Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Dear @lewm  : The overall cantilever build materials signifcance and differences was analyzed at least twice times, one in this thread and in other thread in both appeared the facts scientific/enginnering facts why Diamond and Boron are " the ones " even ruby and saphire are both a top beryllium and ceramic is out of question. J.Carr learned from his " mistake " about.

"""  not what they are made of or what is the shape of their stylus.  I am more thinking that the nature of the transducing system is a major factor in determining what I like and like less.  """

Finally  in these last posts some one, in this case you, that  makes reference to cartridge motor design, at least that says something about.

R.
Halcro: I forgot this very good one from you:

for years I posted that one of the worst headshells were the Orsonic but you followed the advise of other person I bougth some of those true " terribel " resonant headshells.

Time latter I received an email from you asking me that for a while I stopped to post against the Orsonic headshells because you wanted to put on sale here in Agon and I ccepted not to post about to help you can " scam " some other ignorant. I have that email from you.

And exist several other ? ? ? ! ! ! !  ?

@lewm  agree there is no need for all those but don't let me alternatives.

R.
@travbrow

I’ve read on another forum about this Glanz model, the owners are very satisfied highly praised the performance, but a little concerned that it’s a low rider, not being sure if that’s normal for these models? I asked the EBay seller how many he has left, he didn’t reply.

My advice for you to buy it, but prior to buy just ask him about suspension condition if he could check. If it will be refused then you can still buy (you can return if the suspension is failed during your own test). The seller does not have to answer the question like "how many do you have?".

I’ve had 5 Glanz cartridges, not from that Japanese seller, i’ve bought from Germany, only one of them was a lowrider, but it was Glanz MFG-71L (that model is nothing special, however Axel fixed the damper for 40-60 euro for me and i sold it). The MF-61 is in my top-5 cartridges and i would never sell it.

BTW has anyone measured the "terribel resonance" of the Orsonic AV-101 headshell, exept the Raul, who has his special hearing abilities with built-in resonance and distortion meter?

How many people on audiogon does not like the Orsonic AV-101 ?
Maybe less than 1% of the members i believe.

P.S. I’ve never owned any Lira cartridges, i have nothing against them, but there is only ONE disadvantages in its design (imo) is the unprotected cantilever which looks like it was made to be bent accidentally. Not only Lyra designed in such way, but also some VdH and Dynavector cartridges. I would NEVER buy ANY cartridge with cantilever like that (for security reason). This is so easy to destroy!


Regards, all:

Ebullient is the word.

Empire 999S/EX cartridge lounging without a stylus in a drawer for I can't remember how long. "Gary" at VOM (Voice Of Music) site offered two genuine Empire stylus options for the old guy, Pfanstiel #'s 235 DE .02 x .07 ellipt./.75 - 2.0 downforce & 235 SDE, also 2x7 ellipt., 0.5 - 1.5 down. Freq. response for the SDE listed by Empire Scientific at 8-32k Hz. 

The 235 SDE arrived yesterday, today got it plugged it in & laid Hewy Lewis' "Sports" on the platter.

The 999S/EX motor is listed at 8.0mv. First playback is robust with prodigious bass. Midrange was nicely conveyed and the Hf's were there but just a little less evident than expected from the nice elliptical.

Moved on to Ricky Lee Jones' eponymous Lp. Very, very good center image, layering and soundstage. Deep and wide. No stridency in her vocals but evidence of mild mistracking. A reduction in tracking force and a bump in VTA brought the Hf's a little more into the mix. Played with loading, much better.

Santana Borboletta next. Third album and there's a noticeable lifting in the upper registers as the cart warms. Guitar is fluid, percussion rise is sharp. No noticeable  overshoot but there's a little more overhang than I'd like to hear.

Fifth Lp. Hf's starting to get a little sparkle. Gaining fine detail, bass more proportionate. Dubious at first, I'm beginning to like this rather bold cart. With an appellation like S/EX, how could I not?

The cantilever is a fine al. tube just over 3mm in length, appears to be anodized. The nude diamond is crystal clear and cleanly affixed.    

Now at 1.1 VTF, 300pF, 100k Ohm and a raucous 8.0mv output. a rocker of a cartridge.


Peace,

   

  
Chakster, I bought one. It seems this cartridge was very rare and highly regarded. So I thought I’d better just buy it before it’s sold out.

 I’ve read a thread about this model at another forum. One poster that owns some of the best TOTL models from Grace, the ATML180 etc. was highly impressed with its performance. 
@travbrow Great, congrats! I'm pretty sure you will be impressed, i hope you know that on ebay you're protected by "paypal buyer protection", even in the worst scenario (if the cart has any deffects) you can return it for full refund and it's guaranteed by paypal. I think it was decent price for such special cartridge with the most advanced cantilever and stylus tip. It may require a burn-in for 50 hrs, because it's a NOS.  

But with that mediocre system is extremely difficult you can learn. You need a true reference room/system. In other threads you and me already had several dialogues about with facts why is a mediocre system. Starting with your room, followed by the subs room position and that non reference phonolinepreamp.

Well here are modest iPhone videos of my "mediocre" system....

