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
Lewm,
I guess you have to try the L-07D original arm at original "closed loop" place and compare to other tonearms. I got an impression from L-07D forum that secondary tonearm is not really an improvement, but everybody has to try and decide for himself. Even if you install another tonearm into closed loop (original) position it might give it different treatment than L-07D arm. Tricky subject, only trial and error will tell.
Dear Lewm,

All I know for certain is the 1000 ZE came out a couple of years before the 1000 ZE/X. There is a High Fidelity magazine test on the 1000 ZE.

Perhaps the X version means Empire mounted the diamond nude onto the cantilever-- it seems like that technology was just coming into use at that time and also, Empire did advertise how the X had a nude-mount for its diamond (i.e., no brass cylinder between the diamond and cantilever, for less moving mass).

The two bodies appear to be the same, so I would expect one can put in even an ERD stylus and see what happens. I do not know if inside, the coils have the same inductance as the X version.

I do know there are no marks on the stylus assemblies which would identify different versions.

Best regards,
Roy
Addendum: Sorry, I should also have mentioned that I just bought an Empire off ebay that is also said to be a "1000ZE", NOS in its original box. The seller never has responded to my query regarding the "X" designation. So now I have two questions: Where does the X come from? How does the X designation relate to the discussion of factory original vs replacement styli that was initiated I think by Royj above? When I googled "1000ZE" all I could find were references to the 1000ZE/X. Moreover, the Empire factory manual available on Vinyl Engine, which shows all their products as of the late 1960s (I think), makes no mention at all of a 1000ZE; only the 1000ZE/X is shown. And finally, the cartridge I bought looks exactly like photos of the 1000ZE/X on VE, color scheme and all. The proof will be in the pudding when I finally receive the thing so I can look to see whether the X is engraved on the stylus assembly.
Thank you Siniy, but if you read above you will see that I have been using the M20FL Super for most of my listening for at least the past month. I like it too and would agree with your verbal description. Perhaps you are suggesting I should try it in the L07D, and I do plan to do that when I finally get my motor and power supply back from Howard. I just had the platter buffed out, because there were some slight corrosion marks in the anodizing around the rim, and it looks like new. I have a secondary armboard for the L07D, from Vantage Audio, and cannot decide whether to mount a DV505 or my Triplanar on it. All my listening to the M20FL Super so far has been in the DV505 with factory headshell and mounted on my slate-plinth Lenco. It has been said that the factory tonearm weakens the L07D performance. Not that it is bad per se but just that it is not up to snuff with the rest of the package. What do you think? (Sorry, I do tend to wander OT.)
Lewm,
I found M20Fl Super to be very enjoyable on L-07D. More at home with natural sounds (jazz, classics, rock) than The Prodigy. It is quite polite with hard stuff, but not ridiculously so. Huge and enveloping sound stage. I've set the tonearm to lowest possible heights since M20FL is only 14.6 mm. It was almost a flat VTA. 1.5 g. VTF, anti skate is 1.5. Given its accessibility I recommend to try it in your system and decide if it fits you music and mood.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " ut also this leaves the Empire 1000 as the finest sounding cartridge that Raul has ever heard in his system. (It's the only one that got a rank of 9, far as I can recall.) " +++++

well not exactly, other that the Sonus Dimension 5 I has more than 15 cartridges that I have to test again and that due its high quality performance potential I think could belong to that 9 range level and beyond it ( 10 or 10+. ), that's why I leave the 10 range empty. We will see.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
My Empire 1000 cartridge label reads 1000 ZE without the X. The stylus assembly is black and reads EMPIRE with the little round logo under it. The cantilever is rather broad with no real noticable taper to the eye. Compared to the cantilever in my Empire 4000 D/111, it looks large and clunky but it is very similar to the cantilever in my Empire 999VE with the older style tapered stylus assembly like on the 800 series. The cantilever on my later Empire 999VE/X with the stylus assembly like that of my Empire 1000 ZE is thinner and shorter. I have the original manual for the 999VE and the stylus replacement is S 999VE ERD Purple. NO X. Maybe Empire changed the cantilevers in later versions of a same model and added the X to designate that? Just tossing that out for some thought.

