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
Speaking of the M20FL--- I also bought a NOS one from Germany because of the rave reviews here and the relative low cost.
So far I've only tried it in my SME 3009 S2 Improved arm and I'm beginning to think that it might do better in a lower mass arm.
With the standard SME counterweight for that arm, the weight has to be all the way to the pivot point to counterbalance and I can't say that the sound was all that great.
Adding a 1.7 gram weight to the headshell enabled the counterweight to be moved out some but I still have what I'd call "muddy bass."
The setup passes all of the tracking bands on the HiFi News test LP at a VTF of 1.5 grams and it also tracks a warped LP I have that some other combos won't track. The resonance on both bands is between 8 and 10 HZ but there has to be more going on here.
I've never run into this kind of problem with a MM cartridge before where the bass is bad but all else is good.
The mids and highs remind me of my Ortofon SPU in that there is a sense of smooth naturalness there but the bass is just too flabby and muddy to be an asset.
I've tried different VTA's but that didn't help the bass.
I have an SME 3009 with metal bearings and a non detachable headshell that should be 3 grams lower in mass than the S2 Improved but it needs 4 new cartridge clips to be installed on the wires and the arm needs to be mounted to a table.
So I was wondering if anyone using an M20FL could give me some insight as to the tonearm/headshell mass it seems to do best in.
Raul, if I may, Lewm's post of the 16th asks for replacement stylus for the AKG P8E. This is available from Jico. Search AKG P8E, eliptical is $49.
Also, I must correct myself: the X8S stylus is eliptical, not shibata as I was informed when purchased, or perhaps it's my sometimers disease at work. Accompanying literature confirms the eliptical profile and states that all styli are interchangable, from X6R (1.75-4gm. tracking) to P8S. For the X8S, tracking 3/4-1.25gm, response 10-28000hz. The X8E, 10-23,000hz response.
Pivot end up or "positive VTA" seems to be the common preference. How far up is a matter of listening, I guess. And one M20FL user (Siniy123) likes his flat, i.e., tonearm parallel to LP.
Dear Axel: I have some relartionship with Van denHul due not only because I own/owned some of its cartridges but because I send my Colibri in four diffferent times to fix it ( bent/broken cantilever: my fault. ).

Things are that in México there is no Van denHul distributor/dealer so Van den Hul accept that I send my cartridges direct to them. I understand that if where you live there is a Van denHul dealer then you have to ask for the Van denHul service through that dealer.

Their price varied along what the cartridge needs but no more than 120 euros witn boron cantilever.

The Van denHul service/work it is not only of very high quality ( against other re-tipers. ) but fast. They fix six of my cartridges in 10 days. Well they are truly experts!

If you want information how to contact them please email me.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: My AKG was/is the P8E that is similar to the one you own but that the P8ES is " hand selected ". I can't be sure ( today ) how good is this cartridge, I heard it time ago vry brief/short time.

Normally Van denHul can repair/fix any of these vintage cartridges but you have to ask them on your specific P8ES.

Right now they have my second sample of the AKG P-100LE for a problem in the cartridge suspension and next week they told me what is their advice ( what to do/changes. ) about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, It was the P100LE that I was curious about. When you found it you were excited and indicated here that it was top of the line, above the P8ES. I've got an NOS P8E stylus assembly, but the one that came on my used P8ES cartridge has a slightly deviated cantilever and looks to have a collapsed suspension. I wonder whether vdH could salvage the P8ES stylus assembly. It seems that the P8ES was a P8E selected for frequency response linearity and bandwidth. So in a sense they are all the same.
Davev, re M20FL Super, On Technics 1200mk2 tonearm it is very balanced with smooth, easy listening, 3D enveloping sound.
Siniy: Thanks for the information. Maybe I need to go up in arm/headshell mass and not down. I didn't try the M20FL in my SME 3012 but I will now.

Dave
I personally dont have an Ortofon M20FL, but have spoken to quite a few people who own both, the M20FL, and the Audio Technica AT20SS cartridges. And they all seem to rank the AT20SS above the M20FL with no doubts about it. I have always read extremely positive things about the AT20SS cartridge, and now that I own one, I have to agree, it stands up to its reputation, as possibly the best MM cartridge ever. I also love the Shure V15VMR, but I know that Shure gets attacked alot, unfairly in my opinion. I think its like when your on top, or as King, everyone is out to knock you down. Shure did alot for their customers, making mounting as easy and accurate as possible, and also making the Obstacle Course LP's available to test out your Vinyl Front End, always trying to better things. You gotta love a company that goes to that distance. Ray
Dear Davev: It is weird taht your M20FL Super performs with that " trouble " in the bass.

