Dear Violin: I have a copy of a Nagaoka sheet with its different models where I can read that the cartridge weight is: 8grs, static compliance 24cu and dynamic compliance 12cu.
These specs are almost similar ( at least on the compliance subject ) to the ones that you can see here: http://www.vinylengine.com/library/nagaoka/mp-50.shtml
where the cartridge weight is different by 1gr.
So we can see that even in two Nagaoka sheets there is a difference, in this case only a different cartridge weight all the other specs are the same. Seems to me that 12cu is the right number.
Now, as Axelwahl posted: +++++ " it seems much more test-system dependant then we generally would like to believe. " +++++
Btw, I don't think that the LPgear samples are fakes. We will see what Nagaoka answer to Birdliver.
In the other side I think that you can ask on this subject directly to LPgear.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Axel,
I think you are being excessive in what I assume is your response to Violin. Both models are assumedly made in Japan and, I'm sure everyone is aware of the difference in European, Japanese and American tendencies when measuring compliance.
Politeness costs nothing except a little class. |
Hi, is anyone actually aware, that those compliance values are measured at 100Hz with all Japanese made carts, and at 10Hz for all European ones?
To come to a comparable compliance from Japanese makes to European makes, a factor of 1.5 - 2 has to be applied to the jJpanese values.
It makes me wonder if such a variation present in the first place (factor 1.5 up to 2) will be a reason for not buying a cart rather then to simply try it out? It is of far lesser value, as seems generally accepted, so as to get 'anal' about the 'apparent' resulting arm resonance, deciding: No good for my arm!
One example, a Dorian I had re-tipped by J. Allaerts. It is quoted with 16 compliance, Allaerts let me know it was 24!! Oh, --- alright, factor 1.5 then I guess...
Personally I am highly suspicious as to how ANY of these values are derived --- it seems much more test-system dependant then we generally would like to believe.
Greetings, Axel |
Violin,
Your friendship remains a truly valued one and many thanks for clarifying what seemed obvious to me. Also, please don't worry about anyone being annoyed with me: not something that I would see as a problem!!
Raul and Downunder,
To answer your question: "What do you mean it may or may not be an original but not NOS. What are they s/h? Did they get them from Nagoaka?"
The word 'original' can mean anything, including anything that is being made now and ties in with your comment about Nagaoka still existing and presumably producing. The word 'NOS' generally means an original item that is no longer produced. That tends, for me at least, to suggest that there is a noted potential difference between the ones first produced (and now sold as NOS) and the presumably newer models (now sold as 'original'). Incidentally, I can still recall my surprise at first learning that Audio Technica produced a version of the ATML-170 using lower graded wiring ("LC-OFC") than the "OCC" wired version that I own.
In line with this and with the apparent concerns raised above by others about lpgear, I thought I would share an experience that 'might' prove informative. I had never seen that "MP50j" logo (so kindly just provided by Siniy123) but only the one that you listed above from the cartridge database (with which you are fully aware that I am familiar). The difference noted in given figures for the former was therefore (as Violin clarifies) sufficient to raise it with other potential buyers. Yet I could not and would not, in all good conscience, be so brazen as to claim that they were "fakes".
I'd therefore also like to see the differences that Birdliver identifies between the model with the "j" (presumably for Jeweltone and currently being made) in the logo and the other models (as with mine and the ones on the Cartridge database) which do not have this and which sell as NOS.
Hope this helps to clarify things and satisfies any inquisitors. |
Hey Guys, I am afraid that I innocently started all this crap about the Nagaoka MP-50 cartridge so I will tell you exactly how this whole thing came down.First do not be upset with Dgob.He and I are friends and have discussed audio together in the past so I went to him with a question. I have been interested in getting a MP-50 for some time and noticed on lpgear's web site that they sold the Nagaoka cartridges.I noticed on their specification sheet for the MP-50 that the compliance is stated at 8.5 and the weight is 8.0gms,fine.Then I checked the William Thacker web site and find that his spec. sheet shows the compliance at 12 and the weight is 8.0gms,the same as lpgear's. Thacker has another spec. sheet posted on e-bay that shows the weight as 9gms.I wondered why the differences in these areas, particularily the compliance. I knew that Dgob has a Nagaoka MP-50 so I e-mailed him to inquire about these differences in the spec. sheets. As he has stated in a thread above he then got in touch with lpgear to ask some questions.The big issue for me is , I cannot understand why a cartridge with the same Boron material cantilever and cartridge weight would show a 3.5 difference in compliance. This is very important to me as far as arm compatibility is concerned. The effective arm mass of my VPI tonarm is 9.1gms and if I use a cartridge with a compliance of 9.0 then the resonance falls at appx. 10.5hz which is in the middle of the 8 to 12 hz range which is considered ideal. However if the compliance is 8.5 then the resonance is appx. 13.6hz. I think normally that anyone would ask the question that with these differences in the spec. sheets, were these made by the same company or could they be licensed out by Nagaoka to a second source,but still have the Nagaoka name by this license agreement. The difference could also be a result of typographical errors when the spec. sheets were typed or even printed. I do not know but this is what I was trying to find out. Maybe Nagoaka still makes all of their cartridges, I do not know.I thought that they had stopped producing the MP-50 some time ago and all that was left was NOS. I do think that if cartridges that are QAed and are made to the very close tolerances that are required and the same spec. then you should not have this great variances for the same Model regardless of who makes them. Dgob or I never said that either of these two companies are selling fakes or copies.I was just trying to find out why the three differences in the posted specification lists. As I have stated above , if the compliance really is 8.5, then I would not use it in my tonearm no matter who made it. If any of you fellow Audiogonists can clear this up, then please do.
