Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Dear Roy: Welcome aboard.

Your post is facinating for say the least and gives us a in deep information ( especially on the Empire subject. ) where we have so many doubts and that now we have the right answers, thank you for that.

I'm using only the cable capacitance to run my cartridges: 100-150pf but like you say this value is system dependent and we have to try and find out which value is best for each one of us.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Like a year and a half from now some people ask me ( posted in this thread. ) for a MM/MI cartridge ranking, even one or two of them really push in that direction, I decided that due that I have not enough experience on this " new " alternative and that I don't try yet many cartridges I can't make a cartridge performance ranking.

After all these two years/long, fun and learning process where I not only tested more cartridges but thank's to each one of you experiences/feedback in the thread I decide that maybe it is time to beguin with an enunciative cartridge performance ladder.

What makes me to choose a 10 range steps ladder was pecisely the complexity of the subject and the diversity of the cartridges ( I own more than 60 different ones and growing up!. ). As exist different levels on " bad " as exist different levels on " good " " very good " or whatever. Even with " only " ten steps I'm in problems with a more precise ranking.

As any ranking evaluation my choose can't leave everybody happy as can't leave everybody happy which cartridges I rank on which performance range step on that ranking ladder.

As I posted my ranking could help to some people and maybe can't help to other people: these facts are not on argueing.

Right now I'm on a detailed each step information and main step cartridge characteristics.

I have to say that this is my very first attemp on the subject and over the time I will try to make it more precise for can help to a wide range of people.

The cartridge ranking has all my experiences and knowledge on audio music I have, I'm not biased or have any kind of preferences other than MUSIC and as better is your system as near will be your own experience with that cartridge ranking.

This is only a point to start and through your own experiences along mine we all can help to enrich that quality performance ranking ladder.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards, Axel: Raul is correct, this is the code for the replacement stylus. "S" designates stylus, "E" for elliptical, "D" for diamond. Example: S909/X-RD is spherical, S1000ZE/X-ERD is a hand polished .2 x .7 mil. micro elliptical diamond. For the specified cartridge, freq. resp. 4-40,000, output 5.0 mv, VTF 1/4 to 1 1/2 gm., 15 deg. TA. JICO offers replacement styli.
For your consideration, this data suggested HF blending might be enhanced by reducing tracking force and lowering the VTA. I enjoy mine at 0.8 gm downforce and with a slightly negative VTA to compensate for SRA deflection resulting from a previously greater (1 1/16 gm.) VTF. Detail and transients are improved but a consequential less remarkable bass may not be to your taste.
Greetings, All. Royj, I give homage to your level of involvment concerning this subject. Our posts crossed on the moderators' desk. My response to Axel is in regard to the S1000ZE/X-ERD, and is from information provided by Empire. The ERD designation extends to the 90EE/X at 15-25,000 freq. resp., replacement stylus S90E/X-ERD.
It should be clarified for others who read this that the information you relate is concerning the EDR and this knowldege is new to me. Thank you.
Thank you, Raul. I am glad to be here. And my thanks for the information on capacitance. Your values are what I expected, but I shall look for others to respond also, since it will be a little while longer before I can try.

Regarding any ranking of cartridges... for myself in the past, the best way to compare was to at first play perhaps only six records that I knew well, selected for clarity, image, tracking, bass, tone balance, VTA, dynamics, etc.

However after that, what has always counted the very most was to then just let other beloved LPs (not necessarily 'audiophile' ones) simply play under a cartridge, without paying any 'audiophile attention' to their sonic details- just going about my work while listening and enjoying.

After a few days or sometimes a full week of playing many different records, my subconscious always told me something more about the cartridge, most often about simply its overall musicality, and sometimes about its other strengths or failings. Once my subconscious finally let me know about 'something', then I could listen critically for 'that', which sometimes to a little more effort in finding how best to listen for 'that', using almost any record.

I think it is easy to not allow our subconscious minds to participate. This takes more time admittedly (and a calm lifestyle I would add). But I do believe this is at the heart of the problem for those who insist on quickly changing between components to compare, such as when using some DBT methods-- useful in some ways, but often less so than learning what the subconscious tells us.