The cartridge quality performance has an even tonal balance, I hope that with your 3012 things improve or with your FR64: you can try it too.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Yes the AKG P100-LE was the top of the line in any AKG cartridge line.

I'm still exited about and like I posted elsewhere I still think that nothing " ( MC or MM/MI. ) can touch " it: yet.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul and others,
I put the M20FL into a heavier headshell and then back into my SME 3009 with a heavier counterweight to get an arm balance.
The bass was better but the setup seemed a bit excessive for the 3009 and I thought the sound should be better.
I then put the M20FL back into a light weight SME headshell along with a two gram weight and mounted that in my SME3012 Arm. Better yet. Now the low notes of a concert grand piano have that growl you want to hear and overall there is a nice tonal balance and no frequency range sounds favored or exaggerated.
Playing the resonance bands of the HiFi News test LP revealed a slightly higher resonance frequency, more around 10HZ, and it passed all three tracking bands at 1.5 grams VTF. The new setup in the 3012 played my "test" warped LP better too.
So it's looks like I finally found a cartridge that sounds good to me in the 3012. It's been sitting idle for a long time.
I may need to buy a headshell in the ten gram range to really tweak this cartridge in.
There's only about 20 minutes of play on the cartridge so maybe it will get even better sounding?
It makes me wonder if the M20FL is what all those people buying "tricked out" Denon DL103's are after?

Dave
Hi,
I've a question to the MP-50: What means: "IM type"?

The MP-50 manual states: " The MP cartridge power generation mechanism, an IM type, is that the magnet outside the vibrating system magnetizes the vibrator. The set magnet selected .... uses samarium cobalt... etc."

Is "IM" the same as "MI" such as is the case in the M20FL super, or Grado carts for that matter?
Thanks
Axel
The term "IM" refers to "induced magnet". It is part of what makes the MP50 so special.
I've just came across a useful manual on the MP50, MP50H and MP30 equivalents. I must admit to smiling because its recommendations comply with what some of us have had to learn through the long and often painful process of trial and error. You can see it at: http://www.vinylengine.com/library/nagaoka/mp-50.shtml

It should help with some of the more basic issues above regarding the cartridge, its features and use.
Davev,

You should try a Denon 103d on a Grace 660P tonearm. It was the standard used in Japanese broadcasting back in the day and helps me, at leaast, appreciate the clamour that there was for this cartridge (albeit clearly a budget item). Definitely worth a listen if opportunity allows.
Dgob: I have a DL103 and a DL103D. I gave up on the D103 because I could never get it to sound good enough for me to listen to and all that modding and hand selecting can cost more than a new cartridge so why even bother trying to make a silk purse out of an pigs ear?
The 103D is considerably better and lots more listenable, but to me it just lacks "a draw" to make me want to listen to it.
Harry W. at VPI told me that it's a match made in heaven with the shorter JMW Arm but I didn't have the two of them at the same time to try that out.
My old Ortofon SPU/GT blows them both out of the water in terms of musicality and sheer listening pleasure but only after it was taken out of my old Ortofon arm and mounted in an FR64 arm so I grant you that the "cartridge arm combo" is important.
I have enough cartridges and I need to get off of the cartridge-go-round and concentrate on what I deem the better combos I already have.
If there is another cartridge in my future it will be another old SPU because I do find that they have many qualities I like rolled into one cartridge but most importantly, a natural or life-like sound with exceptional midrange and tame yet all there treble.
Now I understand why the Japanese have been buying them up all these years.
The M20FL has some of those SPU qualities but after some play time and it already sounding better, I'm hearing what I'd call a "zip factor" like going from 0 to 60MPH in 4 seconds that is kind of annoying but it's still under 2 hours of use and I haven't tried to fine tune the setup yet.

