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
Hi Don,glad you gave us all your opinion.Why not be useful and tell us which high-end MM carts you have tried?
Don, you read through the followup posts and got the impression none were made by "any experienced audiophile"? Truly amazing! ;-)
Dear friends: Now you can read the full Audio Technica AT 20SS full review ( ready Dave? ):
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/frr.pl?ranlg&1280374200&&&/Audio-Technica-USA-AUDIO-TECHNICA-AT-20S

Btw, I " noted " that almost all the great vintage ( the top performewrs. ) MM/MI phono cartridges comes from: end/latest 70's and early 80's. These years were IMHO the most prolific top quality phono cartridge designs ever.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul, That's two thumbs up. I concur with 1.4g VTF. From what I can gather, AT20SS may be the same as my AT15SS except for QC and hand calibration. At 15 hrs. I am starting to hear the fine qualities of which you speak. VTA is still quite positive, which on the linear arm required lengthening the wand by .5mm to restore correct zenith. This must be a good cartridge because I can clearly hear the effect of that small adjustment.
Dear Downunder: Yes I heard it because I owned. The 20SLa was a hair down the 20SS as a top of the line AT cartridge.

Other that what I write on the 20SS review an additional difference between the 20SS and 20SLa specs is on channel separation where: 35dbs are for the former and " only " 30dbs for the SLa. Al other AT specs for both cartridges are the same.

You can use a 20SS stylus in the SLa that I think is the best way to be at almost the same 20SS level. I say almost because we have to remember that the 20SS was " hand calibrated ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dave: Yes the 15SS and 20SS has the same motors, are almost the same cartridge. I have the 15SS stylus replacement that was using my brother, I don't try it and I don't want to touch the 20SS as is right now: my hapiness hearing it can't be so high.
I really don't know when I will follow the AKG P100LE tests, I know I have to do it but the 20SS keep me " chaining ".

Btw, you too can go further on the 15SS quality performance with a 20SS original stylus replacement.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: IMHO this is a secure source for original NOS AT 20SS stylus replacement:

http://www.stereoneedles.com/audio-technica.html

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,

I ordered one this morning from LP Gear. Do you think that is a "secure source" for NOS 20SS?

http://www.lpgear.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=LG&Product_Code=ATSAT0020SS

Thanks,

Dave
Dear Dave: It seems to me that in this model LPgear is a secure source and the price is 25.00 lower than in stereoneedles.

The LPgear stylus description is precise and correct and the price is according with an original NOS stylus replacement. What I can see through the LPgear picture is similar of what I see at my cartridge sample.
I have no single reason to think in different way.

Good and a winner move!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul
I wonder if it is worth getting a new ATN25 stylus for my AT25 from stereneedles.

I was quite unimpressed with the AT25 when I first got it. bright and lean. maybe stylus was worn or is that the tonal quality of AT25?
Dgarretson

You asked me about the Stanton, my cartridge is marked 881S, and the stylus is marked D81 II S. I have been reading more about these, and many of the later 881 where actually a cheaper eliptical stylus, instead of the Stereohedron. Any knowledge of which is which ?
Wayne,

Did you find the following discussion, particularly the remarks of the original designer nfalbert (Neil)? He clears up several mysteries regarding 881S and similar Pickering XSV3000. It might be worth contacting him directly with your question and also query regarding feasibility of substituting a D3000SP stereohedron stylus from XVS3000. The original D81 stylus is unobtanium but there is a Netherlands source for NOS D3000SP that I can point to if you're interested.

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=28162&page=3

Waynefia

I have the 881S + D81E stylus + D81S Mk II stylus. both stylus are NOS.

I actually prefer the cheaper E stylus.
Dear Downunder: I own the similar stand alone cartridge AT-24 and no it is not bright, maybe is time to change the stylus in your AT-25.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Headsnappin: It is in the review but here again: 20SLa, 20Sa, 15SS,15SLa and 15Sa.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards, Raul, Dgob:

For those seeking information concerning ADC cartridges,

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=305018&page=3

The gentleman who designed the Astrion cartridge and the LMF carbon fiber tonearm is currently posting and states he is agreeable to answering questions.
Thanks again, Raul. I do have a bit of a stable of carts I've not gone through yet. My system was taken apart for a while but will report as time allows. They are the P76, Azden ypm50vl (?), the Empires 1000GT, 1000Ze/X, and the 4000d/III gold.
Dear Headsnappin: I think that the AT 15XE can works with the ATN20SS stylus replacement.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I have to recant my initial negative thoughts of the Audio Technica AT25. Intially I must have got the setup wrong, probably in the damping fluid of the P3.

