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
Hi,
a quick report back on SAS stylus for V15 III cart. It is *hyper* resolved, but I can not go enough down with my SME V arm to get at least to 'level arm' position. (last band is lifting the arm out of the groove)

So far the V15 III with SAS is the only cart that can track my most difficult LP band see comment: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1245595534&openflup&65&4#65

Therefore currently I'm back with Windfeld and XF-1 tranny, (without any resistive loading) whilst awaiting an SME V arm shim as to obtain more VTA travel.
Cheers,
Dear Lharasim: +++++ " whats really crazy funny is that relaxed/colored sound you mention is what people today think is good.. " +++++

this unfortunately is what from many years now is happening in this high-end hobby and unfortunately too is that this totally wrong " attitude /way of thinking " was and is supported and promote by dishonest profesional audio reviewers and audio dealers.

Sad that many of those audio comercial people does not care and be honest with we the customers that support/mantain ( $$$$ ) the whole audio industry that include all of them!!!

It is time that our each one audio evaluations and comparison will do it taking the live/real music as first/main reference and not take other audio products like a reference other that one of that product was compared against live music. It is time to come back to the root of the audio entertainment: LIVE MUSIC.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dgob
Glanz MFG-71 is the same unit as Astatic MF-100.

I never heard any Glanz branded cartridge.
Hi: This is what you can read in other thread about a MM/MI cartridge. It is good to read/see that there are people that already try the MM/MI alternative and that are realy satisfied with:

+++++ " 09-14-09: Pentatonia
Hi everybody!
It is not many days ago I did a direct comparison between the Voice and ZYX R-1000 Airy3 (gold) in my own system. I completely disagree with the opinion that Voice is an easy listening cartridge. Instead of this has the most revealing three dimentional and plausible sound I've ever heard from my system. If I would try to describe with one word the voice I'd say ENERGY. Do you know that violin bow is made of horse hair? Have you ever heard that? Have you ever notice the horn loading sound of trombone? Well, I never had. Airy 3 is easy listening cartridge for sure and not my cup of tea anymore. Don't you believe that is the right time to remove any cryogenicaly treated device/part from our system?
Thanks a lot,
Pentatonia.
Pentatonia (Threads | Answers) +++++++

Btw, Lharasim: real/live music is all about!!.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Perrew: Unfortunately I don't have or heard/hear the CD version but the LP with the right set-up can be an eye opener, a system challenge and a learning test on differences between cartridges, obviously if you know what to look at. I like this recording.

My P-76 perform ( with the Grace G-940 tonearm. ) at the top of any imaginable quality level, like " real " music.

Now, there are other MM/MI cartridges that make the same in some areas but overall my vote is still to the Andante one. This fact could be change over time when I test/try other cartridges or when one of the ones that I already tested give it a new opportunity.

Perrew, I'm on trouble with all this subject because the week has only seven days and each day only 24 hours.

Btw, yesterday I mount again my B&O MMC2 in a medium/high mass AT-1503 tonearm with a Technics ( nothing special. ) headshell ( the one where through a threaded weight you can add 4grs, this weight goes in the headshell uper side. ) and ( with out fine tunning. ) its quality performance is impressive, very near the the P-76: madness!, because in the last month I try 4-6 cartridges and all of them performs at first/top level and are so close in the main performance factors that is truly difficult to make absolute judgements.

It is whith these MM/MI where I have to really bring out all what I learn about performance and the discern about diferent level performance, not an easy task even if you have the right tools to do it. This almost never happen to me with LOMC cartridges.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Siniy123,

Many thanks. I could not open the link but think it's the same one as I have seen on vinylengine. Given your thoughts on the parallels between these Glanz and the MF-100: what are your thoughts on the performance of the MF-100? Do you have a comparible Glanz experience?
Dear friends: I posted that in today status the LOMC alternative IMHO is no any more the Reference/Standard for home analog source but the " NOS " MM/MI alternative. This opinion is not a " light/3 hours " one but an opinion that has its foundation through a very long process.

Well, I'm receiving emails from Agoner's ( thak's for that. ) asking/questioning/supporting and even 2-3 that ask if I'm not afraid to do a " ridiculous " with that opinion and in this last issue I recall ( I want to share with you this experience. ) that around five years ago ( maybe more ) I posted that IMHO the DD alternative ( in specific the SP-10 MK2 ) can even and/or surpass the quality performance on a Walker or any other BD TT.

