Dear Phaser: Not exactly, maybe I don't explain in the right way. I will try it again:

Downunder states for the second time that SS goes better with MM/MI cartridges and LOMC ones with tubes but not with SS because are more " revealing " and the SS are not up to the task ( at least this is what I understand from what he posted. ).
IMHO this kind of statement is a misunderstood and perhaps the right answer is at the inverse way.

+++++ " Everyone who doesn't hear what you hear or disagrees with you has a low resolution, highly colored system, doesn't know how to set up MM's or presumably anything else and so has to make do with highly distorted signals from ridiculously expensive MC's to trick themselves into thinking they are hearing something approximating real music. " +++++

not really again. What I'm saying is that for a carrtridge comparison was/is fair both cartridges under comparison must be under the same/similar circumstances, this means mated with the right matching tonearm and with the right overall set up according with each own cartridge specific needs. Don't you agree that this is a fair comparison? and this is what I'm trying to share.

Unfortunately only a few of us have the " tools " in the audio system to meet the overall characteristics need it for a fair comparison between LOMC and MM/MI cartridges.

Phaser, what do you do if you want to compare in your system two LOMC cartridges? do you make a near perfect overall set up on one of these cartridges and a " lightly " set up on the other one?, knowing you I assume that you will make the best overall set up for each cartridge because you want to know its real differences and only with the right set up on each one you can find it, right?. Well this is what I'm saying, I'm not saying or trying to imply that if any one disagree with what I'm hearing he is wrong. I always try to find or to explain me where are the differences in our each opinion and why of those differences: I need to learn inside those opinions and one of the best ways to do it is through specific facts.

Btw, do you already read the Stereophile MF reviews on two LOMC and one MM by Ortofon?, please tell me if that was fair, if the 2M Black had any chance to compare with anything when he mated with that 70.00 AT phono stage when the other LOMC were mated with 5K-7K dedicated phono stages?, even he states that the 2M Black compete with the SSMCC1 and the Sumiko Blackbird when these two cartridges were not mated with that AT phono stage: how he can conclude that?

All these mis-information is what put in my mouth the word " corruption ", maybe is a big word but I don't know, in my restricted English vocabolary, other more adequate word.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Siniy123,
you mix up Boron with Beryllium! The former does not allow for "pipes" the latter does. Beryllium is a very poisonous material in powder form and needs a VERY specialised process to still use it as e.g. in tweeter domes such as still manufactured by Focal.

Beryllium tube cantilevers are rather different to Boron sticks and superior to alu no doubt, yet are no more made due to the cost of handling the poisons material. (Once baked / sintered it is not poisons at all, but as soon as it produces dust e.g. when trimmed or cut it is very problematic)
Axel
Lew, the signature if alloy cantilever om M20FL is very small degree of hotness at certain frequencies that I can hear. I can add that every cantilever material has its own coloration.
So far, beryllium coloration sounds most human to me. There is nothing like a rule, it just my gut feeling based on experience with my modest cartridge stable.
Really great thread, guys--I've been up until about 3 AM the last few nights reading it, and I'm inspired!
Siniy123,
Beryllium has the best "inner damping" (very low density i.e. very light and stiff) of known metals or metalloids (like boron) in use for e.g. dome tweeter caps as mentioned.

So, yes it is superior even to diamond in these applications. But why bother?! It is not being used anymore for cantilever applications due to it's highly poisonous dust. In fact the next best damped material is Alu in form of single tubes or even double tubes as e.g. used in the P-77.

My point again, a boron-stick has a less "real" sound and it is more of late (20-25 years?) that all went for this "glare-y" presentations and then we call it “resolution”!
Sooner or later this will be overcome I'm quite sure.
In fact it is not only piano that sounds more real with the M20FL, also percussions, drum skins of tympani etc., and all string instruments are noticeably sounding more natural.
These plain boron-sticks (and MC construction?) just sounds like some over-exposed copy by comparison.
This would be the case *with any* resolving reasonably un-coloured back-end, as Raul tried to explain. Tubes will just wash over all the added odd harmonics by their own even order harmonics preference, thus creating some more balance I guess.
Greetings,
Siniy123 and Axel, You guys have opened another whole can of worms - the effect of cantilever construction on sonics. Downunder (or Phaser?) and several others here and elsewhere seem quite taken with the new Ortofon MC A90. Even Raul mentioned that he likes it, if I am not mistaken. Yet the A90 has a boron cantilever. Have you guys heard the A90? Maybe mounting and damping of the cantilever have as much effect on sonics as does the choice of material.

It would seem to me that to make a judgement on the "sound" of the cantilever, one would need to audition a bunch of cartridges that are constructed identically in every way save for the material used to make the cantilever. This is a luxury available only to a manufacturer (like Ortofon, for example). Alternatively, it might be possible to listen to several different cartridges in groups based on the cantilever construction and draw some generalizations from that. Siniy123, is that what you have done? It was interesting to me that Raul ascribed differences between the original B&O cartridges and the current SoundSmith equivalents to the fact that the former had sapphire cantilevers, the latter ruby. Raul favors the originals. On the other hand, Raul likes the Grace Ruby cartridge (ruby cantilever) very much.
Lewm,
y.s.: "Have you guys heard the A90?"