VICTOR X1 MM CARTRIDGE

AS PALLADIAN LOMC CARTRIDGE

Now let's see if you have the guts Mr. Kraken, to compare your System to mine via your own YouTube videos....?
I predict you will have multitude excuses for avoiding revealing to the whole audio world, the true 'sound' of what you listen to.....🙉
I find this discussion about the greatness of the Glanz MFG 610 and MFG 61 intriguing as I have had all the other GLANZ MODELS (except for these) and find them universally mediocre....
The 31L, the 51L and the 71L (which all sound virtually identical in my system) and the totally horrific M5 integrated headshell model are made by the same company as the MFG 61 and presumably are based on the same technology.
Can anyone hazard a guess as to how and why, Glanz would make a 'worldbeater' model alongside their 'lesser-sounding' brethren?
Btw, ask to the Lyra owners why they like their Atlas, Etna or Kleos or even in the " down " models.
Ask your self why J.Carr was and is so successfully audio manufacturer for so many years. Ask your self or ask him.

But if we ask the FR64S and FR-66S tonearm owners why they like these arms so much and why they are the most successful vintage tonearms EVER seen....
This argument suddenly seems to ’disappear’......?
Do you see the irony Mr Kraken 👺???!!

PS You never owned or had the FR-66S in your system. Just another of the blatant lies you constantly spin.
@halcro 

The 31L, the 51L and the 71L (which all sound virtually identical in my system) and the totally horrific M5 integrated headshell model are made by the same company as the MFG 61 and presumably are based on the same technology.

Haha, true. This is actually a good argument to destroy Raul's theory that "cartridge motor" is the most important. The difference between MF-61 and the rest of the Glanz models is CANTILEVER AND STYLUS, the Moving Flux generator is the same. 

The difference between my Glanz 61 and 31L, 71L was so huge that my impressing was like i'm listening completely different cartridge. 

This is because of the tiny Parabolic stylus tip mounted on thin Boron cantilever. 

I remember that HUGE, tapered like Egyptian Pyramid, cantilever on 71L (same on Astatic MF-100). I also remember quite well more conventional aluminum cantilever on my Glanz 31L (same on Astatic MF-200) ... but the reference Glanz 61 Boron cantilever and Paroc stylus tip is completely different. I think it was the awakeness of Mitachi chief designer when he realized (maybe in his dream) how this cartridge can be improved by changing the cantilever and diamond. That drammatic improvement belongs to Mitachi cartridges made for Glanz ONLY (not for Astatic). This is what makes Glanz 61 so special.   

So Chak,
Are you saying that if one were to find an original Glanz 61 stylus assembly........one could put it in any of the other bodies (31L,51L,71L) and have the 'unobtainable' Glanz 61?
halcro, what’s your reference or favorite cartridges? Were any of the MM models discussed on this thread favorites of yours?
Could it be that Glanz chose a mediocre aluminum type cantilever? And some other brands designed better ones? That could be the reason the lower models all sound very close and the much better design of the boron and better tip makes a big improvement.
Yes Travbrow,
This Thread inspired me to return to MM cartridges after a 30 year hiatus with LOMCs 🤗
So I bought and sold many of the cartridges mentioned and recommended here......
Some of my favourites (in no particular order).....
There are many other relatively cheap vintage MM cartridges which are capable of wonderful sound.......

@halcro 

So Chak,
Are you saying that if one were to find an original Glanz 61 stylus assembly........one could put it in any of the other bodies (31L,51L,71L) and have the 'unobtainable' Glanz 61?

I think so, but i've never ever seen a separate deal just for the 61 stylus.

Maybe you can refurbish one of your Glanz lower models just to add some exotic cantilever? 

But the better idea is just to buy that 610LX on ebay for $450, however i'm not sure it's equal to the earlier 61 rarity. 

Raul,

Thank you for the suggestion of Magnesium for the arm board material.  I found a supplier of magnesium tooling plate which is 97% magnesium with Aluminum and zinc making up the 3% in the alloy.  They say that the tooling plate machines better than any other metal and  it has exceptional vibration absorbing properties.  

In thinking on this, that would be desirable as the tone arm board is the interface between the plinth and the tone arm.  Turntable designs are such that they use a lot of mass and various materials to isolate the vibrations from the record and external feedback from the music being played through the speakers.  The plinth is the interface from all of this and the tone arm.  I would assume that the more the plinth, platter and tone arm are isolated from these vibrations, the  more true sound will be conducted from the cartridge and to the phono pre amp.  

Since acrylic, aluminum, stainless steel all have their own vibration damping characteristics and magnesium is listed as superior (which is why SME uses it as their tone arm material), I would assume that if I were to machine the new tone arm board from this material, it would add another layer if vibration isolation from the plinth.   

Good suggestion!
Here is something new I discovered this morning:  speaking of unscrupulous dealers/sellers:

As I had mentioned earlier, I have an original AT15ss cartridge I purchased new from a dealer who I did some work for part time in college.  The Cartridge body is labeled AT-15ss, the stylus has the normal guard on it, but there is nothing printed on the guard.  I purchased a NOS AT15ss replacement stylus around 12 years ago or so from a dealer in NY.  I think I paid around $100 for it back then and it came in an OEM AT plastic box.  The guard is printed with AT 15ss on it; I found that interesting as my original didn't have anything on it.  I had spoken to Bluz Brother about this at one point and Alan told me that he has seen the stylus' come through with the printed type and no printing.  