One Agoner that was a Walker TT owner almost laugh on that opinion and other Agoner " big boys " support/agree with that Walker owner and posted about. All of them say it that I was totally wrong ( for say the least. Btw, all those posts are somewhere in threads in this forum. ).

That time I propose that I can make a trip to that Walker owner home with my SP-10MK2 under my arm, with two tonearms ( GST-801 ) and two identical LOMC cartridges and see what happen, this trip/challenge never occur.

Through the time ( in diferent threads. ) I follow supporting the DD alternative when almost no one take care about.
Well after all these years that Walker owner decide to try the DD alternative and today he does not have the BD TT anymore ( Walker ) but a Technics DD one.

I post this experience because many of us are not prepare to suddenly change what we learn through many years ( LOMC subject. ) and not only change but even think on that change/alternative. As a fact I'm not proposing a change: " leave the MC and take the MM ) ", NO I'm only saying that it is time to test the MM/MI alternative.

It is my hope, in favor of all of us, that in the near future the MM/MI alternative be a real alternative for each one of us.
IMHO I think that we need not only more analog alternatives but better alternatives: realy better not only diferent.

To achieve better alternatives we must do a real change of our audio overall " attitude " and think in deep in the word EVOLUTION that IMHO is the one that could help to improve the high-end audio industry.

Can I be wrong?, certainly but that is my today opinion.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Raul, could you elaborate on what MCAT770 does better than the CD? I own the CD and the LP is on order. Also do I read you correctly when you say the P76 is your reference? I have a AT15 and MMC1 to be mounted on a TT, do you find the P76 superior to these as well?
Dear Dgarretson: When I make the whole process to optimize a cartridge set-up ( I mean my reference tracks on those 6-7 LPs. ) I almost always test the cartridge performance ( or comparisons between cartridges. ) with other very especial recordings, one of this recordings is very useful to discern about the quality and rigthness of the mid and low bass, I'm talking of a 1982 45rpm ( Disco-Mix: one track each side. ) David Bowie " Putting of Fire " ( from the original Soundtrack: Cat People. ), lyrics by Bowie and music by Giorgio Moroder.

If any one likes this kind of music or not is not important the important subject is how performs your audio system at 88 db ( average ) in the seat position and peaks on the 96-97 db. Well,hear how the drums sound when the whole battery
start to play, diferent cartridges performs in diferent way but the very good ones in this frequency range make it that the drum sounds tight and dry with no distortion or any kind of " soft " sound.

I have some other " reference " recordings ( same music type/kind of. ) to fine tunning in a specific frequency range but this one can help you to hear true differences between the MF-100 and the P-76 or any other cartridge ( MC or MM/MI. ) .

It is not easy that some of you own this recording and maybe today very hard to find, the recording comes by MCA Records ( backstreet Records that was a Division of MCA . ) with the catalog number: MCAT 770.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Interesting that Raul brings up microphones (micros). One of my good audio buddies has years of experience recording acoustic music. He frequently complains about the current standard of "close mic'ing", on both vocals and instruments, and the subsequent multi-channel mixing.

Since this trend in recording technics has grown over the past 30 years, one might say it parallels the trend to favor MC cartridges. It may be said both this recording process and MC favor ultra detail and a false sense of air. It seems that MM/MI present a more natural sense of detail along with air and sense of space within the soundstage (as heard in live performances).

To extend this line of thinking further, is it any wonder for the popularity of clean, original LPs from the 50s and 60s? They had few mics, spaced placement, little mixing, and all musicians were present for the same recording (but that is a subject for another topic). They must have musical merit, it cannot be simply nostalgia that drives current demand.
Dear Dave and friends: For the last few months I heard/test ( in my system ) not only my top LOMC cartridges but other top LOMC like the Coral, AT Supreme, Clearaudio Titanium, etc, etc, trying to " figure " if the LOMC signature analog sound could/can be still the " reference/standard " like an analog performance ( I'm still hearing the LOMC ones. ) source.

I really tru hard with set up on the cartridges going very " deep " with tiny tiny changes on the set-up to avoid any single doubt of what I'm heard/hearing.

Well, I decided that the LOMC ( any ) alternative is not anymore a Reference/Standard for analog source: the MM/MI is IMHO not only a different level of quality but a real better quality level that make that this MM/MI alternative ( with the right whole set-up ) be the New and today unbeatable Reference/Standard for Analog Source.

I know that for many LOMC advocate people/owners ( like me )
my statement could be something " premature " or hard to belive but we ( each one ) just have to try the MM/MI alternative to aware/believe in this New Reference/Standard analog source.