Dave
A new thought to the discussion?
Does anyone else with multiple trial and error generated setups with that final tweaking for the best sound find that they all sound pretty much the same but one still does something a little better or a little worse?
I don't yet have a way to be able to switch in my five different turntable setups in seconds but when I do switch setups that I have tuned to my liking, I find that I can live with any one of them if I had to because they are all so similar in sound.
So in my case I know I'm rejecting anything that doesn't float my sonic boat in my room with my system and I'm ending up with very similar favorites.
It's been fun doing this but finding the stopping point has been elusive.
Dear Axelwhal: +++++ " Is "IM" the same as "MI" such as is the case in the M20FL super " ++++++

in plain word: yes. The IM is a moving iron design.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Davev,

Great to hear. Yes, as we seem to agree, their providence is an important factor in their popularity. Indeed, the Grace/103d combo is actually 'the' combo that was most frequently used. That other cartridges have made you happier is also a wonderful thing and I hope everyone can find musical happiness with similar experimentation.

Happy listening
Davev,

I think another of those trial and error truisms relates to giving a cartridge at least 20 hours break-in before assessing. Maybe this will apply to your NOS ortofon but others surely seem very impressed with it.

I'm sure you know this already but just in case...
Dear Davev: Nice to hear that finally your M20FL Super is running in better way in your 3012 tonearm, enjoy it.

About the 103/103D I agree with you. I own both cartrridges and I try it in almost any tonearm I own/owned and never give me a " satisfaction ", like you I gave up. The " humble " MM/MI alternative ( IMHO ) is a lot better option than the 103/103D.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dgob response and more on M20FL:
I agree with a breakin for catridges because of their semi-mechanical nature but if a cartridge isn't even in the ball park of what I like to hear after trying this and that, the only other break in I'm willing to offer it is with a hammer.
I just don't believe in suffering with bad sound hour after hour waiting for an improvement in anything that would be a miracle if it did happen because the sound would have to change that much to satisfy me.
With the M20FL I heard things I liked so I kept going and asked here about what arms it seemed to work well in. After hearing that it does well in a Technics 1200 I knew I was going in the wrong direction with mass and more mass did the trick.
I listened more tonight and the "zippyness" I mentioned was far less apparent and like I had said, I needed to use it more and tweak it in if necessary.
I can now say that even with less than 4 hours use it's an outstanding catridge in the right headshell/arm.
Besides sounding fine with most LP's I tried, it played two that lots of cartridges I've tried can't seem to get right.
Paul Simons "Kodachrome" band on Columbia KC32280: the bass was pounding, the vocal didn't scream to make your ears bleed and the piano runs stood out in a solid fashion.
Joan Sutherland The Art of the Prima Donna vol 2 London OS 25233: Her voice was clear and crisp without being shrill yet I could hear the space ambience and the orchestra sounded full and real.
Not bad for $189 for sure.

Dave
Davev,

That's great to hear and maybe it will improve more over the coming hours. I also agree with you about some things being immediate. Of all the cartridges that I have owned (or still own) the MP50 still marks a rare moment in which it took me just 5 minutes out of the box to realise it was something very special. Unlike cartridges such as the Andante P-76, the Nagaoka's performance is also consistent across all frequencies and reproduces inner detail, imaging and attack for all instruments: a much more grown-up cartridge, in my system and with my particular familiarity with live music at specific venues at least. If you get the same joy from the Ortofon (and others do so from what sounds most accurate or most enjoyable to them with their different earing abilities), that must surely be a good thing.

Happy listening
A question:
Why are MM / MI cart better trackers?
I slowly find out that some more difficult grooves are negotiated with just more aplomb, then with any amount of fiddling when I use some of my MCs.
In fact I have come to think it may well be one explanation why some of these dumb MM / MI are simply sounding better --- less mistracking = less distorting, and I'm NOT only talking about the most blatant most noticeable stuff. If it happens with the rough, so it will with the more subtle, and influence ultimate clarity and harmonics.
Any thoughts about that?
Axel
Do any of you SL1200 users know the effective mass of the supplied tonearm? That would be helpful. I am running my M20FL Super in my Dynavector DV505 tonearm. The headshell weighs about 11gm, as I think I wrote earlier. Since the "arm" is almost all headshell, I would guess that the DV505 with stock headshell has an effective mass in the 11-13gm range, making it "medium" mass. The compliance of the M20FL Super is also lower than that of most MMs and only a bit higher than that of a typical MC, placing it in the "medium" compliance category. Hence, I would have thought that explained the excellent result I am having. So I am surprsed that tonearms of high effective mass, like the SME3012 would also work well. I am also running a fair amount of "positive" VTA. I would be very interested to learn how Downunder feels about the M20FL vs the A90.
Lewn,