My 4 NOS AT 20ss stylus' all have AT 20ss printed on the guard.  This morning I dug out my old original AT15ss stylus purchased back in the 1970's..... I studied it closely and immediately notice that the cantilever is Aluminum!!!  It's not the beryllium which is very distinctive.  The aluminum cantilevers are thicker with a very pronounce taper profile where as the Beryllium is technically tapered, but ever so slightly and thus appears to be a strait rod with a light sheen to it, which the aluminum doesn't have.   Long story short; all of these years in which I thought I had the real deal AT 15ss, it was actually the AT15s with the basic aluminum stylus mounted on the AT15ss body!!!  Uhuh.  So who did this?  I guess I got suckered back when I was a 20 year old kid.  I mean who would have known?

No wonder the music popped when I installed the new AT15ss stylus a few years back; I thought that my old stylus was just worn out (it probably was), so it was a worn aluminum 's' stylus being replaced with the NOS ss beryllium.... and man could I hear the difference.


The Japanese eBay seller of the Glanz MFG-610LX  has a stock of 10 left. These were the newer version of the MFG-61. Could be the same, better or slightly lower performance of the MFG-61, we know sometimes newer isn’t better. From what I gathered, The 610LX was made in the 1980’s, and these two models were the only ones with the boron pipe and special tip. I don’t know the actual type of the diamond profile, just that it’s the best one Glanz fitted to their moving flux models. 

So it could possibly rank up there with other rare high end models from other brands. 
Dear @timeltel  : Did you listen in the last two months the Empire 4000 D3? well if you own it and don't do it yet please do it a self favor and listen again.

Btw, if some body is interested in the @travbrow  's love the  Empire 1000ZE/X I own two samples ( as almost all my vintage cartridges, even with some models I own 3 and four samples. ) and you can get from me. Just ask about.

@halcro  what can I do for you when you come back one and other and other again for more?, latter on I will care of you. Stay tunned.

R.
@travbrow 

 I don’t know the actual type of the diamond profile, just that it’s the best one Glanz fitted to their moving flux models.

But i know for sure. The profile on my Glanz 61 is Paroc (aka Parabolic) on Boron cantilever. Hope it's the same on later version (610LX)

Dear @travbrow : Glanz was the origen of moving flux ( a variation of MI/IM. ) adn after it Astatic that is a very old cartridge manufacturer took the Glanz patent and improved it and from Astatic comes something a little superior to any Glanz no-matter what. Way superior? no a little better but can listen the differences if your room/audio system has the resolution for it.

You can read here about:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/who-needs-a-mm-cartridge-type-when-we-have-mc/post?postid=171...

of course that if the offer is really good then buy it Glanz and latter on Astatic when be available. Glanz is more easy to find out as you can attest where your seller has 10 samples !.

R.
Regards, Raul:

Yes, the D/111 followed the 999S/EX, The D/111 is excellent. 

The 999S/EX was exceedingly "musical" but woefully lacking in definition. I found the mistracking due to a mis-match of cart/arm, Suzanne Vegas' "Solitude Standing", side two, blew the stylus out of the groove several times for the first three revolutions I allowed the cart to engage. An excellent recording, I'll check later for any damage to the vinyl.

Dire Straits "Love Over Gold" wasn't as propulsive but the cart did react to a mild warp with woofer flutter. For the record (pun?), the arm is the Tec. EPA 250. Better results might be found with either the 500H wand or trying the stylus on the less muscular 1000Z/EX cart. My impression is the stylus is good, perhaps very good but due to the 8.0mv output it is not compatible with the 12 gm effective mass (IIRC) of the 250 wand. 

A similar experience with an Acutex LPM 315 STR, also with the S. Vega album. The 315 is another cart evidencing strong bass, increasing VTF to 1.75gm corrected the phenomena. Not sure the Empire stylus can deal with the increased downforce, compliance is 30(ish).

Relative to the preceding discussion relating to cantilevers, a NOS Signet AM-40LC was obtained last year, beryllium cantilever/LC stylus. It's in rotation with a Signet TK7Lca, either the OEM stylus or N155LCa. Not a fan of ML styli, probably due to the vintage SS amplification in the rig.

Relative to matching the cart to the arm, my son is enjoying my old  SP-25 with black widow arm, my first foray into "high end" analog circa 1979. Offered a choice of several of my less used carts he selected an AT 15e with a fresh 15ex (nude ellipt.) stylus. Aligned & spun up, performance was excellent with fluid mids and delicate highs. On the EPA 250/JVC TT71 it sounded distant and lacking in ambience and dynamic range.

One might be wise to examine circumstances and explore options  before drawing conclusions.


Peace, 



 
latter on I will care of you. Stay tunned.

I'm waiting Raul...........
But don't come back here without YouTube videos of your 'System's sound'.
We all want to hear what a system which totally eliminates 'distortions' sounds like....?
The time of blah, blah, blah is over Mr Kraken........
Put up or shut up.....
You have heard the tale of the 'Emperor's New Clothes'....?
I have to tell to the readers that our Raul has ZERO information about the current situation on the market of vintage cartridges, because Astatic MF-100 and other models available from the same Japanese seller, but much cheaper than Glanz MF-610LX. The seller from Japan has all of them because they are manufactured by ONE company in Japan. The company is Mitachi Corporation, this company holds the patent for Moving Flux technology.