Best regards,
Roy Johnson
Designer
Green Mountain Audio
We should all remember that 'a proper tracking force' should also center the magnetic armature (at the far end of the cantilever) in its magnetic field, no matter how the cartridge works.

This is best seen by looking at the side of the cartridge as it rests on the record. At some value inside the manufacturer's recommended tracking force range, we should expect to see the cantilever make a right angle with the front pole-piece of a moving coil cartridge, or in the case of a moving- or induced-magnet design, be parallel to the direction the brass sleeve around the cantilever assumes inside the cartridge body.

Best regards,
Roy
Dear Timeltel,

You are right about several things: The original stylus is S-1000 ZE/X. The later stylus is S-1000 ZE/X-ERD. I was wrong when I wrote "EDR" instead.

Instead of trusting my memory, I now just took a look at my inventory. The new ERD stylus I have was still in its original Empire walnut box inside its cardboard box labeled "...ERD". I have six of those styli (some new, most of unknown hours) and one original, along with three bodies (I recall one body is dead on one channel).

The original stylus I see has a 30% longer! cantilever than the ERD-version. The original cantilever is also larger in diameter, more like what we see on a Shure or Sonus/ADC from that era. The ERD-version has a very-much thinner cantilever, very thin like the MP-50 or the B&O MMC 4000/6000- like only a whisker. Not tapered at all though, as with the Empire 4000-series cantilevers.

So, I must reverse my previous comments: the ERD-version should reveal more low level information than the original because it makes the end of the cantilever move farther in the magnetic field for a given groove modulation. That would also increase the cartridge's output over the old one, unless Empire also reduced the size of the magnetizeable piece at the end of that cantilever. And they probably did, to reduce the moving mass and to also fit on the end of the much smaller-diameter ERD cantilever. After all, the output was already high enough in the old version.

The ERD-version still may have a different VTA than the original because it is shorter in length. It should track better in the highs, from having less moving mass. Its compliance seems about the same as the original-- quite high. The diamond itself may be ever-so-slightly smaller in its base-diameter than the original stylus.

I might be able to provide close-up photos if someone sends me an email... In that photo link I posted above, the image is definitely of the original one if you would like to compare that to an ERD version. You can see its cantilever is a little 'fat'.

Can I compare the sound between the two? I will try sometime, but on the only original 1000 stylus I have, the cantilever no longer angles downwards nearly as far from its housing as it should-- I think it is on its way to full collapse (I bought it used).

Best regards,
Roy
Dear Timeltel: Do you already try a " high " VTA/SRA with that cartridge? how high? performance differences?

Thank's.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
My Empire 1000 cartridge label reads 1000 ZE without the X. The stylus assembly is black and reads EMPIRE with the little round logo under it. The cantilever is rather broad with no real noticable taper to the eye. Compared to the cantilever in my Empire 4000 D/111, it looks large and clunky but it is very similar to the cantilever in my Empire 999VE with the older style tapered stylus assembly like on the 800 series. The cantilever on my later Empire 999VE/X with the stylus assembly like that of my Empire 1000 ZE is thinner and shorter. I have the original manual for the 999VE and the stylus replacement is S 999VE ERD Purple. NO X. Maybe Empire changed the cantilevers in later versions of a same model and added the X to designate that? Just tossing that out for some thought.

I found a copy of High Fidelity's 1974 test reports and the 1000 ZE/X was tested and reviewed. The interesting parts are: The Empires response cure looks far more like that of an amplifier than that of a "speaker." Speaker must be a typo because it goes on to say: It is flat within a couple of db over most of the audible range, even at the extremes it deviates by only 3db from the 1KHZ rsponse level. The curves shown here, incidentially, were made with a 300pf input capacitance, shunted by the normal 47,000 resistor. Those who read our report on the V15 Type 11 Improved will remember that a similar capacitance was required before that cartridge would perform up to it's full potential. Without the capacitance the 1000 ZE/X exhibited some 20KHZ resonance and a slight dip in response below that resonance and consequently fell a bit short of meeting it's response specifications. Compliance spec'ed at 35 lateral and 25 vertical. The stylus tip is listed as an elliptical 0.2 X 0.7 mil but in the lab it measured 0.3 X 0.7 mils. To track the most demanding CBS test cuts the VTF needed was 1 gram in the SME arm. ( no SME model mentioned) In home listening we finally settled on 0.75 gram using the arm on a Lenco L-75. Vertical angle measured by CBS Labs was 20 degrees. The listening test resulted in a "superb."