I have no single doubt on this opinion that I know other persons share with me and I know that fortunately for the MUSIC and for us music lovers the best is for coming.

I hope that in a near future the " new " LOMC cartridges improve/beat its today quality performance status to not only even but surpass the MM/MI New Reference/Standard: could be glorious if this happen and could be glorious too that the MM/MI alternative grow up in our home audio systems.

I have to say that we need better phono stages and more important: dedicated MM/MI designed to cope/mate the MM/MI specific needs and in the other side LOMC dedicated phono stages too.

IMHO I think that we are living and we are " actors " of this very important and great Evolution time that already started. I invite you ( all of you ) to be part of that Evolution and not only spectator of what is happening: we need to make things happen in benefit of MUSIC and in benefit to the enjoyment of the sound reproduction in our each one home audio system.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul & all: to rephrase my short recent experience with two MM cartridges and MM vs. MC, the question occurs whether the sense of embodiment and weight that one hears with MM is natural or additive as an artifact of the technology. If we were skiing, MC would feel like a carved turn and MM more like laying back on the tails in powder. With a heightened sense of embodiment, the experience becomes very enjoyable and as you say, each MM cartridge may seem better than the last. One needs only to check whether detail has been enhanced or obscured by embodiment. Similarly, when dynamics are as alive as with P-76, one needs only to check whether dynamic energy is carried by the music or presented artificially like a photograph with over-saturated colors. With P-76, I have the sense of a tighter more forward dynamic evelope. With MF-100 energy is liberated into a larger space. IMHO the latter sounds less forced and more revealing of detail and separation. However perhaps P-76 is still breaking in.
Raul, whats really crazy funny is that relaxed/colored sound you mention is what people today think is good.... I understand if that's what you like it to sound like...... but please don't tell us that its realistic as in what real live music is like

IMMHO the P-76 in a rabco tonearm sound very realistic as in what real music sounds like

I love this hobbie

Good Listening!
Dear Dgarretson and friends: One thing very important subject that IMHO we must take in count when we are making cartridge evaluations is that what we are hearing is what the micros take when this micros are in place very near of the " source "/instruments/whole event, it is almost imposible that in that very short distance a horn/piano/guitar/voice/orchestra sound be " relaxed " or soft other that you do on purpose but not in a natural way.

Now, that that relaxed/colored sound like it more than the " natural sound " of the source is another matter but IMHO does not means that the c artridge is a better performer .

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Dave: I run the P-76 even/level like you but on the MF-100 ( and its little brothers: MF-200/300. ) my set up is with positive VTA.

maybe the MF-100 has a " greater sense of relaxation " ( just like the AKG-P25MD. ) that the P-76 but IMHO that Astatic characteristic put it more away from a live music performance than the P-76, I don't want to make more judgement about till I hear both cartridges in our " final? " tonearm prototype.

Your experiences on these cartridges like the ones of other people confirm ( in some ways. ) the necessity of a universal tonearm where each cartridge can show its best quality performance where there will be no " land " to mis-match/unmatched tonearm results.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dgarretson, to each his own we can agree to disagree :)

I am trying not to upset people/anyone...

I have heard a few Linear air bearing arms (not this one)...they all have that very nice airy sound if you will lol..but in my hearing not right IMMHO

every room treated(my room is) or untreated. the size ,shape etc will play a major roll in the final sound we hear..

whats really funny is most people that spend mega money on equipment(MC carts) don't spend money on real room treatment...IMMHO how can anyone evaluate what something can sound like when most of what you hear is your very non linear room!!

Good Listening!
Based on above comments, after breaking in MF-100 I will remount P-76 and try a wider range of adjustments. So far I have been perhaps too casual with adjustments(around 1.2g; level VTA on P-76 and slight downward tilting arm on MF-100). MF-100 is definitely giving more detail & accuracy of timbre. I would agree that its "energy level" is lower-- but there is also a greater sense of relaxation and calmer background.

Lharasim, the Trans-fi Terminator is quite special and very far from "very wrong." There are design features on this arm unlike others: short 4.5cm arm with low operating pressure/low vibration.
Dear Dg/Lh: We all know the importance and the difference that can makes the tonearm/cartridge matching subject ( other than because the " right " resonance frequency, that is important but....).