Frankly *WHY SHOULD I BOTHER*, true it may sound better then their until then best of breed (Windfeld), and now this A90 with only 400 made --- welcome to that marketing spiel!

If I listen to the M20FL (to stay with this right now), we are so stretching getting not even the same sound experience from this > 10x the money cart... That really begs the question --- big time! (At least for me, and as always YMMV :-)

The MP-50 I ordered has that hybrid construction (as have the SAS replacement styli for the V15) Boron-stick inserted into an Alu-tube-end. Even there I actually find the original VN35MR (all alu) cantilever clearly more close to "natural" sounding. All this maybe of course pure coincident, but having heard Lyras, Axia, Orpheus, etc. yet more coincidents? (And NOT only in my system!)
The SA cart maker Angel Blue Mantis also had decided to stay away from boron, hm --- now he may have changed as business may require such to be offered. His alu cantilever carts had A LOT of rave reviews (they are all MCs, aye). Now go figure.

J.Carr (Lyra) may be able to shine some light into this “can of worms”, but he is conspicuously absent from this MM/MI thread, hm.
Greetings,
Guys,

Don't know if I saw references in this thread to this great TAS article by REG from the late 80s--apparently he and other top recording industry professionals were on to this issue of MMs being more true to fidelity than MCs several decades ago. It's a great read--anyone try the Stanton he references?
http://regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html

Best,

Kristian

Soon to be NOS M20FL owner....
Dear Kristian: Yes some other contributor in this thread already posted, thank you for do it your self.

I hope that you can enjoy your M20FL in the same manner many of us are enjoying it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Yes the cantilever build material in any cartridge design is one of the critical choices for the designer.

Different cantilever build materials has different " signature " sound and not only because are different materials and different cartridge designs but we have to take in count how the cantilever is build: hollow, tapered, not tapered, etc, etc and not only this but how long is the cantilever where the signal must travel. All these factors IMHO make a specific cantilever ( stand alone ) signature sound, but like Lewm point out it is really complex to separate the cantilever own function/sound from the whole cartridge sound.

What is sure is that the same cartridge ( everything the same ) with different cantilever can sound a little different but the designer can make that both can sound similar too.

Which cantilever material is the best one?, IMHO and inside a cartridge design there is no best cantilever build material because the cartridge sounds depend of he wole cartridge design where the cantilever is one of the cartridge important parts.

I know that using ( I can figure it. ) different build materials in a cartridge design we can have the same cartridge signature sound if the designer " manipulate " all the cartridge parts/voicing to achieve the same performance.

I agree with Axel, Jcarr can put a " lot " of light here if he decide to share info with all of us.

Btw, yes Lew I say that the original B&O cartridge design ( in specific the MMC2 ) is a little better performer han the " new " Soundsmith ones. When I posted that I write that because its different cantilever build material but things happen that saphire and ruby are the same material ( at least this is what some one posted that time ), if this is true then differences between the original B&O and the SS ones are because changes in the design and different voicing to achieve what PL ( the designer ) were his targets.

It is obvious that in a cartridge design any single factor ( parts: stylus shape, cartridge body, cantilever material, coil material, etc, etc ) contribute in the final sound but IMHO the must important factor is in the cartridge voicing where the designer decide which is the quality performance level he wants.

IMHO, a cantilever build material does not define, per se, the cartridge signature sound but the whole cartridge design.

Many of us own several cartridges with different cantilever build materials and does not matters which cantilever build material was used many of those different cartridges are great performers whith performance level differences that we can't say for sure comes because the cantilever differences alone.

I like a lot cartridges that comes with aluminum but I like too the Audio Technica ones that use berylium and the Technics ones that use boron.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Phaser/Downunder: Kristian bring here again that interesting link, please read it.

In the other side: do you know that Dr. Van denHul use the Technics EPC100CMK4 as his personal cartridge reference/standard?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, do we really need the opinion of those strange people such as magazine reviewers and nice Dutch gentlemen? We have a luxury of comparing cartridges and deciding in our own living room.

Unfortunately, I'm not Goldman Sacks employee with average salary of $750k/year. So, for me those 1K+ cartridges simply don't exist. I admire enthusiasts that have means to spend few grands or more on such wearable items as cartridges. But I have to leave somewhere, eat, drive, vacation and take care of my family.

What bothers me that during golden age of vinyl rarely cartridges street price was more then $500. There is nothing to guess, volume was so much bigger then. Big companies used their industrial might to make it relatively inexpensive. I hope that with latest vinyl renaissance more consumer entertainment companies such as Denon will step in and we will see real engineering and technological advancement. Till it happens, if at all, NOS cartridges are our best bet.
Raul, where did you read that Van den Hul uses the Technics as his reference/standard? Is that recent? I have read that he has a Technics EPA-100 arm as one reference but no idea how many others he may own and use.