I can agree with the 300 pf or somewhat higher capacitance for the V-15 type ll because when I got mine new it sounded honky or nasal to me. I now remember finding the above report and reading it. I soldered 100pf caps across the preamp inputs and that nasal quality went away.

While I'm here and typing, I also found an original manual for the Ortofon M15 Super. Wasn't there some conjecture that maybe it's the same body as the M20FL and VMS20? The pic on the front looks like the M20FL except for the model designation on the stylus assembly. It was available in an elliptical or spherical. It's interest that the spes for both are the same except for the stylus tip size.
Cartridge weight 5 grams, output at 1KHZ per cm/s 0.8 mv + -
1db, internal impedance 750 mh, recommended load impedance per channel 47Kohm, tracking angle 15 degrees, frequency response 20HZ to 20KHZ, frequency response + - 1db 20HZ to 10KHZ, channel separation at 1KHZ 25db, channel balance 2db, compliance horizontal 50 x 10-6, vertical 30X 10-6, trackability at 300HZ 1 gram tracking 80um, FIM distortion at 1 gram tracking < 1%, trackling force range 0.75 to 1.5 gram, recommended tracking force 1 gram, stylus tip radius elliptical 18/8 um, spherical 15 um. Replacement sylus D15E Super, D15 Super.
Dear Lewm: +++++ " ut also this leaves the Empire 1000 as the finest sounding cartridge that Raul has ever heard in his system. (It's the only one that got a rank of 9, far as I can recall.) " +++++

well not exactly, other that the Sonus Dimension 5 I has more than 15 cartridges that I have to test again and that due its high quality performance potential I think could belong to that 9 range level and beyond it ( 10 or 10+. ), that's why I leave the 10 range empty. We will see.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Lewm,
I found M20Fl Super to be very enjoyable on L-07D. More at home with natural sounds (jazz, classics, rock) than The Prodigy. It is quite polite with hard stuff, but not ridiculously so. Huge and enveloping sound stage. I've set the tonearm to lowest possible heights since M20FL is only 14.6 mm. It was almost a flat VTA. 1.5 g. VTF, anti skate is 1.5. Given its accessibility I recommend to try it in your system and decide if it fits you music and mood.
Thank you Siniy, but if you read above you will see that I have been using the M20FL Super for most of my listening for at least the past month. I like it too and would agree with your verbal description. Perhaps you are suggesting I should try it in the L07D, and I do plan to do that when I finally get my motor and power supply back from Howard. I just had the platter buffed out, because there were some slight corrosion marks in the anodizing around the rim, and it looks like new. I have a secondary armboard for the L07D, from Vantage Audio, and cannot decide whether to mount a DV505 or my Triplanar on it. All my listening to the M20FL Super so far has been in the DV505 with factory headshell and mounted on my slate-plinth Lenco. It has been said that the factory tonearm weakens the L07D performance. Not that it is bad per se but just that it is not up to snuff with the rest of the package. What do you think? (Sorry, I do tend to wander OT.)
Addendum: Sorry, I should also have mentioned that I just bought an Empire off ebay that is also said to be a "1000ZE", NOS in its original box. The seller never has responded to my query regarding the "X" designation. So now I have two questions: Where does the X come from? How does the X designation relate to the discussion of factory original vs replacement styli that was initiated I think by Royj above? When I googled "1000ZE" all I could find were references to the 1000ZE/X. Moreover, the Empire factory manual available on Vinyl Engine, which shows all their products as of the late 1960s (I think), makes no mention at all of a 1000ZE; only the 1000ZE/X is shown. And finally, the cartridge I bought looks exactly like photos of the 1000ZE/X on VE, color scheme and all. The proof will be in the pudding when I finally receive the thing so I can look to see whether the X is engraved on the stylus assembly.
Dear Lewm,

All I know for certain is the 1000 ZE came out a couple of years before the 1000 ZE/X. There is a High Fidelity magazine test on the 1000 ZE.

