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
Raul, a point of clarification. When you say positive VTA do you mean the arm is raised above being parallel to the record at the pivot point? In other words, the stylus is tipped slightly forward?

This should be obvious to an old hobbyist like myself but it is best to be sure (if not Shure!).

Thanx.
Dear Timeltel: Good to know that that SAS stylus can works with my M97, thank you for the info.

Btw, other than running time ( you are a little impatience. ) that Grace needs 100K and positive VTA.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Greetings, Axelwahl: And Rual, thanks for your origional post and boldness in suggesting that "audiophile" sound reproduction can be had without going "boutique". Last night I played my vintage copy of TDSOTM with the Grace. I missed some of the brilliance of Alan Parson's engineering, at 11:00 pm, the Shure went back on. The Grace will go to my upstairs analog system, Pioneer SX-1050, Dual CS-5000 and Paradigm Reference 20's. A very sweet setup. I currently have a SAS stylus for the M97HE on order, which I am certain can be fitted to the M97xE. The stylus for the xE is interchangable with the V15xMR so it should provide opportunity for more knowledge about these marvelous MM cartridges.
Dear Badcap: I was a little busy with the Koetsu Coral and AT PC-1 Supreme on hand but already return to its owners ( I will report on it latter in this thread. ).

I'm hearing my AT 20SS ( it performs better at 100K ) at 1.4gr on VTF and with positive VTA that it's what prefers, btw I'm the original owner and many years ago ( I buy it at the mid-end of the 70's. ) I give it to my brother like a present he use it many years till the stylus last and when he can't find the original stylus replacement he bought the AT-15SS stylus but from there he almost don't use it because of CDs that he prefers, two years ago I asked him ( because I own a NOS original 20SS stylus replacement ) if he can return in change of other cartridge ( I give him two cartridges. ) and he agree ( he does not cares about cartridges anymore. ) ( now I have to a 15SS stylus replacement that I don't use. ) and lucky I'm that I have it again! .

Enough, What can I say on its performane?, as I posted I was enjoying my Grace F9-Ruby that is extremely good performer: well the AT-20SS surpass it and not for a small range/margin, this AT 20SS is more refined one and the words Rigthness/naturalness goes a step forward.
I knew that this cartridge was a good one but never imagine how good it is. THings are that probably the quality sound of this cartridge will improve with a little more running time.

Axel ask somewhere for a quality performance cartridge scale, well I'm not prepared ( yet ) to make it. This AT-20SS/20SLa is so good that I have to re-list/scale ( in my mind ) other " tremendous " MM performers that I already heard and that now I have to hear again.

I'm sure that you will be very happy with your 15SS that is only one step down the 20SS. Btw, thank you to ask for the AT because you give me the opportunity to try it again and what a good surprise!

Badcap, my AT.20SS as your 15SS were build/designed more than 30 years ago !!!!! and this kind of quality performance is no even today.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Timeltel,
so you still do like your type III, I can't blame you :-)

I still haven’t received my SAS and now having 'discovered' this –negative- VTA bit with my VN35MR.

I guess I should have known all the time, but as I stated in another thread on VTA, in the late 70s early 80s when I had the exact same cart no one ever seemed to talk about VTA.
I think it was then, that most folks used conical and elliptical styli at best ---- Micro Ridge, Shiabata, Fine-Line wow! Who had that?

Well *I* had this MR, but didn't know even what VTA was if I recall, and so with most every one else (in my part of the world).

And so we learn, but I like to ask you if that SAS can still do MORE than the MR?
It is pretty hard for me to imagine actually --- I did read the reports on the SAS, but recall I decided to go for it when that 'wrong' VTA made that MR cart sound just too harsh.

Now it sounds like you described it with that SAS stylus, how’s that?

Greetings,
Axel
PS: Best cart in my system for my ears this far... and it's an MM!
Dear Timeltel: Nice to hear that. Well the good news is that that sound will still improve with a more running hours, the Grace ones benefit on a long run broke-up.

Timetel, Axel and everyone Shure owner through my Shure experiences I think that these cartridges performs best with the " brush " out.
You can try it and decide about.