Mitachi Corporation is Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) of Astatic and Glanz cartridges. There is no difference in sound between Astatic MF-100 and Glanz 71L, also no difference between the Astatic MF-200 and Glanz 31L. It’s been said few years ago in our Glanz thread, but i want to clarify it, because the cartridges are twins: Astatic MF-100 = Glanz 71L, Astatic MF-200 = Glanz 31L. There can be a tiny difference in cartridge inductance which does not change the sound at all. Cantilevers and styli are identical for those models. Moving Flux generator also identical, the difference is just printed logos on the cartridge body.

Interesting? Mitachi also made same cartridges for French brand Jamo if anyone remember this brand. Mitachi also made same cartridges for Italian Azzurra Esoter brand.

And the Japanese seller has been selling all of them (Astatic, Glanz, Jamo, Azzurra), because all of them manufactured in Japan at Mitachi factory with identical parts. And he found a dead stock without boxes.

Canadian Astatic just ordered MF carts from Mitachi in Japan, there is NO advantages of Astatic over the Japanese Glanz when it comes to the models i have mentioned.

Maybe Astatic MF-2500 is special in Astatic line, i’ve never seen it, never tried, but the Astatic MF-100 or MF-200, MF300 are all as good as the Glanz MF-31L, 51L, 71L ...

Glanz MF-61 is very special and above all of them, because it has unique cantilever and unique stylus tip that you will not find in any Astatic models. So this particular Glanz is the rarest.

The Astatic MF-2500 does not have such cantilever and tip, i don’t know what is special about it?

Raul never owned Glanz 61, but raved about Astatic MF-2500, MF100, MF200 on this forum.

All those models have aluminum cantilevers and good LineContact diamonds, except for the Glanz 61 which has Boron cantilever and High-End Parabolic diamond of the lower mass! The later version of the Glanz with 3 figure number (610LX) also has Boron cantilever.

Anyone can buy Astatic MF-100 or MF-200 for about $350, but try to find Glanz MF-61 and you will never find anything about it, exept a few users feedback on this forum. I believe the MF-610LX is much closer to Glanz 61 than anything esle, so it must be really good and way better than any Astatic.
Hi there: I said I don't answer to s people but an exception could be welcomed.

"""  The Astatic 100/200/300 as well as the Glanz MFG series are all Moving Flux. Hence the MF model designation.

Allow me share a few things I do know about these carts. All of the MF series from both Astatic and Glanz were made in Japan by the Mitachi Corporation. I can also say for sure that the Astatic/Glanz MF generators are not all the same. Well on the outside they are but the MF200/300 put out 4.2mv. The MF100 and all of the MFG Glanz 31/51/61/71, series put out 3.5mv. 

The MFG51E Glanz is not a MF200 or even a MF300. The sound is quite different on each. They should because they have different output and have different styli. The cantilever on the MFG51E I have also has a much different aluminum cantilever than any other MF units. It uses a very large taper. Looks heavy to me. My MFG51E is on the bottom of the totem pole sonically of all the MF/MI carts I have heard. The MFG31E/L is much closer to the MF200. It uses the same color stylus holder as well as the same cantilever. All three have different styli. MF200 is a nude Shibata. The MFG31E has a nude elliptical and the MFG31L has a nude line contact. ""

from vetterone who owns a true reference dedicated room/audio system, I know it because I was there. His MBL speakers are something to listen as his self re-builñded Technics SP 10MK3. Lyra Olympos performed very good down there.

R.
I think the only reason the Astatic has higher output is more coil windings, not some “better” design. MM Cartridges with low output 4mv or lower work best in my system because of my high gain phono amp and preamp. And I notice most TOTL MM cartridges feature low output below 4mv.

The only manual I’ve seen of the 610LX states line contact, no mention of cantilever type, Though it is Boron pipe something Astatic never offered. And that’s why I chose it over an Astatic model.
So, Some Astatic models featuring a better cantilever than Glanz. The motor design are probably the same though. Right?

First things first, I am glad to see our old friend timeltel (aka

Professor) back. I thought that he left us as some other very

valued members deed. His lectures are the only one in this

forum for which I need to consult English dictionary. This may

mean that his descriptions use more complex terminology than

other (grin).

In the second place all the info about Glanz/Astatic  provided

by chakster can be found in the old Glanz thread. Veterone

was the only one who owned all Glanz kinds Glanz 61 included.

I owned all except 61 and thought that he was teasing me.

If I can trust my memory he was the first who mentioned that

Glanz and Astatic are ''the same'' carts. His preference was

for the 61. I got the 61 much(?) later but sold because I was

not able to get rid of its hum.