This MM cart is superb and as pure and relaxed sounding as any MM cartridge I have heard. It still has a lot of transparency and detail. At this point this cart might be around the top of MM's with the Technics EPC100C.

If you see one around, buy the AT25.

cheers
Dgarretson and Downunder, I understand the Jico Shibata stylus made for this 881 body is supposed to be awesome, at least I am told. I had also gotten some good info from KABUSA concerning this cart and stylus differences and issues.

I assume you are using your 881's in low mass tonearms ?
Wayne, for awhile now on my Trans-Fi linear arm I have been lightening parts to reduce horizontal and vertical mass. The effect on high-compliance MM/MI cartridges has always be favorable, and the arm now has what I believe to be the lightest moving mass of any linear arm.
Wayne
I first used it in a Naim ARO, then moved it to Exclusive P3 with S armwand. not sure if it is low mass, but sounds a lot better.
Hi Raul,

Hope you are well!! Silvio from Tampa here. Long time.

If any of you in this thread needs some down to earth advice on the Grado cartridges I will be more than happy to anwer them. I have owned the Grado Signature cartridges since the original Signature 1 which retailed back in 1976 at the very expensive price of $275.00 --- the very best moving iron cartridge then and still something to marvel after all these years. I do speak with authority since I have been a consultant for Grado Laboratories for a number of years.

Part of my collection of Signatures include over 36 samples of them. From Signature 1 through the 7 (white body ones) and Signature 8 through the later and best of the Siggies - the XTZ. Each one is a cult item in itself.

Please note that I do now want to hurt other people's feelings here in what they like or not. I speak with authority as a consumate advocate to the music. I listen almost exclusively to classical music and I own over 24,000 LP records. If any of you are familiar with the Absolute Sound of 1970s through the 1980s please read Harry Pearson, John Nork, Pat Donleycott, Bob Reina, and host of others who conclusiverly selected the Signaturee as the most natural true to the musical instrument phono cartridges ever producted. They did comparison of cartridges back in 1976 and all the other MMs did have resonance and tortional problems with peaky high end and a lot of IM distortion, some better than others.

The rest of all these MM/MI mentioned are all from mediocre sound to very good indeed, some better than others and in many cases more musical than many Moving Coils of today out there.

Please note however that the Moving Magnets and Moving Irons have continually evolved. But, here is the big but: other than Joe Grado perhaps only the late Peter Pritchard really had the spark of creativity to design trully musical cartridges. Peter's best cartridges were the ADC XLM, XLM II, the earlier model 25 (with 3 interchangeable styli) and the older Point 4 series. His ground breaking cartridge was the original ADC-1. None of the other competitors could even get the tonality of the instruments, the depth information and soundstaging that the ADC and the Grado cartridges had.

I am speaking of experience with over 45 years in this cartridge history undertaking. Owned all the Ortofon MMs, MicroAcoustics and Stantons. Again, please refer to the Absolute Sound where in those days -- at least -- they really had good ears! Today is just mediocrity in the extreme and mass market ripoff to entice the innocent.

The problems with the Grado cartrides have always been the wrong kind of arms. I just do not want to go fully in detail here since I can speak about this and fill a book.

Nonetheless if any of you need some advice on the old Signature series cartridges do not hesitate to contact me.

By the way, yes, the newest Statement Reference is superb at the low output of 0.5 mv -- the better the tonearm the better the sound. Just use no more than 1.5 grams in tracking force and "ZERO" antiskating for best possible sound. The tonality of the instruments is correct with clean and natural string sound from all your beloved LPs.... If you want HI-FI artifacts and the type of music you listen demands the colorations then go another route!

Happy listening.
Aolsala,

You are undoubtedly a great addition here and I'll jump on your kind offer.

I recently bought an ADC Point 4 and the seller 'believed' it to be "special", although he know very little about it himeself. Sadly, I couldn't find anything of further substance about it. Could you fill in the huge blanks here with any information on its history and/or performance?