Perhaps the X version means Empire mounted the diamond nude onto the cantilever-- it seems like that technology was just coming into use at that time and also, Empire did advertise how the X had a nude-mount for its diamond (i.e., no brass cylinder between the diamond and cantilever, for less moving mass).

The two bodies appear to be the same, so I would expect one can put in even an ERD stylus and see what happens. I do not know if inside, the coils have the same inductance as the X version.

I do know there are no marks on the stylus assemblies which would identify different versions.

Best regards,
Roy
Lewm,
I guess you have to try the L-07D original arm at original "closed loop" place and compare to other tonearms. I got an impression from L-07D forum that secondary tonearm is not really an improvement, but everybody has to try and decide for himself. Even if you install another tonearm into closed loop (original) position it might give it different treatment than L-07D arm. Tricky subject, only trial and error will tell.
Royi, Raul, any information about the LTD designation on the Empire LTD 750 which Raul recommended some time ago and where it fits into the Empire range? All your discussion about the EDR is what raised the question for me.

I must admit that all this discussion is fascinating. I shared with Raul that my curiosity with MM/MI cartridges was revived several years ago after reading different reports of some of the best known mastering engineers favoring Stanton, Shure, or other MM/MI cartridges. Hey, if they are good enough for Doug Sax, why would I shun them? Then further reading over time found that some hobbyists favored Pickering or Empire over Stanton or Shure. But about that time Shure ended production of the V15 Type V (something) and I assumed none of the others were available any longer. So, not even thinking about possible NOS, I abandoned my interest until Raul began this post.
Dear pryso: That Empire 750LTD is very good performer.

In my cartridge box that LTD denomination say: Limited Edition Cartridge, that's all.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Downunder: +++++ " So is this the new Emperor ? " +++++

well maybe no but IMHO is a " heavy " contender.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, you asked: Dear Timeltel: Do you already try a " high " VTA/SRA with that cartridge? how high? performance differences?
Originaly at 1.1gm, 200pF total and tonearm up 3 - 4mm, my 1000ZE/X's strength was in the bass and mid to 5-6khz, the hfs seemed pushed 2-3 decibels back.
Currently at 0.8gm, tonearm slightly down from adj. VTA while listening, 100k ohm resistance, 300pF total capacitance and on a magnesium headshell instead of aluminum. The hfs have a believable presence, bass transients are never congested, voice is clear. As stated in my previous post, I do hear a hint of diminished bass resonance and warmth.
If I weren't now enjoying a nicely set up Grace F9E so much, I'd fit the Empire with silver headshell leads, a heavier headshell, go through VTF/VTA/capacitance again.
In other words, I found the same thing for the 1000ZEX Davev (thanks) reports, but I think it can do better yet.
Dear friends: I posted that if I push very hard ( " perfeccionist " ) I would like that my Empire 1000 ZE/X could has a little more SPL over 10-12Khz.

I was running it with no adding capacitance but after reading the Davev post ( thank you for that. ) where the High Fidelity's 1974 test report states:

" The curves shown here, incidentially, were made with a 300pf input capacitance, shunted by the normal 47,000 resistor. Those who read our report on the V15 Type 11 Improved will remember that a similar capacitance was required before that cartridge would perform up to it's full potential. Without the capacitance the 1000 ZE/X exhibited some 20KHZ resonance and a slight dip in response below that resonance " ++++++

so I add 150pf on capacitance and the already cartridge high quality performance improve in that frequency range I'm looking for!!!!!!!!!!!!