On the VTA there is no rules other than how the records were cut and try to match it through VTA/SRA changes. Of course that in some way is system dependent so we have make changes according.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Greetings, all. Thank you Raul and for your praise of the Grace F9-R(uby). I have listened to a F9-E for three days and it is the only cartridge I've had for a generation that displaced my Shure V15-111 for more than two. The high end is delicate but devined, whoops, I meant deFined, the bass is not as pronounced as the Shure's but with presence and never murky. The midrange/voice is slightly emphasized but very smooth and never confused. Suzanne Vega, ooh! The Shure with the JICO SAS stylus is fast in transitioning, decay is never a concern and the detail is phenominal. Sometimes brutally accurate. Axelwahl is correct, this one needs neg. tracking angle, it was engineered for recordings when the angle of the cutter was frequently at 17-20 degr., not the contemporary 22-24, agreed upon sometime in the early 70's, if I remember correctly. Old recordings sound "tinny"? VTA. Let me know if I'm wrong. The V15t3 will have to wait a while more, I'm "enjoying the music", with Grace.
Dear friends:
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1249757667&/ADC-Astrion-cartridge-nos---used-styli

this is one of the great MM cartridges ever made and the best on the ADC catalog on those times, don't lose it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Badcap: Yes both are compatibles. The VTF range is 0.75grs to 1.75grs on the AT-15/20, I have in my notes that works really good at 1.4grs.

Your post make that I take out of the " closet " my 20SS and I'm mounting and in three-for days more I can answer about the load impedance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Thanks Rauliruegas I thought the SS was suppose to be better but I did not know in what way. So they still have the same stylus shape and the same cantilever. Just the SS had better specs.. I just wanted to be sure the SS stylus was compatible with the Sa cartridge. It seems like the SS would have cost more if it was better. Are the AT15's and the AT20's best when loaded at 100k like you recommend for most MM cartridges. What VTF do you think works best with these.

Thanks for the help
Dear Badcap: I'm talking of an original AT SS stylus replacement not a " second source ".

Raul.
Dear Badcap: Let me to explain about: I own the AT-20SS and the AT-20SLa, both cartridges including stylus are the same and in its time had the same price for the cartridge and for the stylus replacement.
The same is true for the 15SS and 15Sa.

In those times the people ( directly ) of AT told me that the SS designation was for those cartridges where ( through measures/tests. ) its spes comes a little better.

In both cases ( 20 and 15 ) the SS ones separation spec is better: in the 20SS 35db against 30db in the SLa and in the 15SS is 33db against 30 db on the 15Sa.
Could you tell ( hearing it ) which one is which?, hard to say with the 15 but in my 20 cartridges I can think/feel some tiny difference.

Unfortunately I don't own or owned the 15SS/Sa.

If I was you and have the opportunity to get the SS this will be my " road ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Next AT question like Badcap's:
Has anyone here with an Audio Technica AT-140LC tried the 'upgrade' stylus ATN440MLa on it.
Was it an improvement?
If so in what way.

Thanks
PS: Thanks Badcap, for your typing help :-)
Has anyone here with an Audio Technica AT-15Sa tried a stylus for a AT-15Ss on it. Was it an improvement? If so in what way.

Thanks
Dear Halcro: +++++ " As Axel asked previously.........who suddenly decried that MCs are superior to MMs and that this was the direction that the High-End would take?
Is it the reviewers or the manufacturers? " +++++

this was part of my answer to that same question:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&openflup&223&4#223

I can add that there are other factors that bring the people to the " only and right " road thorugh the MC cartridges, in no order:

- the very low price in the MM alternative. Almost all the people think that expensive audio products are synonymus of better quality and that a very low price audio item can't perform good: it must be a bad audio item.

- many people think that if his audio's friends circle knows that he is listening a MM cartridge this fact wil be " a shame " or something totally out of that " circle " place.

- over the years the MC " word " was a status symbol to the best and the MM was a " word " for low/hi-fi and " poor " audio people.

- other factor is that many audio people already lose " spirit " to be or to find how could we can things go better. Many of us are mere spectator and do not care anymore to be active " part " on our hobby.

- of course that the ignorance and non know-how is an important factor too.

Any one of you can add many other factors on the subject.

IMHO, here and today the MM alternative it is not only alive but the ones that still have the " spirit " are enjoying like ever/no other time the music reproduction through their audio system in a way that the others not only can't enjoy it but can't even imagine/dream!!!

Please do it you a favor and recover that " spirit " !

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi All,
I got another dose of anti-MM yesterday and it brings about my question:
Has the better 'fit/sound/match/etc.' of these MMs to do with the 'inability' of 60dB plus phono-stages to 'truly' resolve the much smaller MC signals, than the one offered by an MM?

The argument is, that most 60dB plus stages use 'inadequate technology' to do MCs 'justice' i.e. using op-amps and even if discrete components --- not good enough also with most all of them MC stages...
The problem (if it is such) is not present using only 40dB step-up stages, all of the 'tricky' 60-78dB step-up stuff is simply eliminated.