Many thanks in anticipation
Timeltel,

Many thanks for your kind pointer. I'll have to join that forum when time permits.

Cheers
Dear Silvio, It would certainly be interesting to revisit those old TAS reviews. As best I can determine, little to none of that archive material is accessible now and is perhaps more difficult to locate than the cartridges themselves.

Whatever one's opinion of vintage cartridges, could it be true that tone arm design has evolved and that today there are better matches for evaluation of NOS cartridges?

With respect to ADC cartridges, I have been avoiding these due to comments that the suspensions on some XLM models were from inception subject to early failure. Any thoughts on this?

Dgarrestson,

Not to butt in or stop Silvio's response but I believe the collapsing ADC's only applied to the original XLM1 and Super XLM MkII and only relates to a challenge of tonearm matching. With a BW or something newer (maybe a Morch green dot or the like), and careful handling there should be no problem. The early ADC's really are sonically special and you can (as I recently did) find the NOS replacement stylus for the Super on eBay.

Excuse my brief intervention and I hope it helps
Dear Downunder: Good that you heard it again. I agree with you on the high quality performance of these Audio Technica At 25/24.

I don't heard for some time my AT-24 but for what I remember and maybe that comes with a eliptycal stylus against the Shibata AT-20SS my thought is that the 20SS has more " true live feeling ".

For those with interest on these AT cartridges is important to know that the AT 24 is the same AT 25 with out integrated headshell design.

This is a source for both cartridges ( NOS ) where they ad that the cartridges comes with Shibata stylus and seems to me that that was a mistake because the original stylus and the only one I know was elipthycal one, anyway a very rare opportunity to put our hands on these AT true gems:

http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=4160

http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=4161

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Mu estimado Silvio: Nice to hear from you again.

I know your commitment for Grado. I have a lot of respect for Grado and what was and still is his great contribution to the grow up of the analog high end.
As a fact I owned and own Grado cartridges and headphones.

Welcome a board!

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
The cartridge you bought was made in 1964. It was available in two versions, a Point 4 conical (the smallet tip on the side of this Earth, .0004 mil and a .003 x .007 mil elliptical). The conical had to be played with Stereo records only otherwise it would bottom the grooves of the mono and distroy them. Make sure you ahve then the elliptical otherwise you can only play stereo records.

The sound quality was ages better than the Shures of those years except the Grado cartridges. Joe had the Professional $75.00 cartridge which was truly superb in its own way as well. The ADC had to be played in a low mass arm and THERE WERE NONE IN EXCISTENCE IN THOSE DAYS. Only his arm, the ADC tonearm which was made of wood was able to partly negotiate its very high compliance.

Excellent pick up but there were problems with tortional distortion products and the tracking was severly limited because it did exhibit a peak around 16khz. The ADC-25 was the superior cartridge. I have a brand new one here with three interchaneable stili.
Tonearm design has continually improved markedly. However the very best low mass tonearms have not been superseded too much, with exceptions such as the Morch tonearms. The Infinity Black Widow tonearm and the Mayware Formula 4 and Grace 717s were excellent for high compliance cartridges.

A properly modified Rabco SL-8E with a balsa tonearm or cork can properly play the high compliance cartridges successfully. Unfortunately the high mass tonearms of today are great but for moving cartrdiges.
There was some quality control problems at ADC during Pritchards reign but it did not apply to the original XLM cartridge only to the MK IIs. Incidentally the ones that say MK II Improved or MKII Super were made by BSR Company which later acquired the Induced Magnet pricinciple. There was never a SUPER XLM. Peter wouldn't release It was far too compliant and there were no tonearms at the time that could be used. It was announced but never came out in the market.

The best ADC cartridge after the XLM was the Model 25 which sported three different styli tips, back in 1969 sold for the extremely expensive price of $100.00
Silvio, fascinating observations to the effect that some classic high-compliance MM/MI designs were ahead of their time in terms of then-available tonearms, and may not play well on even top current tone arms conceived principally for MC. This elevates the discussion of MM vs. MC into rarified air.
Thanks, Silvio. As an owner of a Grado TLZ purchased about 25 years ago and resurrected from storage thanks to this thread, I have been struggling to get the best out of it (again). If I recall correctly back when the TLZ was my one and only cartridge, I owned an Alfason HR-something tonearm. Right now, I am trying to play it on a Dynavector DV505 in a Dynavector headshell. Perhaps this is too much mass and I need to find a lighter weight shell, at the very least. Any further ideas would be appreciated. The tone is good, but there is a bit of distortion that suggests the suspension might have stiffened up over time. I hate to increase VTF too much for fear of damaging my LPs. I am using 1.6g at the moment.
Raul