I'm confused about the effective mass issue too.
The info in the below link says that the 3012 has an effective mass of 14 grams but I don't think that includes the headshell.
There's also a chart showing expected resonace with different complinace and total effective masses.
Obviously the "key" to unlock the mystery is the actual effective mass of the arm with headshell and cartridge and it must also make a difference as to where the counterweight is set at the rear of the arm or how far out from the pivot point it is.
Then Ortofon said the compliance is 20 but is it?
I just weighed the headshell containing the M20FL and the added weight I put in and it's 13.30 grams total.
As a result of the not that heavy headshell weight for the 3012, the two weights on the rear of the arm are moved in toward the pivot.
I was going to add more weight to the headshell to see what happens but it's sounding so good I may not even bother.
Another consideration might be that my 3012 doesn't have the heavy counterweight to balance something like an SPU and I'm only using one "rider weight" or VTF weight rather than the two when using a heavier headshell.

http://www.analogue-classics.com/html/sme_3009___3012.html

Dave
Dear Lew/Dave: +++++ " Then Ortofon said the compliance is 20 but is it? " +++++

+++++ " The compliance of the M20FL Super is also lower than that of most MMs and only a bit higher than that of a typical MC.... " +++++

IMHO and searching on the cartridge compliance subject I found in an old Japanese Stereo Guide that the 20cu for the 20FL and the 40cu for the 20E cartridges are the static compliance value and the dynamic one ( that is the one to use it in the measurement of resonance frequency along the tonearm. ) are 10cu and 25cu respectively.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Axelwhal: This is what you can read through the original thread:

+++++ " 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. " ++++++

Certainly not the only factor but an important one along the kind of suspension design on these MM/MI cartridges.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Right Raul,
I recall your saying this, yes.
I do now think it must be weighted much higher as how it came across to me at the time (might be just me though).
It is most noticeable with very difficult tracks, yet in the less noticeable parts it translates into loss of "inner detail". I have just no further explanation for this by now.
Thank you for reaffirming your earlier and more detailed statement on the subject.
Axel
Hey Boys

Ortofon M20FL Super - arse slightly up, got that.

Tracking weight - 1.5gms??

BTW - I have not found MM's to track any better than MC's, with the exception of my Koetsu Rosewood. It is not bad, just sometimes it can play up on certain tracks.

My Phantom is the most fussy arm with inner tracking and related distortions - I really need the Mint tractor to fine tune - then all is good. The longer arms like my Ortofon AS-309 and the Exclusive arms have little difficulty - I guess the longer length.

Tracking, especially inner groove tracking IMO is more dependant on getting the alignment correct. Arc protractors like the Wally or Mint are excellent. Once this is done they all track fine.
Downunder,
>> ... Ortofon M20FL Super - arse slightly up, got that.<<
Well, if you'd ask me it's quite A LOT up! In fact (measured at the arm post) about 5mm, and that certainly is more then "slightly" in my book.
That cart is ~ 2.5mm less in height then most others. So having the arm about level with say a ~18mm height cart, I'd leave it right there for a start. The M20FL will now be "dipping" nose down, creating a relative large tail-up position.
Also looks OK, if you check the stylus (SRA) position.
With out "substantial" tail-up the cart sounds pretty sat-on, at least in my rig, where I usually use "lightly" tail up with just about every other of my carts.
Let us know what your findings are, it'd be ineresting to know.
Thanks,
Axel
What recommendations does anyone have for a tonearm to match the Technics EPC-100c Mk4?

Many thanks
Dear friends: All of you,

Merry Christmas!!!!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, Thank you for the recommendation of the m20fl.May be the best sound I've have had on my system. Need to get my soundsmith repaired and do a comparison but I really enjoy this cartridge.Very musical. Makes me wonder about the Garrot although I probably need to upgrade the Music Hall first. Anyway thanks.

Merry Christmas to all,
Danny



Axel et al, Re VTA with the M20FL, what happened to me was that I replaced the Grado TLZ with the M20FL without altering the height of the tonearm pivot. As Axel says, this serendipitously resulted in quite a bit of positive VTA, just because the M20FL has a lower profile than the TLZ. The immediate result was so terrific that I never even considered fiddling with VTA thereafter.