So, only some of the VERY TOP MC stages would actually qualify to do 'justice' to carts like 'Titan i', Orpheus, DV drt xv-1s/t, etc. etc.?
Alan Wright's phono-stage seems to qualify I'm told, and it seems way 'under the radar' and is not even mentioned in the: "Stand out phono stages" thread! http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1195322402&openfrom&70&4

With 40dB for MMs we can happily use tubes only also, going higher starts to get VERY EXPENSIVE to do MCs any justice, or?
Hybrid tube stages with almost unobtainable JFETs in the first stage...
Is that why my (and most every one else's) MC stage sux, and why MM is the way to go --- IF you like to listen to music rather then 'over-contrasted' un-real Hi-End MC sound only?
I really can't say, but I can say that my currently running S1000 ZE/X Empire sound CLEARLY better than the Orpheus I listened to... and what about Rauls PC-1 argument that comes to mind?

So is it, that if I do not spend >$10 000 on the phono-stage (you know all the contenders) I better stick with a top MM?
Raul, has one pretty snazzy phono-stage/pre-amp as I know --- who else can shed some light on this argument?

Also, I 'dumped' my previous stage in favour of one integrated into my pre-amp, better power supply, no extra cables, no extra connectors, better screening, etc. etc.
Have I gone the 'wrong way' like --- MM only now?

Not that I'm complaining, but I'd be very interested to hear some expert comments on this one, since I'm getting close to sell off my PW MC when ever I get it back. Lest I have another $10k plus to spend on a 'commensurate' phono-stage, which by DEFFINITION will NOT EVER be able to reside inside my or ANY pre-amp, as I understand it.

Greetings,
Axel
PS: To hell with all that misleading review MC stuff if the above said holds any truth. Eish!
Interesting point Axel.
I remember John and Brian Garrott strongly emphasising to me that the pivot point MUST be raised with their P77.
They were so adamant that I must admit I have not dared to try it lower.
Perhaps I'll give it a try?
Hi all,
as Raul rightly suggests in sharing of all information MM, let me do this with regard to one apparently lesser known MM: the "Townshend EEI 500, parabolic".
Raul hasn't heard of it, so I guess it must be 'under the radar' :-).
Initially it sounded somewhat 'dry', I'd reported, and not much to write about. Upon further reading up on the required setup (thanks to Vinyengine see: http://www.vinylengine.com/library/townshend/eei-500.shtml) I stumbled on some interesting information --- i.e. parabolic styli like to be set-up 'heal down' or with negative VTA.
So I tried, lo and behold, that did the trick!
Listening to 'Missa (solemnis)' KV 139 >> Waisenhausmesse<< by W.A. Mozart (he was only 13 years old when he wrote it!) DG 2530 777, with a young Claudio Abbado conducting, Vienna Sate Opera Chorus, and Vienna Philharmonic --- I have 'goose bumps' no end...
Next, 'Gloria Salve Regina' Vivaldi in San Marco (church Venice recorded)' Philips 6780 007, more of the same, wow!
This cart is doing something none of my MCs managed to do. I have of course played these records before, more then once.
Now one question remains, that is the negative VTA for 'parabolic' styli...
I investigated this a bit further and found some very contradictory information for the oft mentioned 'Garrott P77' with a 'Micro Tracer' stylus, also quoted to be a 'parabolic' stylus. In the manual, kindly forwarded to me by HALCRO, the original Brothers' manual mentions to use (a LOT) of POSITIVE VTA i.e. 4-5 mm UP! from the arm being parallel. Now what?
So I give my A&R P77 a try with negative VTA (I had run it with positive this far) Note: "The A&R P77 featured a Weinz Paroc (parabolic oval cone) stylus..." it also works fine, in fact better with negative VTA. Hm..
Now is this some well know information, that only I missed this far?!
The "Townshend EEI 500" manual states, I quote: "It has been found that to achieve the best Vertical Tracking Angle for parabolic styli, the rear of the arm should be lowered. (as opposed to some elliptical designs, which need the arm raised at the rear).

Please let's have some of your expert findings on this one to share.
Many thanks,
Axel
Hi Dgob,
I only have one arm, the SME V.
I do know that Raul is having his ZE/X re-tipped and he has arms and decks a plenty.
So with a bit of patience he might let us know his findings, also with regard to your arm question, when his re-tipping is done.

Next item:
- Townshend EEI 500 MM,
- Stylus type: shanked parabolic.
Not a bad cart either, but quite a bit more 'dry' in comparison to the ZE/X. Maybe it will loosen up, I shall see. I have noted that it's impedance is a stack higher than e.g. the ZE/X, which I measured at ~ 480ohms. The "EEI 500" is 2.5k ohms and quite a different item.