That is very interesting web site. As you said, good opporunity to buy one and then buy the factory NOS stylus for the AT24/25 from one of the stylus web sites Raul mnetioned previously.
Interesting comments about current and past tonearm designs and their suitability for MM/MI cartridges.
I find that differences with LOMC cartridges between my 3 primary arms (Phantom II, DaVinci Grandezza 12" Ref and Continuum Copperhead) are quite subtle.
With MM cartridges like my Garrott P77, Ortofon M20FL and Empire 1000ZE/X, the transformation when mounted on the Copperhead arm is little short of staggering. The Copperhead is described as "LOW MASS PIVOT DESIGN - No additional mass is placed over the pivot to improve the responsiveness of the bearing system. The Copperhead is free of the inertial energy storage found in high mass bearing systems."
Up till now I have been reticent in posting my impressions as there is almost no-one else out there with a Copperhead or Cobra arm to validate my findings (and those that are out there almost certainly have not mounted any vintage MM/MI cartridges thereupon).

This may change shortly with Tuchan having both Cobra and Copperhead arms and mounting his first MM (although I believe it may be the Decca London which does not seem to rate in Raul's ranking system?)
Aolsala,

Many thanks for your kind and very helpful response. I've got the conical version but will also order the elliptical for those mono moments. I look forward to giving the Point 4 a run out as soon as time permits. Just a quick query regarding your preference for the ADC 25.

The scant information on performance that I can find suggests that the Point 4 and (more dramatically) the Super XLM MkII are far higher quality performers. Could you provide/correct the data sources regarding the comparitive frequency range, channel separation and channel balance of the 25?

Again, my gratitude
Querido Silvio: +++++ " The ADC-25 was the superior cartridge. " +++++

Like a year ago I bought two 25 ( auction was for two 25s. ) in NOS. I test both for a while and after that I put on sale on ebay.
I can't find nothing that tell me that I have to keep one of them. In the past I owned the 26 but I can't remember its real performance.

In the ADC line my XLM 3 improved, the Astrion or TRX IMHO are far superior to that 25.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgob: The 25 was part of the 26 and 27 cartridge family, here you can read about the 26 ( that I owned several years ago. ) that was very similar than the 25 and maybe could help you:

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/adc/26.shtml

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
The ADC 25 must be played on a very very low mass tonearm otherwise you will defeat its purpose. Its compliance was 120X10-6 cm dyne vertically and 56X10-6c, dyne horizontally. You cannot use your wonderful high mass tonearms. Impossible. You will defeat its suspension. Try a Black Widow, or a very light mass Morch. Incidentally the ADC XLM III was not made by Pritchard and was substantially inferior to the original XLM. Again, read Harry Pearson of the Absolute Sound and I concur with him.

Sorry but the Astrion had considerable design problems and I did attest to it. Harry was right all along. I will be more than happy to send you the copy of the review.

Again, it depends for what you are listening for.

Regards

SILVIO
Please note that the ADC-25 was a fine sounding cartridge. The XLM was even more liquid. You need a very low mass arm otherwise you are defeating the purpose entirely. None, and I mean none of the arms made today are compatible with these pickups with the exception of the low mass Morch tonearm, certain tangential arms and the Black Widow and Formula 4 or Vestigal arms.

Point 4 was fine for its day but in comparison with the better pickups (there have been improvements in cartridge designs since 1964!!!) the IM distortion is a bit elevated.

Sound quality of a Grado F-1+ circa 1974 for example trounced the ADC.

If you still need a vintage cartridge because of collectability that is fine but please do understand sound quality has improved throughout the years!
Please sorry for the misprint. I meant the BEST ADC cartridge prior to the XLM (not after like I stated) was the ADC-25. The XLM does sound better but only because it is more liquid in its high frequencies, the ADC-25 a bit flatter but very smooth.

Both cartridges need low mass arms and very low capacitance in the tonearm leads. I have used ADC 25 on several low mass arms and there is a great degree of difference because of the tonearm involved. Do not judge a book by its cover!