Axel, I think I can ask the question over on this thread without arousing any ire. When you changed the load resistor on your Windfield from 100R to 47R, you say the W is now much better. Does it now compete with the M20FL, in your opinion of course?
Dave, Perhaps I was wrong in categorizing the SME3012 as having very high effective mass. I must have read it somewhere. Plus it LOOKS to be a heavy tonearm. Anyway, your listening experience is all that counts.
Downunder, Cannot recall where I set VTF with M20FL, but 1.5 sounds right. I took the VTF from another post on this thread. Maybe the original poster will 'fess up.
The 1.5 grams VTF is what the E-Bay seller of NOS M20FL Supers claims but there is no Ortofon paperwork with the cartridges.
The Cartridge Database on the Vinyl Engine also says 1.5 grams VTF.
If anyone has the original paperwork for an M20FL Super it would be interesting to see what it says.
Tonite I verified that I am at 1.5 in a Dynavector DV505 tonearm and tracking is superb.
Lewm,
>>> When you changed the load resistor on your Windfeld from 100R to 47R...Does it now compete with the M20FL, in your opinion of course? <<<
Yes, it does --- in a way that e.g. the MP-50 does compete.
It's sort of like two pretty women, one with ~ better legs [M20FL] and the other with better "front-end" [Wndfld] :-)
(Incidentally, it is also 47ohm loaded when using the SUT of 30dB into 47K phono-pre, this too confirms the 47ohm somehow).
So your next question is the difference between 47R "straight" and 47ohm SUT impedance, yes?
Lets wait until after Xmas, and a good one to you all you folks too :-)
Axel
Downunder,
the spec. sheet of the seller says 1.5g VTF for the M20FL super and NO range is given.
Axel
This weekend I turned up a circuit that allows continuously variable cartridge loading using Silonex light dependent resistors(LDR). In my balanced phono stage, the LDR works in parallel with Caddock TF020 high-value fixed resistors. In a single-ended phono stage, an LDR could entirely replace a 47K load resistor. The LDR circuit could optionally be built externally and placed in series with interconnects.

The range is adjustable from 35R-250K via a control circuit comprised of coarse and fine potentiometers in conjunction with a 5V Burson Superregulator. The control circuit works outside the signal path to govern LED brightness and set resistance value of the photo-resistive element in audio signal path. The signal path is straight from PCB through soldered-in LDR. There are no switch points or wires or carbon pots in signal path to degrade sound.

My initial interest was to evaluate the sound of Silonex LDRs relative to other top resistors. The topic has been explored in a DIY forum thread in the context of the Lightspeed passive attenuator. But of course one wants to hear this for oneself.

In short, a Silonex LDR in parallel with TF020 sounds better than TF020 alone. The LDR sound is resolving, clean and extended at the frequency extremes in the manner of TX2575, with an enveloping yet articulate LF that blends the best attributes of TX2575 and Audio Note tant.

Next week Soundsmith should be returning my Helikon retipped with optimized line contact diamond. This sets the table for me to compare Astatic MF-100 and P-76 to a (possibly improved) MOMC on one phono stage with the flexiblity of precise loading across a wide range.
Dear Downunder: +++++ " Is tracking to be set at around 1.5 gms?? " +++++

the answer is yes. Now, like others posted there is no more information about the VTF cartridge range but IMHO and looking to my Japanese Stereo guide these guys take the 1.5grs value like the cartridge builder " preference " ( because they did with other cartridges they listed. ) and I think that a 0.3gr +,- ( plus, minus. ) around !.5 figure will be a safe VTF range to try it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgarretson: Well I'm exited right now for: which will be your findings about?, I can't wait.

Thank you for share this interesting and usefull " tool " that you describe in deep for almost any one can/could take advantage on it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
This one of the most interesting thread. I have been following this from the beginning. I also acquired the M20FL super based on the recommendation.

I have a reviewed article from Hi-Fi Choice from 1979 on this particular cartridge. It is consider a Best Buy and a top MM cartridge at that time. Unfortunately I don't have the scanner. Anyway this is part of the informations

Cartridge type and mass Induced Magnet 'VMS', 5g
Estimated dynamic compliance 20cu (x10-6cm/dyne)
Specific downwardforce: range 1.25g to 1.75g tested at 1.6g
Sensitivity at 1 Khz 17mV/cm/sec
Relative output (0dB=1mv/cm/sec) +4.5dB
Recommended loading 47k ohms plus 400pf
Recommended arm mass and damping 4 to 10g, moderate
Cartridge coil and resistance 800ohms, 600mH
Stylus type and spec detach, naked line contact 8x line um
Frequency response 20Hz- 20kHz +/- 1.6dB
Frequency response 100Hz,-5kHz +0.2, -1dB
Stereo separation, 100Hz, 1kHz,10kHz 20dB, 36dB, 28dB
Channel difference at 1kHz, 10kHz 0.9dB, 1.0dB
Trackability 300Hz lateral+15dB,+18dB(Supertrack) 1.2g, 1.7g
Trackability 300Hz vertical +12dB 0.8g

I hope this help.