|
Dear Birdliver: Thank you. It is important to have a precise answer about.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Ray: When I buyed I did for what Siniy123 states: berilyum catilever, shibata, nude, etc, etc but I don't remember that LPgear states that that stylus replacement for the AT20SS was original.
As I posted and Siniy123 states maybe my sample was out of original specs.
I think that you have to send an email to LPgear asking about. In the past I made two or three questions and they always give me what on my understanding was true answers, I mean they don't told me that a replacement was original when it did not.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi Raul and others, I e-mailed Nagaoka and asked them for a dealer list for the MP-50 cartridge for the US and other countries. I will share any info that they send along. -bird |
dgob, I've never seen Nagaoka MP-50 in person. But LPGear photo grossly appears identical to: http://www.hifido.co.jp/sold/?lang=E&gcode=0303&keyword=MP-50&limit=10
http://www.lpgear.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=LG&Product_Code=NAGAOKAMP050&Category_Code=NAGAOKACART
I don't now how stylus is attached on this Nagaoka to the cantilever. But I see some trend in Audio Technica AT155MLX and AT33PTG to attach the diamond by blob of glue. Back then they used laser to cut precise rectangular hole in cantilever.
|
Raul. that description from LPGear that AT440LMa better then AT160ML is just silly. Not borderline silly, but so silly to be brushed off immediately. I think even my 4.5 y.o. daughter can recognize this :)
I purchased only once from Stereo Needles, it was AT-22 stylus. Comes in original Audio Technica package. Compared to other original in aftermarket packaging AT-22 purchased it doesn't sounds any better or worse or any different in construction and final quality.
Back then there were lot of aftermarket styli suppliers that bought original replacement styli from original manufacturers and supplied their own minimalistic package.
But my experience tells me that real aftermarket stylus, the one not coming from original manufacturer, will never have beryllium/golden plated/boron/any sophisticated cantilever or nude stylus.
Most of them is simple aluminum with some diamond on bushing.
May be you sample from LPGear was indeed a bad one. |
This sounds like the same issue with the AT20SS Stylus. LP Gear states that they are original NOS that they bought directly from AT. The place Raul recommends is 2 times the price. Audiophiles on the Vinyl Engine are stating that the LP Gear AT20SS Stylii that are NOS for $109.00 are the real thing, a NOS AT stylus, and berrylium cantilever, the exact replacement. I just want to be sure before spending any money. I appreciate if anyone knows the real deal on these stylus. Thanks, Ray |
Dgob
I am with Raul on this.
What do you mean it may or may not be an original but not NOS. What are they s/h? Did they get them from Nagoaka?
Quote from the LPgear web site
" LP Gear imports Nagaoka cartridges, styli and accessories and has full authorization from Japan to sell Nagaoka products."
Is this a lie from LPgear?
I have had good experiences from LPgear in the past.
Or are you suggesting to buy off the two grey market German sellers or some other grey market seller on ebay as they can sell NOS that are not bought or authorised by Nagaoka but guarantee they are NOS?
I just bought a MP50 from LPgear based on your rave that it is in the top performing MM's and Raul has stated that it is very good as well. |
Dear Dgob: Can you check here if your MP-50 and the LPgear one are similar in appearence?
http://www.cartridgedb.com/
you look for: Jeweltone in MI ( type ).
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Dgob: I can't speak on the MP-50 by LPgear due that what I own and owned are the Nagaoka MP-50 Super.
What I can't understand is what do you want to share with us? that the LPgear is not the real MP-50? or only that it is not a NOS.