Happy listening.
Dear Silvio: I use it with the right tonearm, so don't worry about.

+++++ " Sorry but the Astrion had considerable design problems and I did attest to it. " +++++

that was not what the ADC designer Eric posted. Read the Timeltel link about.

In the other side I don't care what Harry say about ( no I don't need the review, thank you. ) I know what I'm saying. What he said/heard many years ago had the influence of an audio system that IMHO was not comparable to today systems and more important to my today system, period.

Btw, if you think ( like you posted ) that the tonearm effective mass is the determinant factor on a cartridge quality performance then IMHO you need an update on the overall cartridge/tonearm subject. I don't want to open a new window about, only an opinion.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: Your Cooperhead tonearm experiences confirm the importance that the whole tonearm design has on a cartridge quality performance. Here your tonearm designer was talking on the tonearm pivot bearing and you can add the whole Coopperhead build materials, geometry and even internal wiring.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Greetings, Aolsola. Regards, Raul.

Great information about ADC cartridges recently, and perhaps more importantly, justifiable opinion expressed by knowledgeable others. Does it get any better?

The Astrion is apparently a transitional cartridge, the designer (posting at AK) indicates it was a move away from the XLM series for which he had redesigned the failure prone pivot block shortly after Peter Prichard had left ADC. A few of his comments: "The Astrion was an evolution (away from the extremely high compliance cartridges). The ZLM attempt(ed) to recapture the combined warmth and sparkle of the XLM II --- the Astrion was conceived to solve the perceived lack of stiffness in the ZLM's tapered tube cantilever. The lawyers wouldn't let us use beryllium because of the toxicity hazard so I ended up going with a laser slotted single crystal sapphire with the modified elliptical diamond bonded in the laser slot", and: "A ZLM was the best tapered tube stylus we ever built with the same diamond as the Astrion and the same hand assembly. Only real difference was the sapphire cantilever in the Astrion".

Other comments regarding the XLM reflect your (Aolsala) concern regarding tonearm matching: "OldADC" (username) admits admiration for the Black Widow and recommended it for the XLM/XLM-11 cartridges even though the B. W. was in competition with ADC's LMF low mass tonearms. If I have it right, XLM-111's were a BSA product, Prichard was busy with Sonus by then. Later styli (BSA) were made in Japan, original ADC's were of USA manufacture. A quote from elsewhere: "the tas guys had already been gaga over the adc25 and wary of its delicacy or rather lack of robustness of durability. when the XLM came in the scene, they jumped on it".

Other esoteria to share: All ADC bodies with a similar configuration will accept all similar stylii: A ZLM will exchange with the Astrion, a XLM, QLM, K-8, RSZ, RSX, RXL, etc. Turntableneedles has a good offering of NOS stylii and although the XLM-11 seems universally admired, I've selected a ZLM stylus for assessing the two working ADC bodies I own through happenstance.

Aolsala, I wonder if you might be aquainted with "OldADC", he was with ADC from the late '70's into the early '80's, he gives Eric as his first name. I hope some of this is usefull.
Raul,

Thanks for the information: it did make interesting reading. I think I have sufficient ADC's to forego the 25 and 26. The XLM and Super MkII seem (statistically and according to other listeners' opinions) far higher performers and I eventually need to get around to getting truly acquainted with these gems.

As always
Aolsala,

Many thanks for your feedback: much food for thought. I do use the lightest of the Morch arms with my ADC's and would hasten to confirm your view regarding matching the earlier XLM's. On a related point, and to keep engaging your experience.

Although not a Prichard product, do you know the history of the Super XLM MkII? I ask because it has been listened to by very trusted listeners who hail it as a near unobtainable king slayer, as it were. I own one that needs some attention and I always enjoy knowing the background of these old heroes. Any information greatly appreciated.
Timeltel,

Excellent recount. I share your fascination with the variety of responses and experiences. I had said this before but... I believe the ADC's prove the importance of listening for one's self. I found it irrefutable that some of the older XML's were superior to the later ones in my system and for my hearing and expectations - particularly regarding timbre. I have a range of untested ones that I'll be giving a run out eventually.

What is there to lose when you consider it cost me $5 for a slightly used ADC Point 4 from an estate sale?

Happy days.