Chak, you gotta prove this community that all GLANZ motors are exactly the same. + you gotta prove us that all GLANZ and ASTATIC motors are exactly the same. You will have a hard job but we are all ears.
FYI GLANZ MFG-31LX w/ Line Contact is not ASTATIC MF-200 w/ Shibata ...
+ "No difference with GLANZ MFG-71L and ASTATIC MF-100". ?? You must be joking because the former has Line Contact and the latter has Micro Ridge stylus. My sample has. Besides, optimal VTF for 71L is 1.25 g whereas for MF-100 is 1.5 g. The 71L has the lowest VTF of all other GLANZ MFG-XXX models including the MFG-610LX. Maybe like your MFG-61 as the best ever GLANZ as should have, so let us know ? + the 71L has the flattest FR and highest compliance of all according to the manual/specs sheet.
GLANZ MFG-51LX has nude Line Contact on a tapered aluminium alloy that looks quite a sophisticated design and quite thin to my eyes, nothing "bulkiness" to worry about, let alone presumed mediocre sound. And looks finer than any vintage ACUTEX I have seen, including the top dog 320 STR III short nose I once had. That 320 has nothing on my MFG-51LX soundwise. I would never underestimate a nude diamond in a sophisticated aluminium cantilever.
It´s always funny to read comments about certain items the commentator has zero experience. For instance, Chak you have been raving about your darling(s) for many years but have no experience whatsoever about such vintage hyper rarities such as ASTATIC MF 2500. But have no worries, it´s a stellar performer. Well, my sample at least : )
 I’d bet the motors are identical design but different coils, cantilever type and suspension plus diamond profile so of could they’ll sound a little different. Go ahead Harold, rip em apart we want to see the different guts of these things. Kidding...
@harold-not-the-barrel

Chak, you gotta prove this community that all GLANZ motors are exactly the same. + you gotta prove us that all GLANZ and ASTATIC motors are exactly the same.


Do you have any printed documents with your cartridges? Just look at the specs. I did not said they are all exactly the same on paper (but soundwise), i have compared MF-100/MFG-71L, MF-200/MFG-31L to my Glanz 61.

As for the tiny difference on paper, i think it’s because those cartridges were made for two different companies and could not be marketed exactly the same, so the manufacturer did some tiny differense such as Shibata vs LineContact, very tiny difference in cart inductance or recommended traking force etc. But it does not change the sound character at all.

As you see i am not trying to say the Astatic is better than Glanz or vise versa, i do rate them on the same level, except for ONE superior model (the Glanz 61).

I will add pictures from the internet below


You will have a hard job but we are all ears.
FYI GLANZ MFG-31LX w/ Line Contact is not ASTATIC MF-200 w/ Shibata ...


There is no such model as 31LX, you are talking about 310LX released later on along with 610LX. The Glanz 31L is the original model i am talking about. Shibata is a LineContact type needle too, do you expect any audible difference between Shibata and LineContact ? I don’t.

+ "No difference with GLANZ MFG-71L and ASTATIC MF-100". ?? You must be joking because the former has Line Contact and the latter has Micro Ridge stylus. My sample has. Besides, optimal VTF for 71L is 1.25 g whereas for MF-100 is 1.5 g.

None of them have a MicroRidge styli, never. Any cartridge have a range of tracking force from 1.00 to 1.5 easily, it doesn’t matter at all in terms of sound. Normally recommended tracking force for any cartridge is within +/- 0.25g range (can be anything from 1g to 1.5g if the recommended is 1.25g).

The 71L has the lowest VTF of all other GLANZ MFG-XXX models including the MFG-610LX. Maybe like your MFG-61 as the best ever GLANZ as should have, so let us know ? + the 71L has the flattest FR and highest compliance of all according to the manual/specs sheet.

The 71L has HUGE tapered aluminum cantilever which looks like Egyptian Pyramid. Same about 51L in comparison to the 31L. This cartridge is nothing special in terms of sound like the Astatic MF-100 when we comparing them to a better cartridges.


GLANZ MFG-51LX has nude Line Contact on a tapered aluminium alloy that looks quite a sophisticated design and quite thin to my eyes, nothing "bulkiness" to worry about, let alone presumed mediocre sound.

Just like the Glanz 71L (there is no "X" in the model number). Any model with "X" are EX with Elliptical tip or they must have 3 digits number, not 2 digits number like the earlier models.


Chak you have been raving about your darling(s) for many years but have no experience whatsoever about such vintage hyper rarities such as ASTATIC MF 2500. But have no worries, it´s a stellar performer. Well, my sample at least : )

I’ve never seen this model, but i have a printed specs and there is nothing special about it on paper. The person who promoted this model on this forum swear than MF-100 and MF-200 are so special, but in my experience they are not special at all and no difference compared to Glanz 71L and 31L based on my own experience. Buy the way the Glanz 31L is much better than 71L (with its super fat cantilever). All of them are mediorce souding cartridges compared to ultra high-end Glanz 61 (the best and rarest model ever, equipped with Boron cantilever and special Paroc nude diamond, this model has been sold for 1200 GBP white the rest of Astatic and Glanz available everyday for $250-350). You don’t have Glanz 61, you have 610LX and i believe it’s a very good cartridge.

Do you like your Astatic MF-2500 with aluminum cantilever better than your Glanz 610LX with Boron cantilever ?

We had a comment here on audiogon from Steve Dobbins (the famous plinth maker and a person behind KODO THE BEAT turntable, ex Reed tonearm dealer in USA) who said the Glanz 61 is one of his favorite cartridges ever.

Nandric just mentioned him by nickname in his previous post.  

Harold, I’d also like to hear your opinion about Astatic 2500 compared to the Glanz 610LX. You really seem to like the Glanz and you recommended I buy it. Since hardly any of us will get to own the Astatic 2500, It be interesting to know how close the Glanz is to the Astatic, in your opinion. 