The Dave statement: +++++ " MF-100 is subtler, more detailed, has better bass control, and throws a deeper soundstage. " +++++

certainly is what he heard against the P-76 performance and that " better bass control " ( that between other things means cleaner and less intrusive. ) is what made that we hear more detail and better and deeper soundstage.

I have mounted the MF-100 but I don't hear/heard it by many " moons " but for what I recall the overall energy of this cartridge ( all over the frequency range ) is lower that in the P-76 ( where seems to me your tonearm is not handling it at the same level performance that with the Astatic one. ) so its presentation is different but I think not better than the P-76 ( I have to hear the MF-100 soon. ). This cartridge ( P-76 ) that I'm using almost everyday is improving its quality performance, the overall change is of be more and better " refined " quality, no I'm not " equalized " ( yet ) to the P-76 sound but that through the play hours changes ( subtle ) are coming.

I like both and this " I like both " is something that when I start my full MM/MI adventure was a very nice surprise to me ( that never happen with my very long experience with top LOMC cartridges. ), let me explain about:

till today every single MM/MI cartridge that I test/try sounds great and several times what I heard tell me that " this " today cartridge is better than the last night one that was a great too, maybe and just maybe this experience is what Dave is experienced about.
Anyway, what those kind of experiences tell/told me is that more than ever my music LP's test references ( tracks ) are more important that I imagine becaus e through it I really can discern on the real and more than on the real the differences on each one cartridge quality performances.

Last two days I was hearing the Ortofon X5-MC ( HOMC ) testing at 100K ( I already reported about ) and I receive my second sample of the AKG P-25MD ( it is curious: if you want an original NOS stylus replacement for the AKG you have to spend 200.00, well I buy the full cartridge NOS for 80.00 ) that is very sensitive on tracking with medium/high mass tonearms ( the cartridge weight is 3.5grs and HC. ), well ( like almost any MM/MI cartridge ) I made the set up and listen and after 30 minutes the cartridge performs ( maybe at 90-95% of its real performance ) guess what?, yes GREAT and you can questioning me: Hey for you everything performs great!! and the true dear friends is that that is in this nice and ejoying way ( and Axel I'm not yet equalized to MM/MI sound, I prevent that hearing LOMC top performers at least one day at a week, I can't " hold up/last " more time. ).

I don't hear yet all the MM/MI cartridges ( I have like 20 more to hear and I'm still buying. ) I own because of time to do it: each time that I test a new one and I say only for two days I just can't do it because its each one great quality performance and instead two days I take two weeks maybe more of enjoy it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dgarretson I use a mechanical tangent arm Rabco sl-8e I have found I do not like the sound of air bearing tonearms way wrong IMMHO..

Good Listening!
Hi Dgarretson,from your description of the MF-100 and P-76 it seems you think the P-76 is more dynamic and musical but the MF-100 does detail,bass and soundstaging better,in your system.

I guess it all comes down to personal preferences.For me,the P-76 does the detail,bass and soundstaging very well and with it's other unique qualities is why I like it more than my other cartridges.It sure is nice to be able to get great sound for so little money.The MF-100 is the next cartridge on my need to try list.
Hi Lharasim, perhaps the higher compliance of MF-100 is good with a linear air bearing arm. I agree P-76 handles the presence region really well-- voice & brass are very organic. 10 of those will get you through the night!
Hi Dgarretson, I am going to have to disagree on the mf100 versus P-76......I own many cartridges including unobtainium Astatic MF2500 spec 10-40K +- 3db which is better then the MF100 as specs goes anyways...

The point is I think your tonearm plays a serious roll on what you hear....for me the P-76 sounds like music... Plays the brass correctly ( peculiar Attack! ) vowel sounds of the human voice, of each instrument of the orchestra etc..

Thats why I bought 10 of these I really think its the real deal!!

Good Listening!
I must add after a few more hrs of development that MF-100 has fantastic bass extension and warmth.
After several hours comparing NOS Astatic MF-100 to NOS Andante P-76-- Yeah! At an average cost of just $100 for the two, clearly there is no reason to choose between these cartridges...but... as remarked by others, P-76 is alive, forward, & involving. MF-100 is subtler, more detailed, has better bass control, and throws a deeper soundstage. MF-100 splits the difference between classic MM and MC sound. MF-100 is objectively the better cartridge; P-76 works deeper into the emotions. Either of these retires my AQ7000 Fe5. Still awaiting a Soundsmith retipped Helikon for comparison.
Dear Ptmconsulting: Yes, it works at 100K. I can't say about differences against 47K but this Ortofon X5-MC performs very good at that load impedance comparing against my " new " reference/standard on cartridge quality performance: MM/MI.