this experience tell me that I must be more carefully on a carrtridge set up with the capacitance value. This Empire is more sensitive to capacitance changes than other carrtridges like the M20FL.
In this case was worth to try other capacitance value that this time was easy due to the Davev post.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul: I'm happy that the old Hi Fi Magazine test report I posted was of some value.
In my recollection and experience, back in the 60's and 70's there wasn't a consumer knowledge or concern about input resistance and capacitance for MM's until CD4 cartridges came along and the 100K came into play with a low capacitance but how many dealers actually told their cartridge customers?
My experience with a new at the time Shure V15 Type ll was the first time I even thought about things like that and that was by pure chance in reading the review I posted.
The Shure V15 Type ll manual doesn't mention that you should have 300-400 input pf but the added pf made a BIG difference for me in listening enjoyment!
Seems to me that the HIFI test report of the 1000ZE/X was probably done with a mind set that the 47K was a fixed standard and the capacitance was easier to change if need be so they didn't even play with the input resistance.
I may be wrong but aren't the two related in a way that makes the combination act as an equalizer of sorts, bending the response curve depending on the combination of capacitance and resistance? If this is correct then an MM/MI is more difficult to get just right than an MC because MC's aren't that sensitive to the capacitance.
I came across something else that may be interesting to you and others reading or participating in this thread. I haven't yet read it all but what I have read looks like the subject of MM/MI "loading" has been inconclusive for a long time. http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/pdf/bass/BASS-06-01-7710b.pdf
I also find it interesting that a British reviewer didn't care for the Shure V15 Type lll because to me it's one of the better sounding MM cartrides of that time period.
So far my experience with the 1000 ZE version, without the "X," is that it sounds exremely clean, smooth and open while not having a harsh high end BUT there is a lack of bass when used with the same preamp settings I use with other cartridges. I put a NOS 999VEX stylus into the 1000 body and there was more bass but nowhere near as much as with my Ortofon M20FL or Empire 4000 D/lll with NOS stylus. Because the 4000 D/lll sounds so good I hesitate to spend $166 for a NOS 1000ZE stylus and by the way it's advertised on the Internet it's hard to say if it's the ZE or ZEX version.
I was looking for a "different" sound to round out my collection of turntable setups and the M20FL fit the open slot nicely for me so I may just try the D20E stylus.
NOW CONFUSED: The HiFi Mag test report says they tried the Empire 1000ZE/X in an SME arm and the arm of a Lenco L-75 to see what VTF was needed but they didn't say what arm it was in when they called the performance "Superb."
An SME 3009 S2 Improved is 9-10 grams effective mass, the non detachable headshell verison is 7 grams effective mass and in the Boston Audio Society literature they claim the Lenco L-75 arm is 23 grams effective mass.
Raul, what if the approximate effective mass of the arm/headshell combo you are using with your 1000ZEX that sounds so good to you?
I wonder if that's my bass problem? I just took for granted that the compliance was too high for a higher mass arm than an SME 3009 S2 Improved.
I try adding 1.6 grams to the headshell, rebalanced and I didn't hear any difference but maybe that wasn't enough?

Dave
Opps. I see that Timeltel posted the link to the Boston Audio Society literature on 1-24. That must be where I got it!
Not getting any younger here and the brain farts certainly verify that. LOL
Greetings, Davev: Be my guest, glad the link was of use. I suffer from similar symptoms, evidence of my sometimers disease. Agree with your thoughts concerning the V15-111, it's very accurate, fast while suprisingly warm IMHO. The midrange may be too hot for some.
It seems we are tending somewhat in the same direction. I find not all mid/high compliance cartridges respond to less mass. I !speculate! that the inertia provided by a heavier headshell stabilizes the cartridge/arm at lessened VTF and consequently the cantilever describes greater relative, less labored movement. Sometimes. This optimalization approach worked with my M20FromL when lighter headshells, heavier tracking force and heel-up VTA left the hfs recessed and muddled. The report you provided seems to support this regarding the M20. The silver leads Raul enjoys also help.
Please don't anyone take this as a recomendation for all, our thread host mentioned the importance of matching headshells on page one. (If I remember correctly).
Dear Davev: The effective mass in my set up is: 22grs.

The last recording I heard last night was the Firebird ( Dorati- Mercury ) and the 1000 ZE/X cartridge performance was impressive, the bass not only with the precise quantity but with a very high quality. The cartridge bass quality performance is IMHO first rate.

Due to " age " I think there are/could be differences in sample cartridges.

Btw, yes with MM/MI's we have to " play " with the capacitance value along the impedance value.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: As you know the MM/MI's alternative and its set up is really " new " for us, we are not " expert " yet and due to this fact we have to be testing/trying different " roads " to achieve better cartridge performance.