Now, what I also notice with the ZE/X, it is the most 'alive' cart in terms of tonearm 'feedback'. Never had a cart as yet that lets me hear if I only as much a touch the tonearm, and I'm NOT talking about static!
My SME V almost sounds like a micro!
Now you take that more delicate Moerch arm of yours and you get some idea! I have a feeling the ZE/X really needs a very well damped arm --- but let's see what the experts have to say about it.
Greetings,
Axel
Axelwahl and Dean_man,

Many thanks for your responses. I've spent some time trying to find other owners of the 1000 ZE/X with limited success. I'm currently using mine on a Morch DP6 red point and do enjoy it, especially its wide and deep soundstaging and its beautiful midrange). I'd just like a little better/firmer imaging but think a different arm might be the answer to what I'm achieving. Has anyone tried various arms with the Empire and found an improved or ultimate partner?
Hi Dgob
in answer to your question:
I'm using an SME V arm, practically no damping, 1g VTF and about the same for anti-skate. I have tried to go lower in VTF, just for interest, but than it starts to sound like some too little loaded MC i.e. a bit splashy...

Also agree with Dean_man about the sound, very alive and "no listening fatigue" type of treble, yet highly resolved. As to VTA I have it level as can be on a 150gr record, which equals a tad nose down on most thinner vinyl.

Axel
Regards, Axelwahl: You will make up your own mind about the Shure V15t3, but it has been my first choice for 20+ years. At first listen it will seem clinical, but after the first shock you'll notice detail most other MM carts. only hint at. There is no coloration, bad recordings sound really bad, but the good ones can be exciting. Pay attention to percussion and reed insturments. Cymbols are there in the room with you, piano sounds like piano. No bloom in the bass end, just very solid. Foot pedal on the organ compresses the air in the room, windows rattle. It loves anything by Vangelis. When I go to another cartridge, it usually sounds lacking somewhat in definition. I also think the V15-111 is an acquired taste, well balanced but totally absent of the usual Shure character described as "sweet". Since you pulled a quote from my last post, the Grace F9-E (thanks, Raul) arrived today, the cantilever seems stiff from storage but is loosening up, I like what I hear. At 9/10ths. gram tracking, the treble starts to really shine. Good luck and good listening!
Dear Axel: You already discover the " tip " of the iceberg and you can't eat the iceberg in " one day ".

Be patience and enjoy each step while you grow-up on the " fantastic " MM learning curve.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Most recently I've set up my Empire 1000 ZE/X for use with my Magnepan Unitrac arm, which in turn I've used on a couple of vintage 'tables--a Russco Mk V belt/idler hybrid and a Thorens TD 150 Mk II. I tend to track it at 1 gram, VTA very slightly nose down, just a touch of antiskate, and like it a lot. I agree wholeheartedly with the statements about a rich midrange and excellent all-around performance and I'll add "no listening fatigue, ever."

Gee three 1000ZE/X posts in a row, we ought to start a club :)

Jim
Axelwahl,

I have the Empire 1000 ZE/X and it is special. I think it is nearly in the same league as the Nagaoka MP50 with a completely contrasting presentation (richer or more pronounced midrange but weaker at the extremes). What arm are you using it with and what VTF?
Hi all,
if we keep it coming like that, we might just beat that 'steam-cleaning thread' :-)
Now,
>>> The V15xMR continues to gather dust, in favour of the ***V15-111/SAS*** and the 97xE <<<
This is some good news to my ears (eyes, so far). It'll be for a short while till I get that SAS I ordered for my V15 type III...
But now! I got this "Empire S1000 ZE/X" on a roll, and let me tell you --- VERY NICE in deed!
Raul, as I understand it, is having his cart still with the re-tipper.
The original claims a 'hand polished' stylus, no less. Some of it's spec. sounds pretty far out, like better 35dB channel separation! and **0.25gm** - 1.25gm VTF...
Well all I can tell this far: it sound really great and I shall be VERY interested to learn where it scores on Raul's scale of MMs. (I guess we'd need some sort of scale sooner or later, or does that sound to pretentious?)
If my A&R P-77 is a 5 or 6 out of 10, I'd give the S1000 ZE/X an 8 or even a bit more. Saying this, I'd be little surprised if Raul will tell us that there's still plenty more till we hit a 9 or 9.5 (I'll keep it simple :-)
Those MMs make single instruments come out so REAL, they like guitar, violin and what 'AIR' they produce these 'old' things is almost unbelievable.
OK, I stop rambling now and get seriously back to the music.
Cheers,
Axel
Raul, you stated: "I like the 97 and prefer over the V15 Type V". I too enjoy the 97xE, it is a permanent fixture on my stand-by turntable. The V15xMR continues to gather dust, in favor of the V15-111/SAS and the 97xE. With further listening with the xMR (microridge) stylus in the M97, voices are presented with a natural ease and highs are cleaner, with no evidence of shrillness. My overall impression is that the MR stylus is, well, faster and with a slight increase in volume. Research through other sources indicates that there is a tab of plastic with the Shure badge on it above the stylus which must be removed to fit the SAS M97(HE) to the 97xE cart, or to the V15xMR. Available through lp gear, the JICO site dosn't show it.
I am eager to recieve the Grace F9, the stylus is described as showing no evidence of wear, the suspension good and the cartridge tested to spec. I will, as you suggest, enjoy it without the Soundsmith "upgrade" unless necessary. Thanks for your interest and good advice.
Dear Timeltel: I like the 97 and prefer over the V15 Type V but I don't have any experience on those different stylus you name it.