I'm not doubting that he may admire the performance of a 20+ year old cartridge but for a cartridge manufacturer to use one as a reference/standard seems to be a bit of a stretch. I would think if anything he would have a few master tapes and custom pressed vinyl from those for a reference.
Hi Raul, when you were experimenting with high load values for MM/MI, did you find that any of the cartridges preferred loading >100K? Reason is I am constructing a circuit to provide continuously variable loading and need to select a value for the upper limit of the range.

With precise & continuously variable loading on the fly, perhaps the performance gap between respective MM/MI cartridges can be narrowed. The method used will be a variable optocoupler resistor in parallel with a high-value fixed resistor.
Dear Pryso: I ask to his right hand worker.

No it is not a stretch because I'm only refereing to a cartridge reference not source reference.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Siniy123, I think everyone's opinion is of some value, including yours and "those strange people such as magazine reviewers and nice Dutch gentlemen." The Dutch gentleman probably knows more about cartridges than everyone on this thread put together and then some. Are reviewers strange because they express a different opinion or occasionally do something we think is not as thoughtful as it should be? The one reviewer Raul mentions not only has an exceptional level of knowledge of things vinyl but was and is a stalwart in championing the superiority of vinyl when all about him were digitizing. He's heard more cartridges than I've had hot dinners so I am interested in what he has to say. Not always convinced and I don't always agree but I'm always interested.

If we don't accept the views of other fresh or differing views and only seek the advice of like minds we become myopic and miss what is right before us if we just took the time to look and listen to others' experiences.

I've have criticized Raul here on this thread but I respect his right to have and express a view different to mine and I believe that he respects my right to express my view even though he disagrees with some of what I have to say.

You'll be waiting a long time for economies of scale to return to vinyl. It's a niche market experiencing some growth but it has to be put into perspective and it will remain a niche market. Enjoyable, rewarding but niche.
Dear Dgarretson: I never try over 100K but ( I can't remember whom. ) one person posted here that he was achieving great performance at 250K!

I agree with you, with this continuosly variable loading the performance gap between cartridges can be narrowed a lot and can give us the right tool to achieve in more easy way the best of each one cartridge, welcomed idea!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Siniy123, pretty strange response; are you running to the thread starter to censor the thread? Do you know who REG is, and/or did you read his article?

Also, I find it unnecessary to be demonstrative about posters' abilities to afford gear. What someone can or can't afford is uninteresting. Someone's ability to spend $10K on a cartridge is nothing to get sore about if you cannot. This thread is not about cheap cartridges; it is about whether MMs are able to hold their own with more costly MCs.

Best,

Kristian
Raul, I am sure the majority of us are enjoying this thread, me included. even the banter between us with differences of opinions is generally light hearted and just that - a difference of opinion - not fact.

Except you recently are starting to sound like a leader of some Waco like cult and try your hardest to discredit anyone that has a difference of opinion to the grand puppetmiester.

some of the reasons why some of us don't agree are

- our systems are colored and biased towards MC distortions - WTF -

last I noticed my system is setup towards my listening, which is a little warmth in the upper bass, a little laid back,tonal meat on the musical notes but still with good dynamics and transparency.
Phaser's system is voiced completely different - towards neutrality, speed and transparency, Tobes system is about in the middle of both our systems.

Guess what, I respect both their systems, in fact anyones system as we all have slightly different priorities and biases when listening to music. there is no absolute.

yet all 3 of us clearly prefer MC's as our ultimate music making device. All of use have spent the same amount of time setting up( in reality probbaly more) and listening to MM's. What does this mean - nothing in tengrand sceme except we prefer MC's over MM's.

Clearly all of our systems are biased towards MC's right ? - you have been drinking too much kool aid Raul.

If anyone's tonal balance is ultra neutral (tube or SS, however generally it may be SS) using a highly detailed/transparent MC or MM would probably sound lean and bright on a lot of recordings. Your preference to MM's is totally understandable.

- All MM phono stages MUST be loaded at 100k to sound at its best, otherwise you are intentially incorrectly loading your MM cart.

- last time I looked, ALL MM manufacturers design and voice their cartridges at a standard load of 47K

- yet you in one swoop claim they are all idiots and all MM's must be loaded at 100k. If you don't have a MM phono stage that has 100k, your phono stage is biased towards not getting the best out of MM carts. WTF?

- Where are the facts that MC's have much higher distortions than MM?. OTOH CD has less measured distortion than LP's at certain frequencies and we all know how CD sounds :-)

- What is wrong with current production MM's? You parody Fremer's review of the Ortofon Black MM ( I don't disagree with you) - Have you heard the Ortofon Black, or Nagaoka MP-500 or the new Soundsmith top of the range MM's for example?

You seem to have this obsession with recommending vintage NOS MM's that are hard to find, and if we don't luv the sound of the mentioned MM, there must be something wrong with the MM sample, our system etc etc - see a pattern?