With my MM/MI cartridges I already try several load capacitance values from almost 0pf to 600pf and I find that 100pf is ( overall ) the best compromise and it is with this value how I hear these cartridges: it works!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dgob,
here is Glanz infromatio from Vinyl Engine
http://downloads.nakedresource.com/download_centre/index.php?glanz/glanz_cartridge_data.pdf

In my opinion Glanz G7 is basicall is Glanz MFG-71L, which is same as Astatic MF-100
Here is link to spec picture
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7794685@N03/sets/72157615140899137/

cartridge weight is around 4.2 g
I heard back from jim Hagerman. His thughts are that 100k loading will probably work well with old Shure and other semi-ancient MM cartridges, but he doubts that it will prove beneficial to modern day Mc's (high or low). He did suggest that removing any capacitive loading would be truly eye opening.
Dear Dgarretson: Here it is, frequency response: 10hz-20k +,- 1db; channel separation at 1khz: 30db and 25db at 10khz; output: 3.5mv; tracking force: 1.0-1.5grs; load capacitance: 100pf; stylus shape: line contact/parabolic; weight: 5.5grts.

Great performer that Astatic MF-100.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I apologize if this info may be somewhere above, but does anyone have the full spec on Astatic MF-100?

Thanks, Dave
Hi All,

Someone on this thread mentioned having tried Glanz cartridges along with a range of notable others. I have just purchased the Glanz G5 and would love any feedback on this and its performance.

It's proving almost impossible to find any information about it or its G7 and G3 siblings online. The only things I've found relate to reports from recording engineers who described its lesser manifestation (the Glanz MFG-71E) as the best mm, topping the Nagaoka MP50 in their ranking. Any help/information would be truly appreciated

Many thanks
Thanks Raul. I posted a question to Jim Hagerman to seek his opinion and resistor location (since I amusing his Trumpet phono stage). I am eagerly awaiting your test results.

Thanks,
Bob
Dear Ptmconsulting: The internal resistance ina HOMC is relative lower than in a MM one: around 100 ohms against around 900 ohms, this could make a difference.

Anyway I never try a HOMC at 100K. I own two ( I thnik )HOMC that now that you mentioned I will try it and see how performs at 100K, I'm thinking on my Ortofon X-5MC.

I can't give you a precise answer.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Axel: I concur with Dgarretson, those TX2575 ( Vishay. ) are really neutral and top choice.

You can find here: http://www.percyaudio.com/Catalog.pdf

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hello all. I'm now listening to my new p-76 on my p-mount liear tracker technics SL-7 tt, using a SUT & bottlehead phono stage at 47k. It has 2 hrs on it and is very different from my Denon 103r on a RB300 with cardas wire, technoweight and twl's hifi mod on my modded and replinthed lenco. I do love the raw live feeling of my dl103r, but i seem already to be getting more dynamic and transient impact from the p-76, and like others i'm hearing a beautiful air and space in the upper regions. also there is a delicacy there that i rather like. It still feels a bit tight though at the moment, something that i expect to change with running in. Very nice for a "midfi" but p-mount turntable!
Raul,
+++ Axel, I urge to change your load impedance to 100K!!! +++

I'll work on it, but is a TX2575 *THE* resistor for this, or have we also some other useful suggestions?

I'd truly dislike the though have so solder and re-solder a discrete R on a chippoed SMD pcb... eish!
Greetings,
Axel
Dear Axelwahl: I agree with you on those fabulous characteristics that you mentioned on the Empire and that IMHO are characteristics of other top MM/MI cartridges where almost no LOMC cartridge " can't touch " that kind of quality.

Axel, I urge to change your load impedance to 100K!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Funflyer: Welcome aboard, Agon is an audiofest.

Like you explain there is no doubt about the " name of the game " is synergy and when we are talking of analog and in specific of cartridges the matching between toearm/cartridge ( synergy ) is what makes the difference like with your Decca experience.

It is not an easy task to achieve whole synergy in our each one audio system, very complex because many and different factors that has multiple interrelationship in between and this is what makes this hobby so estimulant and creative: each one audio learning curve.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
(My first post here!) I too have gotten a lot of pleasure reading this thread. Rauliruegas' initial post is brilliant and brings up a multitude of questions about where we have been and where we are going with higher-end audio. After some years' hiatus, I have returned to the fun and have been pleasantly surprised to find quite a few vintage MM and MC cartridges on ebay and a-gon which cost relatively little, but which clearly can hold court with current designs. Who needs a $16K ZYX anyway?