I found a copy of High Fidelity's 1974 test reports and the 1000 ZE/X was tested and reviewed. The interesting parts are: The Empires response cure looks far more like that of an amplifier than that of a "speaker." Speaker must be a typo because it goes on to say: It is flat within a couple of db over most of the audible range, even at the extremes it deviates by only 3db from the 1KHZ rsponse level. The curves shown here, incidentially, were made with a 300pf input capacitance, shunted by the normal 47,000 resistor. Those who read our report on the V15 Type 11 Improved will remember that a similar capacitance was required before that cartridge would perform up to it's full potential. Without the capacitance the 1000 ZE/X exhibited some 20KHZ resonance and a slight dip in response below that resonance and consequently fell a bit short of meeting it's response specifications. Compliance spec'ed at 35 lateral and 25 vertical. The stylus tip is listed as an elliptical 0.2 X 0.7 mil but in the lab it measured 0.3 X 0.7 mils. To track the most demanding CBS test cuts the VTF needed was 1 gram in the SME arm. ( no SME model mentioned) In home listening we finally settled on 0.75 gram using the arm on a Lenco L-75. Vertical angle measured by CBS Labs was 20 degrees. The listening test resulted in a "superb."

I can agree with the 300 pf or somewhat higher capacitance for the V-15 type ll because when I got mine new it sounded honky or nasal to me. I now remember finding the above report and reading it. I soldered 100pf caps across the preamp inputs and that nasal quality went away.

While I'm here and typing, I also found an original manual for the Ortofon M15 Super. Wasn't there some conjecture that maybe it's the same body as the M20FL and VMS20? The pic on the front looks like the M20FL except for the model designation on the stylus assembly. It was available in an elliptical or spherical. It's interest that the spes for both are the same except for the stylus tip size.
Cartridge weight 5 grams, output at 1KHZ per cm/s 0.8 mv + -
1db, internal impedance 750 mh, recommended load impedance per channel 47Kohm, tracking angle 15 degrees, frequency response 20HZ to 20KHZ, frequency response + - 1db 20HZ to 10KHZ, channel separation at 1KHZ 25db, channel balance 2db, compliance horizontal 50 x 10-6, vertical 30X 10-6, trackability at 300HZ 1 gram tracking 80um, FIM distortion at 1 gram tracking < 1%, trackling force range 0.75 to 1.5 gram, recommended tracking force 1 gram, stylus tip radius elliptical 18/8 um, spherical 15 um. Replacement sylus D15E Super, D15 Super.
Dear Timeltel: Do you already try a " high " VTA/SRA with that cartridge? how high? performance differences?

Thank's.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel,

You are right about several things: The original stylus is S-1000 ZE/X. The later stylus is S-1000 ZE/X-ERD. I was wrong when I wrote "EDR" instead.

Instead of trusting my memory, I now just took a look at my inventory. The new ERD stylus I have was still in its original Empire walnut box inside its cardboard box labeled "...ERD". I have six of those styli (some new, most of unknown hours) and one original, along with three bodies (I recall one body is dead on one channel).

The original stylus I see has a 30% longer! cantilever than the ERD-version. The original cantilever is also larger in diameter, more like what we see on a Shure or Sonus/ADC from that era. The ERD-version has a very-much thinner cantilever, very thin like the MP-50 or the B&O MMC 4000/6000- like only a whisker. Not tapered at all though, as with the Empire 4000-series cantilevers.

So, I must reverse my previous comments: the ERD-version should reveal more low level information than the original because it makes the end of the cantilever move farther in the magnetic field for a given groove modulation. That would also increase the cartridge's output over the old one, unless Empire also reduced the size of the magnetizeable piece at the end of that cantilever. And they probably did, to reduce the moving mass and to also fit on the end of the much smaller-diameter ERD cantilever. After all, the output was already high enough in the old version.

The ERD-version still may have a different VTA than the original because it is shorter in length. It should track better in the highs, from having less moving mass. Its compliance seems about the same as the original-- quite high. The diamond itself may be ever-so-slightly smaller in its base-diameter than the original stylus.

I might be able to provide close-up photos if someone sends me an email... In that photo link I posted above, the image is definitely of the original one if you would like to compare that to an ERD version. You can see its cantilever is a little 'fat'.

Can I compare the sound between the two? I will try sometime, but on the only original 1000 stylus I have, the cantilever no longer angles downwards nearly as far from its housing as it should-- I think it is on its way to full collapse (I bought it used).