You at every corner state that any phono stage with transformers are crap as they are totally coloured.

How many of us have received several emails from Raul offering to cure our phono stage ill's with one of Raul's masterpieces ? Not very good form IMO. There seems to be no disclosure of Raul being a manufacturer on his profile. BTW, I have heard it sounds wonderful - but that is not the point.

There is nothing wrong with MM's and I really like the Nagaoka MP-50 I just prefer MC's as the ultimate music source, I will still continue to play with and listen to MM's.

I appreciate you opening up this thread as it has been very interesting. I can also understand why a lot of people avoid this thread like the plague.

Differences of opinions and more importantly the respect of such opinions are vital for all of us to practice.

Any way if any offence is taken, none intended :-)



Yep, the opinion of magazine reviewers we all know from heir publication in for-profit rags. Van Den Hul is cited here as you local preacher cites the God opinion for some pedestrian case. Like he knows...:)

Anyway, collectively we here have more experience, resources and will then any magazine reviewer.

For me cost will be one of most important variables. If it is not the case for somebody - I'm very happy for them.

MM/MI/Other technologies gives us more options to enjoy music and spend less. The fact some great cartridges are around for reasonable money, even add to this.

I'm so grateful to Raul for his bravery, investment and willingness to share the information in public. Every time he discloses his NOS source, the price will go up for this cartridge model. But he choose to share the information with community and disregard his monetary benefit.

Somebody raised here question why we mostly compare NOS MM/MI and not the current production. Been there, done that, I can say that Ortofon M20FL immeasurable better then Ortofon 540, as an example. Here, again, the price not on the side of current production. NOS also looks technically superior.

It is always difficult to break stereotypes, be a leader and pave new way. I admire Raul, for doing all this above. Unfortunately, it puts you into spotlight and them people will start to look for imperfections.

I'm not taking all his opinions at face value, but for me they are more of catalyst or additional direction to explore.

I'll contribute back to this thread any interesting findings in realm of non MC cartridges.
In light of Werner Ogier's fine article addressing variable loading of MMs, I find the blanket recommendation of loading ALL MMs at 100Kohm/100Pf misleading. See: http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/load_the_magnets_e.html
I recall objections to doing this from my retail days many moons ago, but Ogier's article confirms the cause of my concern in no uncertain terms.

One problem behavior of MCs is the typical midrange suckout followed by a rising topend. When you examine Ogier's graphs, you'll see clearly that when loading MMs as prescribed, you end up with a large midrange suckout and a sharply rising topend, ironically turning your MMs into seriously nonlinear transducers and quite similar to MCs. Using 100Kohms/100Pf gives the overall FR of the tested Shure a terrible overall FR graph--even worse than the worst-case 75Kohm/150Pf test shown. Why destroy your signal (e.g. make it totally nonlinear) at that early stage when your tubeamps/tube preamps, speakers, and rooms do such a good job of it?

Also, it may well be that changing the FR of MM in this way suits the sound of Raul's system and room; if his speakers for example has a midrange hump and mellow topend, or if his room has similar characteristics, then modifying a MM response as prescribed would sound better. It would be interesting to see an in-room CD pink noise FR graph of Raul's listening room.

Finally, all MMs have different electrical characteristics, meaning that the blanket recommendation will give different results with different pickups.

I echo Downunder's concern that I find it incredible to infer that ALL MM designers get their loading recommendations wrong. They slave away at designing pickups with flat FR only to have us ruin that by misloading them.
Well Siniy123 you certainly have staked your claim firmly in the NOS MM camp so good luck to you.

Unfortunately you make Raul sound something like Ghandi but you're entitled to your opinion. Anyway as we say in Australia I am sure he big enough and ugly enough to defend himself if in fact defense is needed.

As for VDH well he is no god to me and I don't own one of his cartridges but to ignore his abilities and knowledge is churlish in the extreme.

More collective experience and knowledge?- well that depends on the size of the collective and the particular reviewer. You really don't like reviewers do you. I bet not one of them has a 666 tattooed under their hairline. I've got not hairline so I know I don't.
Downunder,
on the one side you speak of tolerance, on the other of WACO :-)
Funny, is it just me, but I have absolutely no issue(s) with Raul's contributions what ever. In fact he often mediated when things got a bit hot, and I truly appreciate THAT. If he tells you *his truth* about system colouration, well some will not like to hear such, and some would know it anyway and be fine by it.

The man has a deep motivation to beautiful musical sounds and actually showed me some insights. Never actually found him bullying his opinions. So let's keep it rolling I say, and when my MP-50 arrives it may just be the first bloody boron-stick I can say I'd *truly* like :-)
Best of greetings,
Axel
That TNT article is really great. Makes a lot of sense. Thanks for linking to it. I think one of the arguments I could not buy is the universal 100K loading, especially as I've met several MM users (esp. AKG P8ES users) who were using less than 47K loading, as P8ES has a rising treble. I think the key is to advocate different loading for subjective tastes, and optimized to individual cartridges, which that TNT article recommends.
Siniy 23, you're completely missing the boat and the point. REG's article is completely against the grain of the strong MC bias in high end journalism; if you'd read the article you'd know that.