I find it hard to believe that the handful of rare unattainable models people on here praise are really that much better than the list of more affordable TOTL models people enjoy so much...and might actually find at a decent price. 
Regards, Nandric:

Not AWOL, just sitting contentedly on the sidelines enjoying the usual "good-better-best" debates inevitable with committed audiophiles. On occasion, when a thing is sufficiently heated a little light is emitted.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

That Empire 999S/EX rocket ship:

System synergy impacts performance. Can I say that? Component interaction and listening environment are two major factors. I've not experimented with a Frankencart for several years, the mistracking experienced with this high horsepower Empire leaves me curious as to why specific frequencies cause this cart/stylus combination to literally boost itself several grooves over.

I'm considering two factors, harmonic and mechanical.

Harmonic osculation is inevitable in the interaction between groove modulation and the springiness of the cartridge suspension, and, to a lesser degree cantilever flexation. Boundary resonance, tip/tonearm mass and damping also each have an impact. A mismatch in any of these considerations can result in euphonic distortion. Sometimes a large amplitude resonance is the outcome. Woofer pumping in the 6-10 Hz range is the most frequently observed evidence of this phenomena. Consider the vibration of a tuning fork. or the "twang" of an archery bow string.

Some guy, Newton I think was his name, said every action has its consequences. 

Perhaps justifiably disregarded, it seems (to me) EMF has its own  contribution in tracking groove modulation.

(I've posted similar thoughts before): Lenz's Law states that: "the direction of an induced emf is such that it will always oppose the change that is causing it". In dealing with higher output cartridges, an induced current will always OPPOSE the motion or change which generated the induced current. This to a greater degree that observed with a cartridge of lower output. Makes sense? 

One may observe a gain in presence but let's not forget Newt's law of conservation of energy. Conditions being otherwise the same, due to increased magnetic attraction leading and trailing transients as well as dynamic sweep should suffer. Compliance/mechanical damping, effective tip mass, cantilever length, cross-section diameter, length and rigidity are responsive factors to be taken into consideration. 

It's seems likely that with this hashed together high output cart mismatched with a high compliance stylus suspension, there is a  high amplitude oscillation in conjunction with a relatively large generation of EMF which combine to exaggerate these factors. There're just too many "highs" there needs to be a "mid" or "low" in the mix? What should be a simple harmonic motion and oscillation and the ability to damp these continuously occurring oscillations is not adequately constrained, as a consequence it launches itself out of the groove.

A conclusion in a somewhat non-sequential manner is that in  consequence the "good-better-best" debate is relative to synergistic factors, these being unique to each series of components, environment and listener. 


Peace,







Dear @harold-not-the-barrel  : Four-five years ago in this thread we had same discussion about Glanz and Astatic and exactly as you and vetterone ( the statements I posted came from him, not from me but are similar to the ones findings I posted years ago. ) posted you are rigth. It is useless to have a dialogue with s people that along ignorance just can't understand " things ".

iously that Astatic and Glass cartridge motors are not exactly the same because Astatic ask for some kind of " refinements ".
Astatic came way after Glanz stop or gone out of cartridge market.

Inductance values are different too and @travbrow  if it's true that higher output level could be for more wire in the coils could means too that comes with powerful magnets and not only that exist designs with higher output but lower inductance. 

NO are not the same Astatic and Glanz and Steve/vetterone that owns a true reference dedicated room/system confirm it in his statements I posted because he can listen differences between those Astatic/Glanz models that ignorant posted several times sounds the same. But to be aware of those differences we need to own a true reference room/audio system and that person that understand almost nothing owns and average/mediocre system and this fact is the more important for any one that reads any post coming from any one.

Not only in this thread but in all threads and when we read posted opinions where we agree or not before we can have a judgement about we must have to analize with whom comes that opinion which level has his audio system and his first hand experiences on the subject and his self knowledge levels on MUSIC and Audio.

Almost all discussion in audio forums are because the ignorance levels of each one of us that are participating in those discussions.
No one knows everything on every MUSIC/audio subjects, no one and that's why we need always to be willing to learn with the attitude to learn and not with the attitude to win the discussion because this is non important but to grow up learning about.

The 2500 cartridge that you own you bougth at a true bargain price and this great Astatic cartridge motor is different and way better than the Astatic newers models as the MF 100/200/300.
Why Astatic decided to change it? is something I don't know but the newers models are good but not at the 2500 quality level.

Other MF cartridge design is the Micro Seiki one that I still own and that I posted its performance many years ago in this thread.
It sounds similar to Glanz or Astatic?: NO there are differences, not big differences but exist it.

 Micro Seiki named  its cartridge motor design: variable flux and as almost all Micro Seiki items this cartridge is first rate performer. I own with original box and everything.

Mitachi is not the only cartridge manufacturer for other out there. Scan-Tech is other one that build cartridge for Lyra, Linn, Audioquest and many other companies that are in the cartridge market.

I own/owned top models from Lyra, Audioquest and Linn and all sounds different because Scan-Tech builded according what each designers ask for, according his particular characteristics they were(are looking for.


I never said Glanz is a bad cartridge even here I said to travbrwo to buy it and in other thread what I said is that I don't like the cartridges that comes with integrated headshell and that's why I never bougth it but I bougth it in stand alone version. I sold it.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Bluz Bros supposedly has the JAMO MF-10 Cartridge. It sports a .2 x .7 nude elliptical.
looks like the Astatic/Glanz body. Maybe similar to the Astatic MF 300.