Nagaoka still exist in Japan and works in audio areas: http://www.nagaoka.co.jp/
Could be that the ones that LPgear has on sale comes from a different Nagaoka ( original ) " bunch "?. I would like that someone that already buy it through LPgear can share his experiences on the quality perfromance of that cartridge, in the mid-time, for you or other interested people, the best we can do is to ask directly to Nagaoka: could you do it for us?
Thank you in advance.
Btw, I buy several stylus replacement and cartridge accesories through LPgear with good success. The 20SS experience was the exception. I know too that many persons in this forum buy different audio items from this source ( LPgear ) with very good results.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Siniy123,
Another Agoner trying to get a Nagaoka MP50 was attracted to LpGear. However, their cartridges did not appear to me to be the originals. I contacted them and sought clarification. It appears that they offer their MP50's as original but cannot claim that they are NOS. The friend has decided to go elsewhere for an NOS model. Just for general information.
Jlin/Raul,
Thanks for you kind suggestions.
Happy listening one and all |
Dear Ray: Maybe after my last post to Siniy you are more confuse than before.
If I was you and money no object I will buy the NOS replacement on the source I give you or try to find a different source through the net.
Yes, in the link that I posted the price is almost the double so maybe yo want to go for the lower one in LPgear.
Is there a big difference? not night and day but there is a difference. Both perform good but I'm almost a perfeccionist and always look for the best and nothing less.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Dgob: Jlin already give you his advise.
One " tip " is to clean with a razor-knife the cartridge pin conectors and the headshell-adaptor pin connectors, after the use of the razor-knife then clean with stylus liquid cleaner and if you can clean inside the headshell-adaptor pin connectors.
Be care with the stylus guard when you set up-down because is so small that you could have an " accident " and bent the cartridge cantilever.
Btw, it likes to ride with small positive VTA/SRA but you are the best judge on your audio system.
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Siniy123: The LPgear is brighter that the original that I get in NOS from my brother.
Unfortunately I sold the LPgear one and I can't say if theres is a phisycal difference.
Yes, I know that from different stylus replacement sources Stereo Needles is the most expensive but I don't know other source for that NOS cartridge stylus replacement.
Now, could be that the LPgear sample that I test was not on specs?, could be but I can't tell for sure.
It is very dificult to trust 100% on many of those cartridge stylus replacement.
If you look for a AT160ML stylus replacement you can read in LPgear that the " latest " stylus replacement is the AT440LMa and they say that the specs are better than the original AT160ML, well this is totally wrong/untrue: the specs on the original are way better than the 440.
Sometimes and even if you have the right know how level on the subject it is a matter of " luck " that what we buy perform as we are waiting for.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
I just compared ATN20SS from LPGear to NOS ATN15SS. ATN15SS cantilever seems to made by extrusion, it has ridges.
ATN20SS - seems to have a shiny finish, no ridges. Still very thin, but no Micro Acoustics thin.
Diamond on ATN20SS is of higher quality, more accurate, clear and generally neater. |
HI Raul, what the difference LP gear is selling as original ATN20SS and that original-original you use?
I found LP gear ATN15SS to be identical to my NOS AT15SS. |
Dear Ray: The LPgear is not an original one but one made for LPgear as a replacemet but not original, of course that looks like the original but is not and does not performs at the same quality level than the original.
I tell you this because I try it: I make my mistake. Right now I have the original in my AT 20SS cartrridge.
Yes, the original is more expensive becvause is not easy to get in NOS condition.
Regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Hello Raul, Would this be the same stylus replacement? This is the one I was referring to from LP Gear.
http://www.lpgear.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=LG&Product_Code=ATN20SS
Please let me know..Thanks, Ray |
Dgob,
Don't have any tips for set-up of the MMC-2, however, it is a rather high compliance cartridge, so a lightweight headshell would probably work better rather than the heavyweight you are planning to use. |
Dear Dgarretson: I eiter. What happen is that I use to a cartridge set up always the same recording tracks that I know extremely well so if in a cartridge the sound does not comes in the " right "/near way I have try to achieve it through changes in the whole cartridge set up and the VTA/SRA is one of the " handy " changes.
There is no reason, other than the cartridge was/is wrong, for I can't achieve what I looking for because I know exactly for what looking for. Not big deal: practice.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Halcro: Thank you, very interesting information that will help to the P-77 owners.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Siniy123,
Congratulations. I think I saw that actual cartridge and considered it as a replacement for my damaged ATML-170. I'd be fascinated to hear how the LC-OFC version (I believe only available in Japan) compares to the OCC version I've had. Maybe somewhere down the road..