In the case of the Empire 1000 ZE/X works to me a very very high VTA/SRA set up ( almost 19mm at the tonearm pivot. ), it sounds crazy this set up but works really fine.

Why don't you try this un-orthodox set up? what can you lose?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards, Raul: "As you know the MM/MI's alternative and its set up is really " new " for us".
And some are re-discovering things taken for granted 30 years ago. I can never find correct VTA unless I start pivot down, then raise it until the bass meets the treble. Typically, at that point a one to five mm adjustment brings the cartridge to open up at a specific position within that greater range, but this is just "preaching to the choir". My 1000ZE/X meets this criteria just below level. I've not tried it much above this.
Many thanks for your positive suggestion, I'll try the ZE/X with increased VTA when I can bring myself to pry the Grace F9-E off the tonearm. After 40 years of audio involvment I remain a "student", not an "expert". As you say, "what can you lose"?
As to your appreciated reference to silver headshell leads; those I recieved, and replacing a 6.5gm alum. with a 10gm mag. headshell, polished the performance of my M20FL. I'm replacing all copper leads except for a Grace F9-L and Shure V15-111. Detail with these two needs no encouragement. I recently saw some of gold.
(Hummm).
Timetel,

I would be careful with the gold leads as they have a sonic signature and tend to colour the sound slightly. The silver leads (S50 specifically) remain a must have for the better MM/MI.
I agree with Raul on the 1000ZE/X VTA to be VERY high, in fact more so than for the M20FL super.

I just comfirmed this, and it is my best sounding cart with this setting. This Empire sound pretty nice with lower VTA --- but REALLY comes into its own with the much higher setting.

Thank you for bringing my attention this Raul.
Greetings,
Axel
All this discussion of VTA jogged my memory of the old days when my Grado TLZ was my one and only cartridge. In addition to my serendipitous discovery back then that the thing sounded better with a 100K load vs 47K (because I inadvertently soldered in the "wrong" resistor in my phono stage), I also recall that the Grado was exquisitely sensitive to VTA. And the sweet spot was somewhere in the positive domain (pivot UP). It always sounded "good", but when VTA was exactly right, then and only then did it give goose bumps. Thus there was LP to LP variation, depending upon thickness of the LP. It seems these inexpensive MM/MI cartridges are even more finicky than the megabuck MC ones.
Dear Timeltel: Good to know that the changes in your 20FL are working. Btw, in theory silver is a better conductor than gold.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Axelwahl: Always is good that other person confirm that something is really " working " like in this case that high very high VTA/SRA on the Empire 1000 ZE/X.

Yes it is higher not only than with the 20FL needs but till today the higher on any of the cartridges I tested.

+++++ " This Empire sound pretty nice with lower VTA --- but REALLY comes into its own with the much higher setting. " ++++

this statement IMHO is the key to achieve better quality performance with several cartridges.
Many of us maybe are hearing very good performances with our cartridges and we don't take in count/aware that maybe if we go higher on the VTA/SRA set up we could achieve even better quality performance, we have to try harder because like with this Empire it is worth to do it!!.

As Lewm posted: ++++ It seems these inexpensive MM/MI cartridges are even more finicky than the megabuck MC ones. ++++

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Ah, if life could only be simpler!

All this discussion of improved playback for some cartridges with elevated arm height to increase VTA is interesting. And while it is not my intent to question listening responses of others, I just read an interesting twist to this concept.

Many of you long time hobbyists may be familiar with the name David Shreve. He became well known for his upgrades to the old Rabco tangental arm. Jim Smith makes reference to him in his recent book, "Get Better Sound". Mr. Shreve identified "optimal" VTA settings for various LP labels with his Rabco arm. Level cartridge alignments worked best with labels such as A&M, Warner Brothers, and Flying Fish (a folk and acoustic music label he favored for basic set up). Brightness in Columbia classical, DG, and other labels could be minimized by lower VTA settings while RCA, Vanguard, and Columbia jazz and pop LPs could be improved with higher than normal (level) alignments. His findings were that this was more label sensitive than cartridge sensitive. There is recent discussion on this at Vinyl Asylum.