VdH is one of the world's great top 5 audio designers. Period.
Hello,
I have a problem…

I bought a new cartridge ortofon m20fl super from eBay.
The problems are: high hum , no volume,no clarity in audition.
I set up my dynavector p-75 mk II, the tonearm rega rb300 OL and no change.When they are working with my lira cartridge the sound is good.
What can I do?
Thank you,
Robert
Dear Downunder: +++++ " - our systems are colored and biased towards MC distortions ... " +++++

this is a fact because all of us for the last ten years only heard MC cartridges: our electronics, analog rig, cables, speaker set up, room treatment were a choose voicing MC cartridges not MM/MI ones.
Today we add a " new " source in this " MC environment ": the MM/MI alternative, making almost no other main change that switching the phono stage to MM position.

It is obvious that that system environment is biased towards what we normaly heard/hear: MC cartridges. You can disagree with but IMHO that fact is conclusive on that biased subject towards MC's.

IMHO it is of paramount importance to baware that even in that " hostile " environment the MM/MI cartridges performs so well: great merit, to say the least.

+++++ " last I noticed my system is setup towards my listening, which is a little warmth in the upper bass, a little laid back,tonal meat on the musical notes but still with good dynamics and transparency ... " +++++

maybe here is where reside our differences because IMHO either: live music and recorded music through microphones are not warmth or laid back per se, these two characteristics has nothing to see with live music/recorded music but whith what you like and this is not of what I'm talking about.
Remember?: truer to the recording ( with micros at 1-3m of source distance. ) trying to add and lose the less?
This kind of quality performance is what I'm talking about and it is truly different of what you like.
What you, me or other persons likes is totally a different subject against what the music/recording is or must be.

In a serious comaprison we can't talk of what likes each person because then there is no comparison conlusions when each one has a different opinion but when we are talking on how the music sounds this bring ( at least ) one critical characteristic: the knowledge level on the live music/recording subject.

Downunder, I'm talking of music not what you, me or other persons likes to hear in our systems.

+++++ " when listening to music. there is no absolut " +++++

maybe the only area where IMHO exist the absolute is precisely when listening music: live music.

+++++ " If anyone's tonal balance is ultra neutral (tube or SS, however generally it may be SS) using a highly detailed/transparent MC or MM would probably sound lean and bright on a lot of recordings. Your preference to MM's is totally understandable. " ++++++

I'm not against MC's and certainly not because are overbright or highly detailed, the subject is more in deep and is related with the MC overall presentation of the music against overall presentation of the MM/MI's where IMHO these ones are nearer to the live event, has the magic of the live music where the MC's already lose the music context.

I respect what you like but that is not what I'm talking about.

+++++ " - All MM phono stages MUST be loaded at 100k to sound at its best, otherwise you are intentially incorrectly loading your MM cart. " +++++

this is what I posted several times when start this thread but if you read between the last 4 pages you can find at least two post where I leave very clear that not necessary 100K is an " absolute value " and that we have to find the right value in our each one system. I posted there that due that I own so many cartridges and that I?m continue testing on it and that several of them prefer 100K I use this value as " average " because I don't have the time to be making a precise set up ( load impedance>/capacitance. ) with each single cartridge.

Dgarretsson that know about already take/design what is a very usefull tool on this load impedance subject that will help everyone of us about.

Why I made emphasis on the 100K ( between other things. )/100pf?, well many of you coment that the MC has more detail/transparency and the like: well when you load your MM/MI at 100K/100pf you improve the performance in those characteristics.

+++++ " - last time I looked, ALL MM manufacturers design and voice their cartridges at a standard load of 47K .." +++

this is only non-know how that you have because the higher number of vintage MM/MIs cartridge specs speaks of 100K, even Technics speaks on 100KK!!

+++++ " - Where are the facts that MC's have much higher distortions than MM? " +++++

here are some: needs additional gain stages where added distortions that in the MM's does not exist, additional cables for the SUT's, normally the MM/MI's are better trackers than the MC: here too the MC add distortions on the tracking, etc, etc.

Yes I heard the Soundsmith and the blue/black Ortofon's, the latest Clearaudio even I own one Clearaudio.
The subject with that review is that MF don't give the opportunity that the Black was handled/matched with a better phono stage like the MC's.

Maybe I'm too dogmatic when I speak about comparison but what I like is that comparisons have to be fair: oranges against oranges, I mean similar conditions for both oranges.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Kristian85: One trouble with a long thread is that the " new " people can't read it all.

I posted the same link you bring here about load impedance ( thank you to bring it again. )/capacitance and his importance.

What we read through the link is not what is happening it is only a very simple matemhatics/physics model that does not take in count all the factors that are involve in the cartridge frequency response.