Here you can find and contact with people that loves Jico ones: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1241395046&read&keyw&zzjico+sas+

and I understand that Axelwahl is waiting for the Jico stylus for his Type III.

About the Grace, that is really nice, my advise is that you try it in original condition, its performance is very good.
I own it along the Ruby and yes the this one is better performer that I understand is not only because the Ruby cantilever but a little different cartridge electrical design and fine tunning.

Toufu, who posted here, own a original Ruby that he has to send to rebuild to SS and it will be interesting that when he receive it which differences are between the original Ruby and the SS rebuild.

Of course that you can send your Grace to SS any time you want.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Halcro, you ask:
>>> ... did you receive the photos and technical information I sent you on the Garrott P77 by way of Email? <<<
Oh, yes! I did, and send you a reply also... was it lost in the mail?

In fact I'd asked you for a pic from the bottom of your P-77 so as to see the stylus and cantilever more clearly.
Meanwhile I could ascertain that the cantilevers are of the same construction (as in the A&R) -- an 'Aluminium Dual Tube' something I had not come across this far. I've no idea if the stylus shapes are different. The A&R uses originally, styli made by Dr. Ernst Weinz in Idar Oberstein, Germany.
When Dr. Weinz unexpectedly died, A&R were able to source UK made diamond styli from Expert Pickups in the UK.
Any idea where the 'Brothers' sourced theirs?

Thanks again,
Axel
Thanks Axel and Raul for your kind comments. It's gratifying for me to hear such positive feedback.
By the way Axel, did you receive the photos and technical information I sent you on the Garrott P77 by way of Email?
Raul, thanks for this thread, perhaps you or one of the knowledgable A'goners can answer my question. I am impressed by the performance of the Shure M97xE, but it seems to lack that last bit of authority found in certain other MM cartridges. I recently installed a Jico SAS stylus in my favorite, a Shure V15-111, and was very pleased with the improvement. I have a stable of cartridges, AT, Goldring, AKG, Dynavector and several Shures and Ortofons. I haven't used a MC cart. for quite a while. I gave consideration to the potential of an upgrade for the M97xE and found that the insert for a V15xMR is identical. The two, when compared with the microridge installed, sound so similar I cannot immediately say the $500 cartridge is superior. Does anyone have any insight on the necessary modification to fit the M97ED stylus to either of these cartridges? Jico supplies a SAS for the 97ED, and this would potentially provide a serious upgrade for one and an equivelent or improved replacement for the other, which is now practically unobtainable.
By the way, your comments led me to the purchase of a Grace F9-E, I'm considering a Soundsmith rebuild with the ruby cantilever for it, the cart. should arrive this week.
Dear Halcro: I agree with Axel on your P-77 review. Thank you to bring it here.

Oh that " air "!!!!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
For those interested, I have written a review/comparison of the Garrott P77 MM cartridge compared to the top MCs I have heard.
Garrott P77
Dear Livemusic: More that we think there are many MM cartridges that have medium compliance between 10cu to 18cu and the high cmpliance one are very tolerant on tonearms.
As a fact no one of my tonearms has a low effective mass and the cartridges that I already try works fine.

I like the EPA-100 and agree that will be a good match for MM cartridges with the advantage that you can try with different headshells that help a lot to match the cartridge with that tonearm, the 881S is very good performer lucky you are to own it in a new condition.