BrianC
Dear Cashcamp: Great info, thank you!!!

Now, this info about dynamic compliance put me in doubt the info I posted and have in that Japanese guide ( 1984 ) where they have two values: 20cu and 10cu, where I take 10cu for the dynamic compliance.

Seen the 20FL against other cartridge with ( sure/precise ) 20cu the cantilever deflection on the 20FL seems to me less than the other cartridge and this could tell me that the 20FL has a lower dynamic compliance than 20cu: say the 10cu on the Japanese guide.

Anyway, till today no one report a trouble because of the cartridge compliance.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Due that the compliance numbers I posted comes from a Japanese magazine then the true values are what you already know: 40cu and 20cu. Please read this ( at the end of the link. ) and sorry to create this confusion:

http://www.moerch.dk/files/Cartridge%20Armtube%20Combination%20List.pdf

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: I was aware of the Ortofon M20 Super more than a year ago when I buy my first one ( I own 4-5. ) the M20E Super that I buy to a person on CA where I pay something over 200.00 for it.

When I mounted and heard it I was really impressed for its very high quality level that was a nice " discovery " for me. Two months latter I buy a second sample of the E model and latter two FL models and stylus replacements too. Both Ortofon models are the same/similar but the stylus shape.

On " those " times I heard the FL very brief and after heard the E one I don't recall to heard an additional improvement over its cartridge " brother " all I knew about is that was/is a very good performer and that Siny123 agree with.

Well, time to hear it again. I mounted in the Grace G-940 ( internally wired with Audio Note. ) with an unknow aluminum headshell ( nothing especial. ) running at 1.6grs, with a " heavy " ( very high ) positive VTA/SRA ( as Lewm point out. You are totally right Lew: a must to. ), no antiskating, 100K on load impedance and with no added capacitance other that the one on the phono IC cable ( as a fact I don't add any capacitance with any cartridge anymore.) .
The cartridge is very sensitive to tiny Azymuth changes and till this set up parameter is on target you can't hear it at its best.

When the cartrridge set up is right on the cartridge performance is nothing short of awesome ( for say the least ), I was not prepared to this very high quality performance ( not that I don't heard something similar in a 2-3 other cartridges. ) because I never imagine how good is this cartridge: very nice " surprise ".

The AKG P100-LE or the AT 180 ML-OCC are top rated cartridges and extremely hard to beat even to even its quality performance but this M20FL Super approach that top quality level.

The music takes a so " vivid " character that is hard to think that what you are hearing comes through your system instead a live event.

I never heard in any system ( elsewhere ) with any cartridge the so real timbal/drum on a classic music ( Pictures at an Exibition. ) recording similar of what you heard/hear in the music hall like with this cartridge " gem " and not only with this recording but with any single recoprding: the performance is so true/vivid with a full music body that I never heard it before.

Other surprise is that as good as is the cartridge low end performance as good is at the other side of the frequiency extreme ( normally when a cartridge is a little bass-heavy this preclude for transparency on the other frequency ranges. ) where we have not only a natural transparency and detail but the similar notes definition that we have at the low bass performance. The cymbals sound not only like a " white noise " but with a clear/precise sparkle very hard to attain for any cartridge and boy! that music cartridge " body ": addictive for say the least.

The mid-bass is something to hear and with this cartridge you can distinguish between mid-bass and low mid bass like in no other cartridge I know.
It has the precision and definition that you have in the AKG P100-LE ( no other cartridge I know has it. ) especially when no matter which is the recording level of each music recording soundstage layer you can hear very clear the music notes on that single soundstage layer even at the deepest layer.

I have on hand the A90 ( again, Iask for it and my friend was happy to hear it in my system. ) and other MC/MM ( MP-50, Astatic MF-100, ADC XLM #,, ) cartridges and for the ones that we heard all of them sound just " boring " or ( the MC ) " anemic ". No, the A90 IMHO can't compete with his " cousin ", well not many can do it.

I want to hear the M20E Super again but after heard the FL my brain don't call to hear anything else!!!

Axel, you need that 100K load especially with this M20FL Super.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.