There are many mechanical/electro-mechanical factors that affect the cartridge response: cartridge/LP feedback ( during tracking and due to the VTF applied and the friction on the disc ), the tonearm/cartridge frequency resonance frequency, the headshell own resonances and its response with an specific cartridge, the tonearm behavior that affect the cartridge response, the tonearm internal wiring, not ideal VTA/SRA set up, airborne feedback, TT own resonances/vibrations, etc, etc.. All these and many more factors affect the cartridge frequency response well not the cartridge frequency response but that alter the signal quality performance ( where the FR is one characteristic of that performance. ).

When you take in count all those related cartridge factors IMHO that model is useless or at least can't tell us the reality of what is happenning.

So, IMHO the 100K is a good option like could be 47K or 26K or 75K.

What is important to me is that using what any one is using on impedance/capacitance values the sound performance be nearer to the recording/live event.
If 15K or 47K or 100K works in your system that's fine.

Till today no one can prove for sure that 100K/100pf is wrong and many of the persons that already test these values are satisfied with, of course with the cartridge they own.

THere are cartridges that works very well at 47K in my system like the Nagaoka and one or two AT's.

Now, the 100K/100pf could do harm as the system has higher system distortion but as lower is the system overall distortion as better works the 100K figure.

Anyway, as I told Downunder I already posted more than three times that the impedance/capacitance subject is system dependent.

Kristian, at least these manufacturers recomended 100K: Empire, Grace, Technics, Stanton, Pickering,etc. and if you read somewhere the manufacturers that recomended 47K they do it along high capacitance and as you go high in capacitance as you put emphasis in the high frequency. With 100K you put emphasis in that frequency range but in some ways compensate with the low 100pf on total capacitance.

As I posted somewhere: it is not all writing on load impedance/capacitance and IMHO we are learning about in this " new " MM/MI analog source.

Kristian, after 20+ years with the MC alternative today we still have severe controversies on MC load impedance!!!, so the subject is not different on MM/MI's.

How do you know which is the right load impedance for a LOMC cartridge?, I think testing with different load impedance values and this is exactly what you have to do with MM/MI cartridges and here adding the capacitance factor too.

Again, that's why Dgarretson already have what seems a very good answer to.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Downunder: Please read what Hickory posted in this thread:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1259375932

+++++ The biggest differentiation was only a modest level of retreiving detail for the Nagaoka ..." ++++

this is exactly what I'm refering in my last post to you and about the 100K subject.

Here the MM/MI was against two top LOMC performers.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Robert said

I bought a new cartridge ortofon m20fl super from eBay.
The problems are: high hum , no volume,no clarity in audition.
I set up my dynavector p-75 mk II, the tonearm rega rb300 OL and no change.When they are working with my lira cartridge the sound is good.
What can I do?

Hmm..I bought an Ortofon M20FL from the ebay seller a few months ago, it sounded undynamic, veiled and later on one channel dropped out before it went dead. I had sent it back to the seller for check up and still waiting for his response.

In the mean time, i have some joy with a Garrott P77.
Jasper
Dear Robert: Be sure that the tonearm wires ( color ) makes good connection to the cartridge pin connectors and that are right wired: red to red, blue to blue, etc. etc.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Also, Robert, you remark that your other cartridge sounds fine in the same tonearm and with the same phono stage. Is this correct? If so, check to see whether somehow the stylus assembly in the Ortofon was jarred loose in shipping. If that's not the problem, and if you can verify that you are following the color code in hookup, as per Raul's suggestion, AND if you can see that the connections are all firm with no broken wires, etc, try adding another ground to the system, e.g., if the tonearm body is not now grounded to the phono stage, try adding a wire between a screw on the tonearm to the chassis of the phono stage. I don't poor grounding can account for the remarkable lack of gain that you report but it would be of interest to know whether it affects the hum level. I suppose it is possible that you received a defective sample, but if so it would be the first (or maybe the second based on jaspert's post) among contributors to this thread. One hopes that Thakker would replace it for you in that case. Whether or not you prefer an MC ultimately, the M20FL Super is a great performer for very little money. You did not make a mistake in purchasing it. And I own three highly regarded and expensive MC cartridges to which I can compare the M20FL.
Hi Axel
" on the one side you speak of tolerance, on the other of WACO :-)
Funny, is it just me, but I have absolutely no issue(s) with Raul's contributions what ever. In fact he often mediated when things got a bit hot, and I truly appreciate THAT. If he tells you *his truth* about system colouration, well some will not like to hear such, and some would know it anyway and be fine by it."

Yeah, good analogy I thought :-)

Luckily you did not think your Windfeld actually sounded better in your system than MM's, otherwise Raul would have been saying that your system was setup to suit MC's, you can't setup a cartridge correctly, you don't have the right loading on your MM's etc etc

Get the picture??