Dear @travbrow  : Jamo is MF design too, even its box holder is not similar but exactly as the one used by Astatic.

R.
Dear friends: About ceramic material for cartridge use. Other that what I posted I want to share other facts about:

in the time when AT decided to use ceramic in the body of the ML170/180 ceramic was the latest " fashion " in Japan: headshells ( not only SAEC but other like JVC/VICTOR. This one beautiful made with around 20grs. of weigth: I owned, really beautifull blu/gray shiny finish. ), mats, clamps and tonearms.

Manufacturers has really no other way to make research but manufacturing the items with some kind of parts and AT choosed ceramic for that cartridge series but never again made the same mistake in other of its top cartridge designs.
That cartridge body material is the weak in that great cartridge motor design.

That mistake was similar to the Ortofon with the MC2000 models that follows that one: MC3000, MC3000MK2 and MC5000. I owned all and only the 3000MK2 is worth to listen it.
Ortofon never had success with those 100% ceramic bodies cartridge models and never again used the ceramic in their top model LOMC cartridges.

Ceramic is for car brakes, is where that material makes a difference for the better not on cartridges or tonearms or TT mats.

R.
@travbrow if you’re lookinmg for the cheapest you can simply order Azzurra Esoter MF from the japanese seller. Here is the one i bought myself and another i got from my friend @nandric as a present. You can look at the specs. This is aluminum cantilever with bonded conical tip. For $70 it’s a great Moving Flux bargain that will put Denon 103 MC in the dust! More pictures of my samples here and there.

If anyone missed my story in Glanz thread i will repead it here again:

In 1983 Italian yacht Azzurra from Sardinia won L.V. Cup held in Newport, Rhode Island (USA). Azzurra, skippered by Mauro Pelaschier (Yacht Club Costa Smeralda), came 3rd in that competition. The original Azzurra team won 24 of 49 races and developed a large and loyal following in Italy. The largest high-end distributor in Italy (Giancarlo Bonetti) teamed up with Japanese Mitachi Corporation in the 80’s to released a dedicated custom made phono cartridge called Azzurra Esoter! The Moving Flux generator, patented by Mitachi Corporation, has been successfuly used before in Japanese high-end cartridges under the Glanz brand. Those revolutionary MF (Moving Flux) systems brings together the advantages of the MC and MM technologies. In fact, while behaving sonically as a Moving Coil, its output voltage of 3.5 mV did not require the use of a step-up transformers or high gain. Azzurra Esoter is a mid compliance cartridge, tracks well at 1.75g, comes with a very well polished conical stylus tip. The sound is warm, lush and seductive with its unique Moving Flux signal generator.

This is not a typical MM/MI or MC, the patent for unique Moving Flux technology belogs to Mr Tsugikuma Minamizono (Japan). This cartridge, however, must be connected to MM input. Moving Flux cartridges are excellent, warm and very musical, they are adored by many audiophiles on audiogon community. Mitachi Corporation made some amazing cartridges in the 80s and some of them never been distributed very well worldwide, some sold only in Europe, others sold only in Japan.
It’s not easy to find information about Azzurra Esoter MF cartridges, but it’s easy to find many great review about Glanz (Mitachi) Moving Flux cartridges on audiogon. What you should know about Glanz is that all MF generators are the same, different models comes with different cantilevers and stylus tips (but with the same generators). So with the Azzurra Esoter MF cartridge you can use any Glanz or Astatic stily, they are fully compatible!

P.S. Many people are happy with Denon 103 MC with conical tip, but you will be surprised how good is the $70 Moving Flux Azzurra Esoter with it’s highly polished Conical tip, and no step-up transformers required, just regular MM phono stage! Azzurra also can be retipped (if you want to) with the most advanced modern stily such as Fritz Gyger, Paratrace or Line Contact. It can be a much better cartridge.

C'mon, for $70 (current price on ebay) it’s great bargain, but for $450 there is a Glanz 610LX with Boron Cantilever and much better nude LineContact diamond. There are more Astatic and Glanz models in between ($80-$450) available NOS.


Other ceramic build material in cartridge bodies is its extreme fragility because we can’t have gas-tigth contact between the cartridge and headshell because ceramic does not resis to much force when we screwd at the headshell where its mounted. Ceramic is way resonant material for that specific job.

Btw, that beautiful 100% ceramic headshell is the L-1000 where only the headfshell connector is made for metal.
In reallity is a thick flat plattform with a stand alone ( black ) aditament where the cartridge is screwed. Due to its thickness resonance probles goes a little lower but still there. A beauty of headshell as design, at least I like its look a lot.

R.
@simpikins5

There was a thread on Audiogon quite a while ago in which a former engineer from Audio Technica was participating. He wrote a rather in depth post as to why Beryllium was the go to material for cantilevers and the panic that ensued at AT when the EPA came down with the order that it no longer be used due to the dangerous toxic dust released when machining the material. He stated that the engineering department underwent a lot of R&D to find a suitable replacement material and Boron was what they determined would be closest, however it was still a compromise. Apparently Beryllium allows for the largest frequency excursion without distortion and also permits better channel separation and signal to noise ratios. This is why it was so good.

Thanks! This is very interesting information, i wish i could find that old post from him on audiogon (i will try). Actually nearly all my favorite MM cartridges have Beryllium cantilever. This cantilever (beryllium), however, can be very different from one to another. I will add my pictures of the different carts.