Best regards,
Roy
We should all remember that 'a proper tracking force' should also center the magnetic armature (at the far end of the cantilever) in its magnetic field, no matter how the cartridge works.

This is best seen by looking at the side of the cartridge as it rests on the record. At some value inside the manufacturer's recommended tracking force range, we should expect to see the cantilever make a right angle with the front pole-piece of a moving coil cartridge, or in the case of a moving- or induced-magnet design, be parallel to the direction the brass sleeve around the cantilever assumes inside the cartridge body.

Best regards,
Roy
Thank you, Raul. I am glad to be here. And my thanks for the information on capacitance. Your values are what I expected, but I shall look for others to respond also, since it will be a little while longer before I can try.

Regarding any ranking of cartridges... for myself in the past, the best way to compare was to at first play perhaps only six records that I knew well, selected for clarity, image, tracking, bass, tone balance, VTA, dynamics, etc.

However after that, what has always counted the very most was to then just let other beloved LPs (not necessarily 'audiophile' ones) simply play under a cartridge, without paying any 'audiophile attention' to their sonic details- just going about my work while listening and enjoying.

After a few days or sometimes a full week of playing many different records, my subconscious always told me something more about the cartridge, most often about simply its overall musicality, and sometimes about its other strengths or failings. Once my subconscious finally let me know about 'something', then I could listen critically for 'that', which sometimes to a little more effort in finding how best to listen for 'that', using almost any record.

I think it is easy to not allow our subconscious minds to participate. This takes more time admittedly (and a calm lifestyle I would add). But I do believe this is at the heart of the problem for those who insist on quickly changing between components to compare, such as when using some DBT methods-- useful in some ways, but often less so than learning what the subconscious tells us.

Best regards,
Roy Johnson
Designer
Green Mountain Audio
Greetings, All. Royj, I give homage to your level of involvment concerning this subject. Our posts crossed on the moderators' desk. My response to Axel is in regard to the S1000ZE/X-ERD, and is from information provided by Empire. The ERD designation extends to the 90EE/X at 15-25,000 freq. resp., replacement stylus S90E/X-ERD.
It should be clarified for others who read this that the information you relate is concerning the EDR and this knowldege is new to me. Thank you.
Regards, Axel: Raul is correct, this is the code for the replacement stylus. "S" designates stylus, "E" for elliptical, "D" for diamond. Example: S909/X-RD is spherical, S1000ZE/X-ERD is a hand polished .2 x .7 mil. micro elliptical diamond. For the specified cartridge, freq. resp. 4-40,000, output 5.0 mv, VTF 1/4 to 1 1/2 gm., 15 deg. TA. JICO offers replacement styli.
For your consideration, this data suggested HF blending might be enhanced by reducing tracking force and lowering the VTA. I enjoy mine at 0.8 gm downforce and with a slightly negative VTA to compensate for SRA deflection resulting from a previously greater (1 1/16 gm.) VTF. Detail and transients are improved but a consequential less remarkable bass may not be to your taste.
Dear Lewm: Like a year and a half from now some people ask me ( posted in this thread. ) for a MM/MI cartridge ranking, even one or two of them really push in that direction, I decided that due that I have not enough experience on this " new " alternative and that I don't try yet many cartridges I can't make a cartridge performance ranking.

After all these two years/long, fun and learning process where I not only tested more cartridges but thank's to each one of you experiences/feedback in the thread I decide that maybe it is time to beguin with an enunciative cartridge performance ladder.

What makes me to choose a 10 range steps ladder was pecisely the complexity of the subject and the diversity of the cartridges ( I own more than 60 different ones and growing up!. ). As exist different levels on " bad " as exist different levels on " good " " very good " or whatever. Even with " only " ten steps I'm in problems with a more precise ranking.

As any ranking evaluation my choose can't leave everybody happy as can't leave everybody happy which cartridges I rank on which performance range step on that ranking ladder.

As I posted my ranking could help to some people and maybe can't help to other people: these facts are not on argueing.

Right now I'm on a detailed each step information and main step cartridge characteristics.

I have to say that this is my very first attemp on the subject and over the time I will try to make it more precise for can help to a wide range of people.

The cartridge ranking has all my experiences and knowledge on audio music I have, I'm not biased or have any kind of preferences other than MUSIC and as better is your system as near will be your own experience with that cartridge ranking.

This is only a point to start and through your own experiences along mine we all can help to enrich that quality performance ranking ladder.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Roy: Welcome aboard.