Sounds like you are part of the WACO cult no - or is it just that your system and musical preferences are more suited to MM's?

you will like the Nagaoka MP-50 - just don't load it at 47k right, must be 100k so you are now doing your own equalization - even thou Nagaoka have designed the cartridge to work correctly into a 47k load.

that right - Nagaoka are idiot's per Raul.

cheers
Hi Raul

Good to see we agree

Raul said
" here are some: needs additional gain stages where added distortions that in the MM's does not exist, additional cables for the SUT's, normally the MM/MI's are better trackers than the MC: here too the MC add distortions on the tracking, etc, etc."

Nice to see you have quoted real measured data rather than Raul b/s.

It must be by no small miracle with all these distortions and gain stages that MC's can still sound better than MM's.
Imagine how good MC's would sound without these added distortions if someone could actually design an additional gain stage without all these Raul quoted distortions.

See, very easy to flip around what people say to suit your argument -

what does this prove?

I think the proof is here for everyone to see Raul.

I think you need to step off your podium and listen to some music, rather than countless cartridges

cheers

Downunder,
so let's agree my system is really whacked out and that is why MCs don't sound closer to the real thing as this MI cart does.

The difference is BY NO SMALL margin! I use 47k straight into my ML-326S phono-modules and the 60dB input which sounds by far more clearer then the 40dB input. Done many a test and I guess it's the better OP-amp responsible, food for thought i.e. MM = cheap so use some cheap OP-amp to boot, and then go do some comparative testing, right?

I have listened to SUT (with and with loading), and any MC loading imaginable, the M20FL just beats the lot. Every LP (I have a good sound memory) just has that bit more "there-ness, live-ness" to offer. Plus all MCs I listened to in some other dang good systems just do not have this either. So I come from a point of MY KNOWING, and that's all.

I do not have 5 'tables and arms to make this some scientifically relevant thing, it simply just IS - with my set-up, WACKO or no WACKO, period.
Now if MCs sound best to you in your set-up that's just great. Maybe spending $20k on a Platinum this or the next might even sound greater yet, and will be something to look forward to then :-)
BTW, I had heard some of my LPs on some not so good system with not so good set-up with some good MM tho' (where I bought them 2nd hand). Listing to them at home afterwards I was slightly disappointed (using one of my MCs then).
Now, they sound right e.g. Sarah Vaughan "Copacabana"
see: http://www.amazon.com/Copacabana-Sarah-Vaughan/dp/B000000XLM
I now can tell why I bought them :-)

Thank you for sharing,
Axel
Where were you guys 3 weeks ago. It was me against Raul, and his cult full of Stepford Wives, afraid to say anything that doesnt agree with their King. Its actually pathetic. Your posts of late have been the only things that actually make sense, and put Raul and Company in their proper place. Im so glad that you have come along to do so. Yes, a WACO Cult they are, ready to jump on anyone with differing opinions. Ray
On Pickups and Aging: I repost this in this thread as I thought it pertinent. I wrote Ortofon in Danish in Denmark and asked them whether pickups age by sitting re my possible use of a NOS M20FL, and received the following answer from an engineer:

"There's nothing that ages if the pickup isn't used, we have examples of 20 and 30 year old pickups that work. The parts that wear are the diamond and suspension system when used, and dust is another factor that ruins pickups, but again mostly during use. You can comfortably use your M20, the only thing to be aware of is the .5 mm free height between the pickup and the record."

If Ortofon says it isn't so, it isn't so.
Rayr2, if you see this fine debate this way, you're a pretty funny guy. Are you the little knight in shining armour coming in to rescue the poor Stepford Wives? The lone cry of sanity in the wilderness? Sorry, you're not....

Raul's thread is one of the most fun I've ever read in audio, and his opinion is entitled to a great deal of weight given his asserted massive experience with all pickups, something I'm sure you cannot match. I sense jealousy that you a) haven't ever started a thread containing a relatively original idea like this one, and b) discombobulation over not having the ability, like Raul, to play with top pickups regardless of costs and actually have opinions.
Rayr2,
I thought I only had some miscommunications with my current girl friend, and now THIS? (I am obviously not one of your famous 3, hm :-)

If you like LOMCs better then good MM/MIs what's your gripe, just enjoy the music, or?

This is funny I say,
Axel
Robert (Gaugin). I had another thought which almost got me up at 1:30 AM to post this, but I waited til morning. You don't specify which Lyra cartridge you own, but if it is an MC cartridge, your phono stage may be set up with a low load resistance. (Typically MC cartridges, especially LOMC types, are loaded at 100 to 1000 ohms.) If you load an MI or MM cartridge with such values, you would get the exact phenomenon you describe, loss of gain, dull sonics, possibly also the hum you are hearing. Check the load resistor on your Dynavector phono stage. You need 47K ohms for the Ortofon, or variations around that value as discussed here, but to start with, 47K would work fine.
Downunder and Rayr2, Who put the burr under your saddles? If you are disgusted with this thread, just go away. Raul inspired the rest of us to experience some new and fresh sounds from old vinyl with MM and MI cartridges, and for that I, for one, am grateful. As I have indicated several times, I am not yet prepared to dump my wonderful sounding MC cartridges (one of which I bought from Raul) as a result, nor do I know yet whether I agree with Raul's global conclusions on this subject, but I have experienced a new higher level of excitement with vinyl reproduction. I would never have even thought of "the MM alternative" without Raul's bringing these cartridges to my attention.