What you experienced with that Empire is almost repetitive between MM and MC samples: no contest.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul, what tonearms suit better for high compliance MM carts? Super light arms like SME series III, WT and other carbon fibres arms come to mind, but they do not look very good in vibrations damping department. I was lucky to get NOS Stanton 881S; I consider EPA-100 as a replacement for SME 3009 II - what do you think? I became exciting about MM carts after my humble Empire 999 SE/X (bougth used on e-bay for 50$) strapped for mono put in shame Ortofon SPU mono. Thank you for breaking MC inherent superiority myth!
Hi all,
in answer to why do MMs have a more 'natural sound' and all that good stuff, let me put forward some additional hypothesis -- facts even?

Some say, that NO MC will be able to bring forth the 'information density' of an MM, due to it's very low voltage output --- and just about all phono-stages work with voltage rather than current.

It is interesting to note that some top MC makers tell you, that their step-up transformer will be a 'requirement' to bring out the best in their carts --- even it they deliver a reasonably healthy ~0.5mV output.
As an example take 'My Sonic Lab Eminent MC Cartridge' with their 'Stage XXX Step-Up Transformer(s)'. Lyra has their trannie but does not insist you have to have on.
Also, Ortofon's ~ 0.2mV SPUs are asking for an SUT, even though it should have no problem with a 66 - 78dB phono-stages, or?
The anti-SUT faction tells its all BS, and that an SUT will 'mess-up' things more than it helps, oh yes?

Now let's look at an MM --- the above is a non-issue in every respect since just about ALL MMs deliver the 'mean spec' voltage required by a phono-stage i.e. 4.7mV, some more some less.
So what's my point - as we all seem to know all this in any case?
My point is, that we are talking carts here, and VERY little about phono-stages. More specific, the ABILITY of a phono-stage to make 'ood sound' from e.g. ~ 0.3mV as compared to ~ 5.0mV!
Some say, that e.g. op-amps have a VERY hard time to actually deliver the goods, in the context of information density i.e. harmonic completeness, --- micro info gets lost in the process of pumping up the signal by 66 - 78dB. Could well be, someone out there might know some more about that.
Now still with phono-stages, let's look at the tube only ones. NO WAY can ANY tube stage do 66dB or even more, it just gets to noisy due to tube rush. So it's either going to be a hybrid or, lo and behold, we have some SUT inside (Manley, EAR, etc.) that's taking care of business for an MC. Jolly good I say, maybe that's why they sound so good with MCs in the first place!

So, can it be it's the phono-stage's work made easier, that the MM scores where the MC sound either too lean or skeletal by comparison? And putting an SUT being a NO-NO for so may purists?

Fact remains, even if you are OK with this SUT/MC thing it gets extraordinarily expensive. A good SUT will rival the MC cart in terms of $$$$.

And so it's at least worth a VERY GOOD try and listen to see what this 'old time rock&roll' MM cart can do for you.

Greetings,
Axel
PS: J.C., Lyra sells a trannie but far to few I should think :-)
Hi Raul, Halcro et al,

I am, by my inquisitive nature, still intrigued about this **'organic' transparent 'rightness' of the humble MM cartridge**...

I have floated one **hypothesis**: (from Greek ὑπόθεσις [iˈpoθesis]) consists either of a suggested explanation for an observable phenomenon or of a reasoned proposal predicting a possible causal correlation among multiple phenomena...) ... just to get that straight,

Or was it rather a: **theory** (in the general sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of observations. --- End of quote.
This just, before I get accused of semantics etc.

You see, most of this sharing goes on about what these MMs do when compared to MCs and it would be of some use to have as more logical, never mind scientific explanation, why this should be so. Otherwise it's just a load of "he said she said"...
It was 'Steen Duelund' I mentioned earlier that might just have got close to it i.e. more gentle treble roll-off = more natural listening experience...

"Duelund" the man with his special capacitors, resistors, driver (theories) etc. was chasing best possible **natural** sound after all, and a lot relating to cross-over behaviour also.

Is anyone willing to put some meat on this 'bone' or are we now just going on in some sort of self-congratulatory fashion telling each other how great MMs sound as compared to MCs, I wonder?

I have the idea, that most MC-ONLY folks would be moved out of their corner to get something more substancial then: hey, it sound just so great to my ears in my system, etc.

The phenomena we have heard, all of us MM listeners -- but after all there aught to be some logical explanation to help some MC-ONLY folks to take note what we are on about.

Raul, who's started this thread, is rather insistent not to make this some 'secret MM society' to be kept under the radar --- and be ridiculed for being nostalgic and backward oriented, away from the current most advanced MC developments now going for $20 000 'bleeding edge' technology...
(SirSpeedy with his hi-end cost consciousness aught to like this one :-)

What do you think?