Your post is facinating for say the least and gives us a in deep information ( especially on the Empire subject. ) where we have so many doubts and that now we have the right answers, thank you for that.

I'm using only the cable capacitance to run my cartridges: 100-150pf but like you say this value is system dependent and we have to try and find out which value is best for each one of us.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Royj,

Wow and I am grateful for your presence. I will watch your discoveries and contributions with real interest.

I think this is the type of thing (first hand experience, humbleness and a willingness to continue to learn) that makes Audiogon a great site.

Thanks
Axel

If you look at the manual on vinyl engine the replacement stylus is listed as S1000ZE/X-ERD.

So you have the correct one.

So is this the new Emperor ?
I have both types of Empire 1000 ZE/X styli here. The Empire 1000 ZE/X original replacement stylus is marked as Raul says.

The EDR (Extended Dynamic Range) version I see in front of me has a longer cantilever, which I presume allows it to swing wider amplitudes without the other end leaving the magnetic circuit's main region of focus (= Extended Dynamic Range).

In the late 70's, I think it was easier for Empire to simply offer that EDR version as the 'right' replacement, as it was likely the same cantilever and elliptical stylus assembly as found on their Empire 4000 series-- they did not have to tool up to build any of the originals anymore.

In the image at the following link, the cantilever's length matches the original Empire styli I have here (I do not know whether these people are selling an original Empire stylus assembly, nor if what they send you would be the EDR version): S-1000 ZE/X

Because the longer EDR cantilever's far end will move around in the magnetic circuit less on any stroke than the original stylus, that should reduce the output by perhaps 10%. I would not be surprised if the VTA is different. Mostly I see a potential for the EDR assembly to not allow the cartridge body to generate very small signals quite as well, since smaller motions are transduced less well by a magnetic circuit.

I appreciate everyone's hard work in this matter, and I look forward to contributing as well. But I won't be able to compare the differences between the Empire styli for a while longer, nor my MP-50 and others, but I shall report back.

The most likely turntable for this will be our Micro Seiki BL-91 with a "Platter Matter" mat and its MA-505II arm into a Croft Vita tube preamp. Part of the delay is that I must first change the load in the Croft from 47k to 100k, and of course, figure out what capacitance I have in the cables and input circuit. I have several headshells to try- magnesium ones from Micro and Nagaoka, and the ADCOM carbon-fiber one as well.

I do highly recommend the Platter Matter mat, which come up on eBay from time to time-- mine is green/blue. Wash it with dish soap once it awhile, and it sticks to the LP's vinyl as if there was a vacuum system employed- dead but quite firm. Dampens aluminum platters well.

Short background-
I bought my first Empire 1000 ZE/X in 1971. Eventually it went to someone else as I began working full-time in the audio industry- first in retail, later in manufacturing, then back into retail, then into pro sound, then finally to manufacturing for now 20+ years. From 1971-1983, I had daily experience with almost every high-end cartridge out there, including those from A-T, B&O, Dynavector, Empire, Grado, Goldring, Nagaoka, Nagatron, Ortofon, Satin, Shure, Signet, Supex...

Osawa was the importer for Nagaoka back then, and our consistent opinions of Nagaoka (Osawa-branded at first) in that retail store, was that the Nagaoka MP-11 was fine for most people, as it sounded good and did not tear up records, the MP-20 was much more clear, the MP-30 a little bit bright but even better, and the MP-50 very quick and detailed with only a small hint of brightness. But back then, although alignment, VTA, and capacitance were being set as we all do now, we did not have much opportunity to change loading to 100k. We typically used Thorens, H/K, and Micro Seiki turntables, usually into Mitsubishi, SAE and Harmon/Kardon preamps.

In my own system at home, I first replaced the Empire with an ADC XLM in 1973 (I don't know why- the lure of having the 'latest technology' I think). In 1974, I changed to a Sonus Blue Gold (a better-sounding ADC I remember thinking), and then to a B&O MMC6000 in 1975 (because I thought its super-wide bandwidth would be important, but its sound seemed bland/polite). I followed that with a Goldring 900-SE in 1979 (great) and then switched to the MP-50 in 1980 (liked it a lot), followed by the original ADCOM XCLT in 1981 (really great).