The fact that Audio-Technica utilized Gold-Plated Beryllium for their top of the line and the most expensive model (AT-ML180 OCC) is a prove how good this material really is, and the price was the same as Boron (for this model, Boron and Beryllium versions were made). Both Boron and Beryllium cantilevers for AT-ML180 cartridges are hollow pipe, not rod. But the AT-ML150 OCC (also great MM cartridge) with beryllium cantilever is different, look how the diamong goes throught the Gold-Plated Beryllium cantilever on AT-ML150 OCC.

-Pioneer PC-1000 mkII has Beryllium cantilever
-Victor X-1II has Beryllium cantilever (unique shape)
-Victor X-1 has Beryllim Cantilever too (also unique shape)
-Grace LEVEL II has beryllium cantilever as an option
-Grace F14 has beryllium cantilever as an option
-Grace F12 has beryllium cantilever as an option

... just to make a few top MM cartridges ever made (imo).

---------------------------------------------
p.s. ANF FOR EVERYONE:

The AT-ML series of the reference MM are all have ceramic base, look at the white part of the cartridge body. Claiming that ceramic is fragile is total BS !

I think Audio-Technica engineers are much smarter (than we’re) when it somes to cartridge design and material used.

I think we can trust AT’s engineers, just read from the cartridge manual for AT-ML series and you will find this statement: "To further increase the accuracy of the AT-ML180, 170, 150’s moving system, Audio-Technica engineers have ensured against unwanted parasitic vibration with an anti-resonance ceramic mounting base."

I will repeat once again: ANTI-RESONANCE CERAMIC MOUTING BASE !!!
Not the whole cartridge body, but just the mouting base, so it's just layer of ceramic, the rest is different material. 





The Shure V15mr models used Beryllium along with a few different Audio Technica models. You all probably know it, but The manufacturer of these beryllium cantilevers stopped production because of the dangerous toxins released when machining. And I believe that’s why Shure stopped production of the latest V15 models. I’ve only owned one high end Shure cartridge, the V15III this one I believe used an aluminum cantilever.

BTW, there’s like a million Shure V15 models at eBay. Very easy to find, so I don’t understand the high pricing. In some cases triple the cost I paid for my Empire 4000DIII and 2000Z. 
Dear Raul,
I'm a little concerned at all the Postings you've been writing as I fear they might be interfering with the YouTube video preparation of your 'excellent' system compared to my 'mediocre' system....
Could you please provide an update as to when we can expect you to post them here on-line...?

Sincerely Yours
Oh Raul....
Can you also tell me when I can expect 'the Big Hit' from you as I'm excitedly waiting...🤗
Just an update for all the contributors here, who for many years have had to endure the 'fake news' and 'invented' facts vomited from the pen of Raul the Impaler.....

One of his most enduring hobby-horses has been his 'invention' of the "resonances and vibrations" heard from the 'undamped' metal tubes of the Fidelity Research FR-64S and FR-66S tonearms.
As the Internet allows 'falsehoods' and 'myths' to be propagated (unedited) alongside 'real' facts......it is only by presenting scientific and verifiable challenges to these charlatans that their lies can be exposed.

I made two Youtube videos showing the same record played with the 'undamped' FR-64S tonearm and with the fully magnetically damped DV-507/II tonearm.
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/tonearm-recommendation?lastpage=true&page=9#1721843

Here was Raul's opportunity to prove his case by pointing out all the resonances and vibrations he can hear transmitted by the FR-64S and not by the DV-507/II....
Instead.....there is silence from the Guru 🙊
The Japanese eBay seller just listed “Glanz Astatic MF-100” for $280.00 without box of course. It seems he just randomly list these Glanz/Astatic models one at a time. 
Chakster, I did buy the top model 610LX. The low priced Azzurra looks to be a nice low budget option. 
I've done the same Trav,
Bought one of his Glanz 610LX.
If it sounds any good when I receive it, I'll put it on Youtube 🎶
halcro, If the 610LX shares qualities of both high end MM and MC designs it would be impressive.

More hours on the Empire 4000DIII and it did improve. The highs are the best I can remember compared to any cartridge I owned. The midrange performance from these old Empires is what I like most about them. The midrange Seems very natural and well defined. It’s loaded at 47k and the highs are not lacking one bit. I do have “positive “ VTA applied.

I own the 4000DIII Gold also, I think this older version is a step ahead of it. So far my best bargain purchase ever.
@travbrow

Chakster, I did buy the top model 610LX. The low priced Azzurra looks to be a nice low budget option.

I’ve bought so many amazing cartridges, my main passion is Grace F14 and LEVEL II variations (so many different and exotic cantilevers/styli).

As for the Glanz 610LX i’ve been waiting, because i knew he’s got a bunch of them, so i never worried, i’ve seen them for sale for 2 years from him. So i concentrated on more rare beasts with great success.

As you know i have it’s predecessor (the rarest Glanz 61) with original purple MFG-61 stylus (Boron/Paroc). Actually i’ve been thinking about 610LX just as a spare stylus for my 61, maybe i will buy it later.

I think when his stock will be sold out the price will jump up for that 610LX. This cartridge worth much more that he’s asking for it (for sure), easily double price.

Now i will be waiting for your and @halcro ’s feedbacks about this 610LX :)