Happy listening |
Hi All,
Does anyone have detailed instructions for the set up of the B&O MMC2 (in keeping with those provided for the Garrott P77 above)? Otherwise, can anyone share their tips for setting one up to best effect?
I'm hoping to use mine on my Audiocraft AC3300 unipivot tonearm with an Ikeda headshell of 17g.
Many thanks |
Dear Downunder: I figure that. I hope you decide to make the change on your phono stages, worth to do it: you and the music deserve it.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Rayr2: No, don't do that, is a mistake. Here it is the original stylus replacement: http://www.stereoneedles.com/audio-technica.html
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi Raul, For those interested, here is the link to the original specifications which came from John and Brian Garrott with my two Garrott P77s. Please magnify the images to read carefully the specs containe around the circular disc. GARROTT P77 Regards Halcro |
Today I received all the pieces of Audio Technica AT-ML170 LC-OFC. Body from Japan and NOS original stylus from elsewhere in USA. For first hour at 1.5g or so it is best tracker I've ever had, really clings. Will continue further run-in and evaluation. Thanks Raul! |
Hi Siniy123.
thanks for your advise.
I have it at parallel now. The ADC is a good cartridge, however the Empire is in a class above.
regards |
Hi Raul
No my MM is loaded at 47K.
Sounds like you need to petition for the global standard on loading MM cartridges to change from 47K to 100K. Good luck!
Capacitance is at 250pf at the moment. I will experiment with that. Is the theory going down gets a tighter sound and going up in cap gets a slightly warmer more rolled off highs?
cheers |
Downunder, my ADC XLM III sounds very good flat. |
Thank You, Raul and Dgob....I was considering getting a NOS AT20SS Stylus from LP Gear for $109.00 from what I hear, this stylus truely brings out the best in this cartridge. I hope it outperforms my newer OC9 MLII...and AT440MLA...and the AT150MLx.....Ray |
Dear Downunder: In your case: that's mean that you are loading the MM/MI cartridges at 100kohms and 100-150pf on total capacitance?. Like in the LOMC set up is important the loading impedance in the MM/MI is important too not only the load impedance precise figure but the total capacitance too. Yes, these two parameters makes a difference for the better if we follow it or " prevent "/stop that the cartridge can't shows its best if we don't follow it.
VTA/SRA on ADC?, you have to test it.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Halcro: I think that not only Phaser or Axel are interested on the P-77 information but many other people. I appreciate if you can share that information with all of us through this thread.
Thank you in advance.
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi all
I too have changed the VTA on the Empire 1080LT to arse up. It does sound better, smoother yet more detailed, better timing and more bass impact / weight. Like Dgob, I need to play around a bit more with the VTA, but arse up is definately the best sounding set up.
I guess living with MC's, it is uncommon for them to sound better with their arse up.
Raul - myself and no doubt Phaser set up the MM's with exactly the same care as MC's.
Now, Does the ADC XLM 111 sound better arse up? |
I've been breaking in an Empire 888E retipped with an NOS .2x.7 mil nude elliptical stylus. Like 1080LT the 888E seems to want an extremely positive VTA. The forum achives on AA remark mainly on the impressive bass & midrange of this vintage Empire, but Raul's recommended high tilt brings out a vivid HF without sacrificing the warm & seductive "Empire" sound. Thanks again Raul, as I would never myself have guessed to go so far from neutral on VTA. |
Dear Downunder: +++++ " have you removed that flimsy cartridge cover on the 1080LT? wondering if removing that flimsy thing improves the SQ. " +++++
no I did not yet but is possible that doing that we can have a tiny improvement. I understand Dgob did and maybe he can give you a precise answer about.
Btw, do you already try to make changes on the VTA/SRA in your 1080LT set up?
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Phaser: Halcro is the " man " with the P-77. The only characteristic that I can say/remember is more important with the P-77 is around its VTA/SRA set up that like in the Empire 1080LT likes to ride in positive and generous way. Don't be afraid to tilt up your tonearm bearing more than normal than what you use with other cartridges.
Btw, I detect that the 1080LT has lower distortion that other cartridges and due to it we can " feel " that the cartridge sound is not so " alive " like other cartridges, if happen that you are " feeling " in this way then you can give/add it 1db-1.5db through the preamp volume set. The 1080LT lower distortions permit to hear deeper into the music.
Anyway, like I told you if we take care on the MM/MI whole set up the rewards comes alone and the music enjoy will grow up on pleasure and emotion in our whole " human body ".
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Eisunius
No, definately use the MM. MC cartridges are generally in between 0.2mv & 0.7mv. The 1080LT is 3.0 mv - a lot more.