Finally in 1983, I switched to a Garrot Brothers-modified Panasonic strain-gauge cartridge (van den Hull stylus/boron cantilever) into a Jeff Rowland strain-gauge preamp (marvelous). The original stylus assembly of the Panasonic did not track loud high-frequencies, such as on the Harry James' Sheffield discs.

I stayed with this latter setup until 1993, when I stopped using turntables on a daily basis (by then, at the factory - too much dust).

Over the last few years, in anticipation of setting up the turntable for regular use again, I purchased a lightly used MP-50, an ADCOM XC-E, several complete Empire 1000 ZE/X cartridges (as there seemed to be some 'slop' in the way the stylus assembly fit into some bodies) and a couple of spare 1000 styli (hence seeing the ERD difference). I still have the Strain-Gauge system (which needs a new diamond) and a Signet medium-output moving coil, so there will be lots to listen to...

I hope this information helps and I look forward to contributing later this Winter! Thanks to everyone participating in this thread.

By the way, can anyone remind me what capacitance (total) they have come to prefer for the 1000 ZE/X and also for the MP-50 when running either into 100k? I know it would be personal taste in the long run. This is such a long thread in which to locate this information-- I would appreciate anyone's direct feedback to get me started!

Best regards,
Roy Johnson
Designer
Green Mountain Audio

website
Well, my cartridge says on the lable of the cartridge-body "Empire 1000ZE/X" on the outer paper packing (inner is a hardwood case) it says "S1000ZE/X-ERD"

Could it be the "-ERD" addition is just the code for the stylus which is supplied in addition to the one in the cart body itself?
Dear Axelwahl: I have on hand the box where comes my original Empire stylus replacement that I'm using in that cartridge and I can read this:

" Replacement Stylus S 1000ZE/X Black "

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Jaspert: I have to test the 1080 again to be sure about. I will do it and let you know.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Axelwahl: I can't say it for sure because I never seen that ERD Empire cartridge but you can read here too that the stylus replacement is that:
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/empire/1000-ze/x.shtml

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul,
having looked at your posted stylus replacement link I see "replaces also 1000Z/EX-ERD" --- any idea if the -ERD is a different cart / body / performance to the 1000Z/EX?
Dear Zhuweil231: Good.

You need to find the MF-100, it does not works fine in MF-200 body.

Here you can find a NOS stylus replacement for your 1000 Ze/x:
http://www.adelcom.net/EmpireStylus1.htm

The 4000D/III is very good but I don't try it for a long time so I can't be sure its " today " performance especially against the 1000 ZE/x.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul. I am using M20E Super now on 3009S2IMP (preferred over MF-200). I am not sure if it worth to get a MF-100 stylus and fit on MF200 body. I also got empire 4000D/III and 1000ZE/X body with bad stylus.
Dear Zhuweil231: Just by curiosity, I try to give you answers to almost all of your several posts in this thread regarding different cartridges performance: which of all those cartridges do you own?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Downunder: I confirm and agree with each single word I posted that you are refering on your last post, I repeat I don't change any single word I posted

I'm still thinking in that way: ++++ " where I agree the top MM/MI has one step a head. " +++++

Over the whole thread I always speak of MM/MI alternative never like " the only one ". I speak that both alternatives are not perfect and due to that has their each own trade offs.

What do you want on a cartridge ranking? that I put the top LOMC cartridges below the 5 range level?, this is impossible and make no sense because all those LOMC that I name it has its each merits to be there where they are.

Downunder, I'm not a " deaf " man and can appreciate the quality performance of those LOMC cartridges as its drawbacks.
That I prefer the MM/MI alternative quality performance does not means that I don't like the top LOMC alternative. I can live with any of those LOMC name it in my post but if I have on hand some top MM/MI ( that fortunatelly I have. ) then I prefer to enjoy the music through the MM/MI alternative, no single doubt about.

The Olympos and Formula One are the nearest LOMC performers to the very top MM/MI's.

So, IMHO there is no " inconsistency " in my words/posts, sure I can have mistakes or I can rectified on a cartridge performance but this does not means " contradicting ".

Downunder like you I'm not perfect.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
�Sorry guys, and with all due and real respect, Raul, I cannot buy this ranking of cartridges on a 1 to 10 scale. There are SO many variables involved that I think the best one could hope for in this type of discussion, among individuals who are scattered around the globe and who own such disparate audio systems, is "bad, OK, good, better, best". And we would argue all day even about those fuzzy distinctions. Not only does Downunder make a good point, but also this leaves the Empire 1000 as the finest sounding cartridge that Raul has ever heard in his system. (It's the only one that got a rank of 9, far as I can recall.) Perhaps this is the case.