Now, if that is not enough to muddy the waters, consider this. The RIAA equalization curve was finalized in 1954 but it was not implemented by many labels for another 10 years or so. Interest in improved mono playback has revealed that many stereo LPs did not conform with the (then) new RIAA EQ.

So my question is this, can we get a generalized expectation for MM/MI performance by VTA adjustment without also considering the LP manufacturer, EQ, and weight (thickness) of the disc(s) used for our listening evaluation?
Dear Tim, I think EQ is a separate issue that definitely does play into one's listening impressions. The potential value of a phono pre with an adjustable EQ cannot be understated, especially vis a vis my collection, which includes many many early to mid-50s jazz items. I have an original EMI mono pressing of "Ella and Louis" that should be sublime but sounds odd because of its tonal balance, which I am sure is due to the fact that it was probably not cut with RIAA EQ. And obviously thickness of the LP, as I too mentioned, will affect VTA/SRA in different ways for LPs of different thicknesses. At least this latter factor is easily compensated for by readjusting tonearm height. But unless one is lucky enough to own one of the few phono pres with adjustable EQ, one is stuck with RIAA only. Insofar as VTA does tilt the frequency response a bit, although in a homogeneous way, I guess there is some salvation available by that route.
Dear Pryso: +++++ " So my question is this, can we get a generalized expectation for MM/MI performance by VTA adjustment without also considering the LP manufacturer, EQ, and weight (thickness) of the disc(s) used for our listening evaluation? " +++++

all those factors play a role on what we are hearing but normally we have control only on VTA/SRA changes and is through these VTSA/SRA changes and ears how we make the cartridge set up.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi all, Not much has been said about actual set up of the cartridge. I am new to using the older tonearms with removable headshells and have used the wally tractor for my set up of straight arms with the headshell an integral part. I just learned today about an overhang gauge thanks to Raul and would like to know which protractor is being used to set up the mm/mi cartridges. Is there a preference? How is this set up affecting the final sound picture?
Richard
You can find a lot of information on tonearm geometry by searching on the VA site. It was also discussed on one or two Agon threads. And there are whole websites devoted to the subject. But mainly the choice of the various alignment methods has to do with the particular tonearm you are using, rather than the cartridge. In other words, in a given tonearm, the correct alignment of an MM/MI cartridge would be identical to that for an MC one. I own both a Denneson protractor, which is a single point type that is lately frowned upon, and a Turntable Basics protractor, which is the one I tend to use and gives a 2-point alignment (in other words, two points on the same arc). The TB product is very inexpensive and easy to use. The latest craze however appears to be any one of many arc protractors. Feickert and some smaller entrepreneurs seem to make them. Mint LP makes arc protractors different for each and every type and brand of tonearm. This is justified in part by the fact that different tonearms are designed for any one of two or three geometrys, determined mostly by the offset angle of the headshell. To me, it is most important to have the cartridge in the right front to rear position, so the stylus and cantilever are always at the correct orientation with respect to the arc. Any good protractor, two-point or arc type, can get you there. If you are concerned about this, find out the geometry of your tonearm (Baerwald, Stevenson, and Lofgren A and B are examples of the variants). Then select a protractor that conforms to that particular geometry. It isn't REALLY required, because you can twist the cartridge in the headshell (as viewed from above) to conform to the geometry of almost any protractor. For example, the TB protractor is designed for a geometry that is different from that of my Dynavector tonearm, so the cartridge ends up being very slightly askew with respect to the edges of the headshell, when aligned with the TB. This does not bother the cartridge one bit, as far as i can tell.
Thank you for this wonderful article/posting. It is by far the most comprehensive study of phono cartridges I ever could have imagined. I have always been a fan of MM cartridges and I always will be. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.
I concur with the view regarding VTA dependency. A case in point would be my Astatic MF100, which performs much better when parallel in my Morch DP6 green dot than in an elevated position (with the Morch or any of my other tonearms). Many lessons still to be learned!!