Greetings,
Axel
As Axel asked previously.........who suddenly decried that MCs are superior to MMs and that this was the direction that the High-End would take?
Is it the reviewers or the manufacturers?
One theory I have, which Axel and Raul allude to, is that the MCs tend to exaggerate the contrasts in the musical presentation, wringing enormous detail out of the high frequencies, not just in their fundamentals, but particularly in their harmonics. This 'extra' detail sounds initially impressive to listeners who feel that suddenly their systems are retrieving information not previously heard?
With the hearing losses brought on by the aging ears of most analogue audiophiles and the solid preference for valve amplification shown by many of them, this suddenly 'spot-lit' detail of the higher frequencies is often all the evidence they need to assume that MCs are intrinsically superior to MMs?

Once an audiophile has 'ditched' his MM cartridge and installed his MC, it is rare indeed for a revision to occur with the quest for a better and 'faster' or 'more neutral' MC resulting in the purchase of more and more expensive MC cartridges.

The epiphany that one can experience when re-installing a great MM is rarely experienced and thanks to Raul, I have had that epiphany.

When Raul talks about the.....
RIGHTNESS/NATURALNESS that the MC can't show it.
he speaks truly.
The high-frequency exaggeration of the top end combined with a (usually) better controlled and delineated low end, often leaves the midrange, the core of musical presentation, in a slightly lean and unnatural limbo compared to the seamless 'organic' continuum of the MM cartridge structure.
This may explain the popularity of the Koetsu 'sound' which tries to bring the midrange to its natural predominance over the high frequencies.

Certainly I have learnt (and heard) over the past few weeks of intense comparisons between some of the very best MCs and the Garrott P77 MM, that the sheer relaxation, rightness, naturalness and 'likeness to live music performed in real spaces' of the Garrott P77 over the MCs seems to be a characteristic of MM cartridges.

As all the equipment in our musical reproduction chain becomes more and more revealing, quieter, higher-resolving and in some ways more analytical, it seems prescient to step back and re-look and re-listen to the 'organic' transparent 'rightness' of the humble MM cartridge?
Dear Axel: First thank you for share with us your startingand enjoying MM adventure/experiences.

More than an " adventure " the MM experience is a glorious " trip " to a " land " that can give us a unique and " different " joy of music reproduction that IMHO no other source ( I mean cartridges. ) can even or dream about.

+++++ " This 'middle of the road' vintage MM cart turns out one serious competitor, so much so, that I truly think I will NOT even want go back and bother listening to my 3.5k$ MC cart any more! " +++++

even that that A&R P-77 is not at the very top MM range quality performance level you already experienced that RIGHTNESS/NATURALNESS in the music reproduction that everyone of us are lokin for at and that only a few of us already achieve it.

+++++ " MCs are just so tuned to bring out more 'contrast' and it can be exiting - for a while, but then it can get also to this: something's not 'right' feeling. " +++++

I can't say it better than you, I agree of course.

Other than in the future IMHO I think that this time is the best all over times to bring at our homes the MM alternative because our today audio systems are a lot better than 10-20 years ago.

Axel, the good news for you or any other " MM adventurer " is that if you find/choose any of the top MM performers that high " contrast " that you are talking about on the LOMC will appear in the MM alternative but with the RIGHTNESS/NATURALNESS that the MC can't show it.

Axel and you all Agon friends: " for any one can audio-die in peace we have to listen any of those top MM cartridges ", nothing comes really near it.

Axel, about your friend " not inclined " to MM: well he is the one that miss/ed this wonderful music reproduction unique experience.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Hi Raul and All,
I have a question, that might help me to understand some of these MM 'issues'.
The guy that gave that A$R P77 to me (also V15 VN35MR) has replaced it with the relative new Ortofon OM 5E, their most affordable MM if I'm right.
e is convinced that it sounds much better than the former two mentioned.

In your opinion, can that be the case, and that OM 5E would be a further improvement on a P77, or would this indicate that he never got his alignments right?

Regarding the V15 VN35MR it might be easier to explain, since in my set-up it does not sound as coherent than he A&R P77. That V15 VN35MR sound more detailed, but seems to lack the coherent mid to bass of the P77 and sound more somehow a bit etched.

Anyone that can comment on that OM 5E? see under ---
http://www.ortofon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44&Itemid=64

Many thanks,
Axel
OK, and Hi All,
I had to 'fall back' on my MM carts (very recently acquired) as my MC is in for repair.

So, I had no option to start with, when dealing with that 'stand-in' MM.
I found out to my surprise, that it (A&R P-77) is at least as demanding to set-up as ANY MC I worked with so far.
This might be less of a surprise for some other members, it was for me, so do not underestimate that side of it. Raul had said: "No Plug&Play"! and an MM surely is not (not talking about a round-point, OK)

Once I got it just right - next surprise!
This 'middle of the road' vintage MM cart turns out one serious competitor, so much so, that I truly think I will NOT even want go back and bother listening to my 3.5k$ MC cart any more!