By the way, what does the "ZE/X" mean at the end of the Empire model designation?
Hi Raul

Either you are consistently contradicting youself or you agree with me about LOMC's being better sounding devices over the recently discussed and readily avalable MM's.

Raul quote

" 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. "

now we have your ranking

Raul quotes

" Dear friends: I forgot to post about the P77 ( that I try it again. ) and the MP-50.
Well the P-77 is now on 6 range level along the 20E Super with the MP-50 border 6-7 range level.

I already receive some emails asking for LOMC ranging. My experiences and opinion is that the Lyra Olimpos and Allaerts Formula One belongs to 8 range level where the A90 and Coral are border line 7-8 range level, NO no single LOMC that I heard belongs to the 9 range level. The Xv-1 is clear a top 7 range level. "

You now seem to have two MC's I own - dyna XV-1 & A90 ahead of the MP-50 & M20FL. Something I have said consistently from the beginning of the journey.


enjoy the music.
Hi All,

I think individual scales/rankings of performance are always interesting. Many will remember Martin Colloms' practice of using the most expensive ancillaries in assessing and awarding rankings under his particular marking system.

Of course, Martin's decisions came down to his own hearing abilities and preferences. They could never address the distinct venues at which other listeners might have heard the same musicians perform differently. Such is the joy of real music and such is the pleasure of listening to other people's opinions.

I'm surre there's a cavaet in there somewhere!!

Enjoy
Dear Halcro: Unfortunatelly there is no know source about: ebay, Agon or other net sites.

The Sonus Dimension 5 is extremely hard to find and the Empire 1000 Ze/x is a little more " easy " but not so easy.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: I forgot to post about the P77 ( that I try it again. ) and the MP-50.
Well the P-77 is now on 6 range level along the 20E Super with the MP-50 border 6-7 range level.

I already receive some emails asking for LOMC ranging. My experiences and opinion is that the Lyra Olimpos and Allaerts Formula One belongs to 8 range level where the A90 and Coral are border line 7-8 range level, NO no single LOMC that I heard belongs to the 9 range level. The Xv-1 is clear a top 7 range level.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul,

Where can one buy the Empire 1000 Ze/x or the Sonus Dimension 5 cartridges?

Regards
Henry
Dear friends: I tested/try again my Empire 1000 Ze/x.

I mount it in my 10" AT 1503 in a Belldream magnesium headshell, with out stylus guard, no antiskating, no-add phono stage capacitance, 100K on impedance, 1.0grs on VTF and the VTA/SRA set up at/up 19mm over a level/even cartridge/record position ( till today this is the highest VTA/SRA that I used with any cartridge. ).

In this " new " stage/phase of testing cartridges this baby a long the Sonus Dimension 5 are stand alone at range 9 on a 1 to 10 range quality performance ladder ( I'm " building " this performance ladder each range characteristics. ), the main characteristic in that 9 range level is: efortless/seamless.

By comparison the Astatic MF-100 and B&O MMC2 are at 7 range level, the M20E Super at 6 range level and the 20FL Super at 5 range level.
I leave empty the 8 and 10 range level because I have to try yet several other cartridges. The good sound in this performance ladder start at 3 range level.
There is nothing absolute on this each range levels and cartridges over time and with new experiences on each one can change on range performance ladder level. The target is to have something that could give us a " general/enunciative " reference: it is not the Bible, no it is only a " sign " that could be help for some of us.

This Empire 1000 Ze/x not only makes everything what the other range cartridges makes at its best but with improvements.
In other thread some one posted that this cartridge has no highs, I respect that opinion but my experience with is that we have everything with the Empire that is in the recording including those highs. I'm testing it trying to find a cartridge drawback and I can't find it yet, if I put me very exigent maybe I could ask for a little more output over 10K-12Khz but nothing important.

The quality performance with any kind of music is just stellar with this Empire in my system with that set up.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: You can buy here for 99.00:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Ortofon-D-20-E-Super-Stylus-M-20-E-FL-Super-NOS_W0QQitemZ400089498518QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item5d27314396#ht_2178wt_1165

The AT20SS is a good cartridge but I don't try it in these " different " times/days.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
How much for the M20E stylus assembly alone? I hate to be a slave to fashion, but....