In the meantime

Enjoy
Earlier on I reported lack of deep bass and unbalanced sound with my Ortofon M20FL on a Yamamoto Ebony headshell (10 grams) / Micro Seiki MA-505 mk3. Thanks to the suggestion given here, i tried it on a heavier Jelco HS-20 headshell tonight and don't you know it, now I have deep bass. Much much better. I'd gone from meh at the start to this thing has potential to the current wow via different arms,tables and phono stages. This thing is damn fussy to get right but ultimately rewarding. Thanks for the tips again.
I think the Empire cartridge I just bought is going to be a true "1000ZE", without the "X", based on a communication with the seller. I need help with two questions:
(1) Do I need to find an "X" type stylus assembly (whatever that means) to get the best out of this cartridge? (What is the bloody difference between a 1000ZE and a ZE/X?)
(2) If I do need an X type stylus, where do I buy an NOS one? I find the stylus available on the internet from three different vendors at prices ranging from about $30 to $166. I think the cheaper ones are NOT original Empire styli. Probably one wants a factory original one, but maybe not. I need advice. Thanks.
Regards, Raul, Jaspert, Dgob:
Dgob, you are correct. Silver is the most efficent non-exotic electrical conductor. Copper second, then gold. Thanks for pointing this out.
Jaspert, glad increased headshell weight with the M20FL worked for you. For very high compliance cartridges, bigger obviously may not always be better.
Raul,on 2-01-10, Davev (perceptivly) asked about tonearm mass. I have an Infinity Black Widow, eff. mass, if I remember correctly, of 6 gm. An EPA-500H, eff. mass of 8 gm. An EPA-250, eff. mass of 14 gm. with the supplied 6.5 gm. headshell. Raul, you reported eff. mass at 22 gm. You stated: "we have to be trying/testing different roads to acheive better cartridge performance". Tonearm effective mass is a variable and this is a compatibility factor regarding the selected cartridge. Perhaps in our questions and answers we could/should describe more statisicaly the tonearm being used?
Timetel,

My pleasure for mentioning what was probably very obvious in the first place. I suppose it was only a 'just in case' pointer really.

Have you ever tried your Black Widow with an ADC XLM Super Mk2 (or other) and, if so, what are/were your impressions? Only I have heard very positive things from friends whose hearing and love of music I deeply trust.
Dear Lewm: I can't say for sure if really exist a difference between both models and maybe ( if no one tell us. ) the only way to find out is two own both stylus on hand.

If I was you and before try to buy the ZE/X NOS replacement I will wait to have the ZE cartridge, test it and put a picture in this thread to we can find a build differences.
In the other side and due to its very high quality performance I think that an invest of 166.00 is a must to do it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Rrog: Sooner or latter some one could " discovery " the MM/MI great analog source alternative over the time.

Lucky all us that we did, be part of it and can enjoy it.

Btw, which cartridges do you own or are your prefered ones?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I just picked up a Grado Statement 1 and is a huge upgrade over the Sonata. I know it is not MM but I find this to be the best MI I've heard.
Dear Raul, I am a bit confused by your reply, but thank you just the same. You seem to be suggesting that I should listen to the 1000ZE first, before buying any stylus, and that I should post photos of the stylus/cantilever here before spending any more money. But then you say that $166 is not too much to spend. I presume you mean that, IF it is worthwhile to spend the extra money for the Empire factory replacement ZE/X stylus, the company selling them for $166 is the only one that has the true product. Correctamundo?
I think you may be right, Lewm.

I have just sent Raul a picture of the standard ZE/X stylus and the -ERD version, as I have no easy way to post them online- hopefully he can, and provide a link to it.

Perhaps the BLUZ Bros, the proposed seller of the 'proper' replacement, could also have a look at this image, to verify what they are selling you?

By the way, these particular Empire styli always had the Emipre company logo (in gold) molded in 3D onto the front of the stylus guard. Imitations never do, nor have a mark of any kind- just plain black plastic.

Best regards,
Roy Johnson

Lewm, I recently ordered a pair of what appear to be genuine Empire 1000ZE/X replacement styli for $60 each (the original price tag was interestingly enough $59.99 I think), and when they arrive I'll create a 'system' here and post some images along with the stylus I currently have on my 1000ZE/X. At that point I'll mention the vendor. I am certain the stylus I am currently using is a genuine Empire replacement, and an example with the very thin cantilever mentioned above.

Jim