Why, because it (MM) just sounds more RIGHT. Rhythm, timing, tonal colours, natural balance of treble to bass to put it in a nut-shell.

I have just very recently (3 - 4 days ago) listened to a Transfiguration Orpheus and yes, it has more resolution, very nice tonal colours --- but something of that MC carts particular way of sounding too. It is the same that I get from even the best of CD players, and until quite recently could not explain what it could be.

As a follow-up to the Munich Hi-End, a discussion brought something into focus: Treble roll-off behaviour, actually foremost related to tweeters, but also of some major relevance to carts IMO.
Steen Duelund figured it out, (he is no more with us since ~ 2005), but he noticed that if a treble source e.g. a tweeter goes very high to say 20, 30, 40Hz or even more, and then suddenly falls off steeply, from an until then pretty flat response --- something happens to the listening impression. Something starts to sound 'wrong'.

He (S.D.) also explained, that if you listen to e.g. live music, such steep roll-off NEVER happens. In 'natural' listening, the further away from the source you are the more treble rolls off, B U T it does so quite gently and naturally to the ear. Thereby all harmonic information stays undisturbed, 'in takt'...

The interesting thing is, that MMs have the habit to roll of more early than MC, but do so more gently i.e. do not fall off a cliff when done. That made me think...

What I experience, listening to a well set-up MM in a highly resolved system, is that sort of naturalness that I always seem to miss with MCs.
MCs remind me of a TV with the contrast turned up too much as an example. Nice to be impressed for a while, until something in your head tells you that this is just not quite right, a little bit overdone...

It is my experience that MCs are just so tuned to bring out more 'contrast' and it can be exiting - for a while, but then it can get also to this: something's not 'right' feeling.
Now, if you like it, nothing wrong at all --- as for myself I prefer that more 'relaxing into the music thing' and not getting 'frightened' by that 'over-exposed, or over-contrasted' as much as it can be a real kick, stunning, exiting and so forth, for vere hunting for the next detail etc.

So, it's horses for courses.
A good audio friend of mine will NOT go for this (MM) sound, he might be inclined to even ridicule me for wanting it more 'normal'. But I know, when it sound more right, THAT is what counts for me.

Enjoy the music, as Raul would say,

Axel

PS: Another enquiry yet: Why MMs should have lost their rightful place, so to speak...
Dear Toufu: I think I speak early on the Grace Ruby quality performance status.

Now that already run for around 20 hours and that I already make a " fine " tunning I'm convinced that this cartridge belongs to the range/status of " top MM cartridges ".

I hope that your re-tipped Ruby can give you the "joy " that my original one is now given me.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Travbrow: For what I understand unfortunately the MK2 cartridge is no compatible with the MK4 stylus ( Technics make electrical changes on the cartridges. ), for this one you need the MK3 or MK4 cartridge.

This happen to with other cartridges, example: the AT ML 150-170-180 body cartridge is almost identical but if you put the AT ML-180 or 170 stylus in the AT ML-150 then it does not works but if you make changes between the ML-170 and the ML-180 cartridges every change works.

Then you have to find a new cartridge or the MK2 stylus or to re-tip the MK2 stylus.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Hi Raul,I see that you own a Technics 205C-MKIV cartridge.I have been useing a Technics 205C-MKII and It sounds great.I have a NOS 205C-MKIV original replacement stylus to try with it.I put 45 hours on the cartridge with the MK-IV stylus and I cant get it to sound as good as it does with the original stylus installed.I spent alot of time adjusting tracking force,VTA,azimuth and antiskating force.The cartridge with the MK-IV stylus installed sounds rolled of in the treble,smaller sound stage and is less natural sounding.The midrange is too forward and bright.Bass sounds ok.My phono pre is loaded at 100k.I am useing low capacitance cables.Any suggestions?Could it be it needs higher capacitance loading?MY pre does not have adjustable capacitance loading.Thanks.
Thanks Raul,

I hope this info is of value to the overall discussion also.
I'll see what my 'messenger' will be able to 'dig up' in Munich...

Greetings,
Axel
Dear Axel: In my experiences almost all the MM cartridges performs very well with 100-150pf, so you can run with that 0nf and the cable capacitance can/could help about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Thanks Raul,
now it looks like I have a project coming on :-)

The 326S has a jumper setting for 40dB MM or 60dB MC and a 0nF or 10nF cap jumper. I can not have any other capacitances than this (easily). Will this become an issue in your experience?

Axel