Raul, Is the AT20SS up there in your top tier these days? I bought a very used and very cheap AT15Sa and then an NOS ATN20SS stylus, several months ago but still have not put them together. I noticed you listed the whole series of Audio Technica's in the 160, 170, 180 series as being among the best.
Dear Downubder: Yes, only differ on the stylus shape/compliance/VTF.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul

From your email I am assuming the M20FL & 20E have the same generator but different stylus?

Frankly, the 20E is only around 80 Euro, so not expensive if one was to buy.
Lewm

I can only state how a cart sounds in my system. Not that the M20FL sounds bad, it doesn't, it sounds good.

I have not heard a p77, let alone a p77i.

Buy both and let us know what you think.

You also need to buy a Ortofon 20E now as well now it is superior to the M20FL :-)
Lew, The more so as an MCC1 sold yesterday for $600. Reminds me of an old Don Henley lyric that goes something like, "It was a great little town before guys like me came here and ruined it."
Dave, I paid $500 for my NOS B&O MMC1 several months ago. I am glad to know that my investment now makes sense.

Re the MP50 vs M20FL comparison, I have no basis for confirming or disputing your conclusion, but if we scroll back up the thread a bit, I think someone else posted a contrary conclusion not too long ago. How about P77i vs MP50? If I have another $500 to blow away, which one would you suggest and why?
Dear Downunder: You can buy the M20E stylus replacement and use it with the 20FL cartridge.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I fitted the Nagoaka MP-50 and IMO it is quite a bit better than the M20FL Super.

The M20FL is a little forward in the upper midrange and as Raul said, it is a little coarse in the high frequencies.
The MP50 has better transparency and a more refined realistic treble. It also seems to be better balanced than the M20Fl with no forwardness like the M20FL.

Interestly Raul re the M20e Super - this cartridge is cheaper than the M20FL Super. It does have tracking of 1gm vs 1.4gm.
Yikes, The $500+ just paid for an NOS B&0 on ebay has brought many more sellers out of the woodwork.
Dear Zhuweil231: Yes, the latter is a big step up. Both are different ( more refinements. ) designs, the stylus replacement in both cartridges are the same when you see it but if you take the one fromm the Gold Blue it does not works ( it fits. ) in the Dimension 5.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Well I tested/try my Ortofon M20E Super. As I posted this one was the cartridge that impress me and my first " touch " with these Ortofon models more than a year ago.

I made comparisons against ( mainly ) the 20FL Super. Both cartridge has the body on gold. The comparison was made " everything the same " because I try both cartridges with both stylus and the results were the same.

In my sample cartridges the 20FL has a different output than the 20E, around 3db higher.

No doubt about the M20E Super is a better performer an IMHO a step a top the M20FL Super and a step below the Astatic MF-100 and the B&O MMC2..
This was in some way a surprise to me due that I was thinking that the 20E was in disadvantage for its elliptical stylus shape against the line contact in the FL.

In the 20E and over all the frequency range the music flow more easy with better " continuity " . The 20FL in comparison sounds more " rough ", like if the 20FL had more " trouble " on tracking ( that it does not have. ).
The 20E has lower distortion over all the frequency range and this characteristic gives a truer music presentation and a feeling of " loseless " recording performance. The 20E is less edgy than the 20FL but with a more natural music agresiveness, its more " soft " ( not really soft but I don't have other word. ) sounds makes that you can enjoy it for more time an even at higher SPL.

I make the tests with an average SPL , at seat position , around 85db with peaks at 92db.
Normally I make tests at lower and higher SPL range. At an average SPL 93db with peaks at 99db that 20E " lower distortion " makes the differences very clear because the 20FL performance at this SPL shows its drawbacks in better way.

Overall the 20E quality performance is more refined with better " class ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Apologies, Raul: Mr. Colloms' (1977 production only) recommended/not lists and your choices are not far apart. The info. concerning cartridge loading is somewhat technical, but agrees with your findings.

www.bostonaudiosociety.org/pdf/bass/BASS-06-01-7710b.pdf, (dosn't work for me either)

Can be accessed by: Google-> Boston Audio Society-> click on BAS Speaker, scroll well down and click on 06-01-7710b. Lots of good reference reading to be found there, I keep the BAS link in "favorites".