By the way, the repeated assertions that Raul ever categorically recommended 100K loading for all of these cartridges in all systems, and that he ever said 100K was the only way to go, is just plain wrong and unfair. In fact, he made a valuable contribution by in essence noting that there is no gospel truth associated with the 47K load. Go enjoy your LOMC cartridges. Peace. Out.
Axel.

I didn't limit my favorites to LOMC carts. I dont have the proper preamp for true LOMC carts. I do say that as much as I too enjoy, and own, very top flight MM/MI carts. like the Shure V15VMR....AT20SS...GRADO Signature TLZ...GOLDRING 1022GX...etc....But I have also most enjoyed Sumiko Talisman Virtuoso S, D, Sti...2 of these are HOMC carts, and have sound thats amazing, again classics, High Output, but MC, not MM/MI. I have also enjoyed the ATOC9ML/II....Denon DL-110 for $100.00 a real steal HOMC cart. So, Im not limited. I do believe that LOMC cartridges are the best, I just cannot afford most of them. I dont spend more than $500.00 for a Cartridge. As for the Loading, this is something more new to me, that I feel needs playing with, not resorting to one value. Im not jealous of Raul, I agree he has much better cartridges than I do, Better Preamp than I do, and better equipment in General than I do. He created a thread that has gotten more attention than any of my threads, but Im not jealous. I learn alot from all this. But I enjoy hearing from others that do not just agree with what Raul says, but challenge him on what he says. That way I learn far more. I dont claim to be more knowledgeable than Raul in any way. So you have that all wrong. And for my budget, I like High Output MC cartridges....and also some better MM/MI Cartridges. Ray
Ray, If you read thru this thread, you will see that Raul has been "challenged" over and over again by me and by many others as well. In some cases he has conceded points; in many other cases, not. But he has always been gracious and kind, even when delivering one of his withering diatribes. You raise an interesting question as to where to fit HOMC cartridges in the pantheon of choices. I myself have owned a Sumiko Blue Point Special (a few decades ago), a Benz Glider, and a Transfiguration Esprit, in that chronological order. I thought the Transfig was by far the best, but none of them come close to either the Ortofon MC20FL Super (MI) or the best of my LOMCs. I consider now that I wasted my time with them. How do you rate the HOMCs you've experienced as compared to the best of your MMs? As my two sons say, it's all good.
Rayr2,
y.s.: ...but challenge him on what he says... :-) aye.

Being a rebel has it's rewards, no?
Yet, when I look back at my contributions to those early parts of this thread I have to admit: I just didn't get it, and the subject seemingly so off the wall :-)

All that changed since then really, are some cross-over modifications to my Burmester speakers, nothing else. They now are a lot more revealing since these earlier times and boy can I hear what doesn't work now! (not so good with a lesser cart for sure).
But I can CLEARLY hear that the M20FL is superior to the Windfeld in MUSIC MAKING i.e. the points mentioned earlier by Lewm.
We have VERY different systems yet come to the same findings, that should be telling.
Axel
Dear Downunder: For years you, some way or the other, do not like what normally I posted/post and don't like my answers to you.
When your arguments are exhausted/finishised then your attitude is ( like your last post to me. ) to attack personally.

I know that I'm not your " cup of tee " ( ever ) but even that you already attack me over the time I'm not against you and in some ways I try to understand your frustration and that's why I always give you an answer.

I don't want that the thread goes on with personal attacks/offense or the like but that goes on in the clear attitude to learn each one of us.

There is no " worst deaf that the one that does not want to hear ". My last post to you ( the long one. ) give you a very specific answer on almost all the subjects/question you ask or that bring in this thread.

I'm not flipping nothing but given you my honest knowledge about, you can like it or not ( maybe even you could not understand it. ) but if you don't like/understand it this fact can't give you the right to answer in the way you did.

In the future I will post to you if your posts are honest ones and with the mature that you don't show in your latest posts even to other thread contributors.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
The only consensus I ever found in audio is that there is no consensus. Looking at the big picture - tube VS SS, analog VS digital, dynamic VS electrostatic, belt VS direct/rim drive, chocolate VS vanilla; come on people, let's celebrate our diversity!

If we come to this site for information, how does finger-pointing and name-calling help? We all have different backgrounds that developed our personal tastes in music and music reproduction. If anyone posts what they've tried and what they prefer, that should help serve the information purpose. If someone posts an experience that is different from my own, I should either accept and respect that or look more closely at my own to see why differences might be observed. To belittle that person for seeing (hearing) things differently than I do only reflects back on myself.

Shouldn't all this be so obvious that it does not need to be said?
Pryso just condensed down all my more long-winded posts. I agree completely. One of the dichotomies of the internet is that it can be used as a tool to broaden our horizons or to fortify our prejudices. Lets choose the former.