Let us know how it sounds in your setup. |
Hi All,
As with Phaser, I followed Raul's suggestions for setting up the Empire 1080LT. It definitely works. The cartridge moved straight into the realms of the top performing MM's. I need to give it more time and play around a little with the very positive VTA that I've now given it but it sounds very, very promising and can now achieve this on my favoured unipivot: the AC3300. I've taken the empire stylus guard off for playing.
Strongly recommended when set up in line with Raul's set up suggestions and confirmed to work on any decent unipivot. |
Hi everyone!
I have read every single post on this subject, very interesting stuff.
I too have purchased an Empire 1080LT cartridge. I have a question, it says on the specs/info provided by the seller that its output is 3mV. Is that correct, isn't that output more like an MC's output? Should I then use the MC input instead of the MM?
Waiting in anticipation, Eisubius |
Hi Phaser, If you send me your Email address (sorry i've lost it from before), I'll send you all the original technical information for the Garrott P77 given to me personally by John and Brian Garrott. I've already sent it all to Axel.
Regards Henry |
Raul, I dutifully followed your setting up instructions for the Empire 1080 LT and I have to hand it to you, it sounds very much better! A much fuller bodied sound where before it seemed constricted. Better bass extension and articulation as well. Significantly better on voices with more of the resonance getting through. The top end is sweeter and overall a very impressive presentation. I have about 16 hours on the cartridge now and will keep it in place for a couple of more weeks before I try the Garrott P77.
Again, any recommendation on he settings for the P77?
Clearly getting everything right makes a huge difference to the presentation of the music and as you mention in your last post to Downunder I think I have not been as diligent as the process clearly deserves. I will experiment of course but the Vector is not the easiest arm in the world to adjust quickly.
I'll ask the question re phono stage load impedance change to 100K Ohms |
Dear Downunder: Like in any LOMC cartridge the MM/MI ones needs too a good matching tonearm and in this subject we have to take in count that many MM/MI are high compliance devices but even if not we have to try in different tonearms/headshells to mate the better we can.
One thing that IMHO is very important, for the people that like you/Phaser and many others that are advocate to LOMC cartridges for many years and now want ( are curious about ) to test the MM/MI alternative, to give the same treatment/caress to the MM/MI cartridges at the same level that you do it with the LOMC cartridges where you make everything you need for the LOMC shows at its best. Not only on set-up but on load impedance/capacitance, tonearm, headshells, wires, cleaning, etc, etc: otherwise you ( and any one else ) never hear or know how great the MM/MI alternative is.
It is worth to try hard for any one of those MM/MI cartridges show you its real quality performance. I think that you and even Phaser need to contact your phono stage builders and ask how to change the load impedance to 100kohms to cope with the MM/MI cartridges, normally is not big deal to make that change that is very important on the whole quality performance subject.
Btw, try to find the ADC Astrion that in my HO was the best ADC cartridge.
On the AT25 you speak of " typical AT sound " that at the end you name it: lean. I own every single top of the line in the AT whole catalog but the AT-25 but I own the similar AT-24 ( that comes with out integrated headshell ) and IMHO no one of these top rated AT ones sounds lean, even the AT-24. If you can try to find an AT-24 or AT20SS or AT180ML-OCC.
+++++ " Axcel, Sounds like you may need some tubes in your system if you are to go back to MC's " +++++
IMHO a good cartridge ( with the right overall set-up. ) has to sounds good in any decent kind of electronics ( tubes or SS. )
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Axelwahl: Your feelings about MM/MI are not weird especially with top rated samples.
I own the AT 160ML-LC/OCC that I almost never heard/hear it due mostly that I have so many different cartridges, I will take the time to do it very soon, for what I read about it could be a very good cartridge. I think in the same Audio Technica " family " that your AT-140LC.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dgarettson,
I have a clip that I will not be using for a few years (too many others to grow familiar with). If you want to take this to tide you over until you can produce or find/buy a new one, just contact me off line by email and we can arrange to ship it to you.
Cheers |
Downunder,
Regarding the ADC-XLM range, I think the problems with performance are complex. Apparently, ADC's earlier cartridges in the range (particularly the "Super" cartridges) had very high compliance figures (of course, along with very wide frequency ranges). Despite their amazing sound quality, they were subject to colapsed or broken cantilevers due to the unique design that they used at that time. It was to overcome this problem that they produced the later and, most particularly, the "Improved" range. These had a more standard design and gave a more sturdy product for mass production.
Yet, there are differences in the performance of the later and Improved cartridges that also makes it a little more complex than a chronological development with each 'newer' cartridge being an improvement on the earlier one.
Probably as clear as mud but I hope it helps a little |