Frogman's post (~5 Sept) is right-on ref. component matching and synergies, echoing the initial post. I think it's part of the fun of (analog more than digital to be sure) audio: all those tiny adjustments and changes we can make to alter the final sound. And that final sound is what we choose it to be - maybe our preferred listening position in our preferd venue; maybe something totally unreal. Trusting the professional reviewers with their flavor of the month club is silly and just plain lazy. My perception of sonic reality as "the best of all possible worlds" is definitely not the same as the reviewers' (ref the post about HPs preferred Carnegie Hall seats,) so why should I depend on them for more than an initial, cursory evaluation?

I bought a London Decca Super VDH years ago when visiting England and was SO excited to get it mounted in my system (ET2 arm on a Michell Gyrodec) - only to be horribly disappointed. I thought that I either had a bad sample or that I had benn royally "had." I recently pulled it out again and re-mounted it - with intervening tweaks/mods. Better, but still no cigar. It didn't last long, replaced by asn ATOC9II. Then, on a lark as I was reconstituting a retro system, I mounted the same Decca in a Thorens 126 II stock arm and voila - magic! Now I understand the awe that many people have for Deccas, but they need (as above posters have noted) to be mated to the right gear. I think that the arm was the biggest factor, but the upstream electronics could also play into the equation.

It's just what I've rediscovered about this hobby: so many options and variations - and without a doubt - more than one path to perfection. To answer the initial question, "who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC," I say we all need both kinds to match up with the other gear. My inner child gets many more hours of fun with more toys, and my adult self benefits from those magical combinations which bring the MUSIC to my ears in an enjoyable simulation of my percieved sonic reality.
I've read through most of this thread with a lot of interest. It's great that there has been some experimentation and challenging of the 47K wisdom for MM loadings.

Now I wonder if this same logic might be applied to a HOMC? I have an older Dynavector XX-1 High Output. It is the predicessor to the current XX-2 and is supposed to be loaded at 47K and work well with MM phono stages. Anyone try out the 100K loading with a HOMC yet?

I already know the answers I'm going to get "try it out and report back to us."
Hi,
I just now put back my Empire S1000ZE/X after a short sojourn with my recently returned new Windfeld.

Just listening to piano and orchestra is such a relief in 'reality'. It is of course all related to my all SS system, but the Windfeld can't touch the sound quality, of sweetness, pearly piano notes, hall information, sense of thereness, etc. of what this MM Empire produces.

I had to share this.
Cheers,
Axel
Dear friends: This one is a good chance for the AT20SS ( I think is the SS, but you have to ask. ):

http://cgi.ebay.com/AUDIO-TECHNICA-TURNTABLE-CARTRIDGE-MODEL-AT2015S-NICE_W0QQitemZ290346526386QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item439a0066b2&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14#ht_3035wt_1165

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Axel, if you are ever of a mind to tamper with ML phono boards, it is a small matter to remove SMD resistors and replace with superior-sounding small-footprint radial-lead resistors such as TX2575. Then you can load down 100K to whatever you need for MC.
Hi All,
Raul says:+++ things are that Axelwahl is running his cartridges at 47K and that's a difference. +++

One of the draw-backs with SMD phono-boards is, that such changes (47k to 100k) are an issue...

Having said this, right now I'm back with my A&R P77 which sounds more 'right' than my new (replacement) Windfeld with or without SUT. It is incredibly fast and detailed, but somehow less real...

I like to note though, that the Windfeld with FR XF-1 SUT and NO resistive loading sounded better to me, than without SUT.
However, the comments on MC vs MM/MI sound I made earlier on, still stand --- so I'm back with MM.
Some say - my ears got equalised to MM over the last 3-4 month. I believe it is more -a priori- to know when an instrument sounds more 'real' or 'hyped up'.
Enjoy the music,
Axel
Dear Toufu: Good that you already try/change it and IMHO you still could improve the quality performance if instead of those RS resistors change it for the ones that Dgarretson use: Caddock TF020.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgarretson: Well, it seems to me that now we have an assent that 100K is a good choice for MM/MI cartrridges.

I'm with you too on:

+++++" These improvements are reminiscient of a good MC cartridge-- further diminishing any advantage that MC might have in the areas of resolution & spatiality. " +++++

things are that Axelwahl is running his cartridges at 47K and that's a difference.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.