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
What's up with the Audio Technica AT155LC. Don't recall it being mentioned before.

Brad
Dear friends: This is the first time I saw this original NOS stylus replacement. So if you need it this is your opportunity:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Shure-N140HE-stylus-M140HE-Hyperelliptical-/310243766522?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0#ht_500wt_1154

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: I bought too an Audio Technica 331LP ( P-mount. ) that I can't find almost no information.

Any one of you have it? heard it?, I appreciate any help/advise/experiences about.

Thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul and everybody chime in on Arm mass one more time. It would seem most of the catridges being discussed are high compliance that would normally use a low mass arm. The compliance ratings I have looked at for most of the common cartridges discussed. But I have seen for instance a Sumiko MMT or current Jelco's being recommended, which are pretty heavy arms at 20g effective mass.

Bare with me here as one who wants to try a few MM have one nice arm to use with them, but certainly not at the level as many of you, I cannot be the only one.

I know we have also commented that the resonance charts/effective arm mass info is not abosolute, but it must have some meaning.

For those of us that want to buy a few nice catridges, and one good arm, what should we be buying. In my case, I have 2 arms now, an MMT and a SME Series II IMP/fixed headshell. These 2 are on extreme opposite ends 20g for the MMT and 6.5 for the SME.

The MMT at 20g mass seems to lock out any of the high compliance cartridges, many of which are 20-30 at 10hz.
MY SME fixed headshell works fine with my Ortofon VMS20E MKII. But this arm has it limitations in up to 1.5g VTF and only an 8 gram max cartridge(less if you include fasteners)

So I am thinking about an arm that would have a mass of about 9.5g or so and that would work with a wider array of cartridge weights and compliances and a wider VTF setting. I would like to buy an arm new, but don't see buying a Jelco or other heavy arm, but have thought about an M2 10.
Dear friends: More fine opportunities:

http://cgi.ebay.com/GRACE-F-9L-CARTRIDGE-/360293609520?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0#ht_3104wt_1137

these ones accept the AT200 stylus replacement:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Audio-Technica-Headshell-AT-15sa-Phono-Cartridge-/320581455739?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0#ht_500wt_1154

http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Audio-Technica-AT15SS-Turntable-Cartridge-/270626803320?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0#ht_500wt_1154

Good luck.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Plinko

I own the Nagoaka MP50 and tye dyna XV-1. Is the MP50 better than the XV-1. No its not, however its not worse either, only different.

The MP50 has a more balanced sound and maybe can sound a little lite at worst, fresh and vibtant at best.

the dyna definately has a bigger bass, but depending on your system may be a bit bloated in direct comparison. thy dyna has that MC high end lift (to a lower degree to most) that a lot of MC's have, not a bad thing indeed, but there never the less after you havce played with MM's for a while.

for the $$, a bargin but don't expect it to be at a different level but it definately has the potential to sound great with the rigfht ancillaries. the XX2 is very good.
Dear firends: A fine B&O " touch " ( top of the line in its times. ):

http://cgi.ebay.com/Bang-Olufsen-MMC-20CL-phono-cartridge-BOXED-/220660560110?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item336064f0ee#ht_915wt_1137

this one too:

http://cgi.ebay.com/AKG-P8ES-stereo-phono-cartridge-NEW-OLD-STOCK-/220660405048?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3360629338#ht_886wt_1137

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Downunder: Yes, Nagaoka is a fine performer.

Btw and just curious:
almost every audio item you add to your system you listed in your " virtual system " like the A-90 cartridge.

You own several MM/MI cartridges that like the Nagaoka you really like it you even are a proudly and privigeled ( I assume this because what you posted on its quality performance more than once. )owner of the great Technics MM cartridge but you don't put in your " virtual system " items list, no single MM/MI cartridge there!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi All,

Does anyone know if Empire ever made the 1000 ZE/X without the name etched on it as normal? I've seen similar on some of the 999 XE/X cartridges that I have but came across a 1000 ZE/X (in original box etc) that bears no writing. I wonder if this is just wear, as the stylus definitely fits etc.

Views and information keenly needed

Cheers
Dear Waynefia: I think and I already posted that one critical factor/subject on tonearm choice for MM/MI cartridges is to look for a low pivot bearing friction more than low effective mass ( 08-18-10 post in this same page, just below Lewm and Birdliver posts. ).

Here is something that I read on the AKG P8 cartridge description:

++++++ " It should be matched with only the finest tonearms having very low friction in the pivot bearings below 15mg in any direction. * ++++++

The AT tonearms have very low bearing friction, lower than 10mg as the Technics ones that are around 5-7mg.
I name these tonearms because all them are medium to high effective mass but the AT 1100. All them performs really good with any MM/MI cartridge I tested on it.

In the other side there are tonearms like the Dynavector 505/507 where the bearing friction is higher: around 40-50mg, that's still low against the VTF but high on what cartridges needs.

A low bearing friction is almost good to help a better groove tracking.

So, don't go only because the tonearm effective mass that IMHO it is not the critical issue but many other subjects around where the bearing friction play an important role.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Dear Raul, In your remarks about bearing friction, I presume you refer to friction in the lateral plane. Yes? Of course for the DV tonearms, we have two different pivots, one for lateral and one for vertical. Does DV publish the figure you quoted (40-50mg) for friction of the bearing in the lateral plane? Thanks. I would not be surprised if you were correct. OR perhaps you are talking about vertical friction, since the MMs have such high compliance.
Dear friends: More fine options.

This is very hard to find:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ADC-Astrion-cartridge-/130424597252?pt=Turntable_Parts_Accessories#ht_500wt_1154

anoter AKGs:

http://cgi.ebay.de/Phono-Cartridge-Tonabnehmer-AKG-P8ES-vd-Hul-II-/230516187328?pt=Plattenspielerzubeh%C3%B6r#ht_968wt_1137

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: I'm refering on both vertical/horizontal-lateral. Both are important for groove tracking.

These are the 507 specs:

Specifications
Type Bi-Axis inertia controlled Dynamic and Eddy Current Damping Dynamic Balance type tone arm
Overall length 306mm. With head shell: max 326 mm
Effective length 241mm (i.e. tonearm pivot point to cartridge stylus point)
Overhang 15mm
Offset angle 21.5 degree
Height 59mm lifts up to 92mm
Height adjustment range 39mm-72mm at sub arm center
Depth 36mm without connecting cable
Optimum cartridge weight 15-35 grams, including headshell
Horizontal tracking angle error -1.1 degree - +2.2 degree , 0 degree at inner band of record, 2.2 degree at outside
Tracking force adjustment range 0-38 grams by 0.2 grams step
Sensitivity Horizontal:less than 50 mgrams, Vertical:less than 40 mgrams
Net weight 1,380 grams
Output connection 5P connector
Headshell connection EIA standards 4 Pin connector
Accessary
low resistance (0.046 ohms/m, 54pF/m) high quality arm cable,
milled aluminium headshell weight 15.4 grams.
mounting template for the arm
overhang guage for the headshell

in the 505 both are 50mgrs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
I recently bought a new hyper eleptical stylus for my Empire 600LAC from LP Gear.
I am very happy with the sound but noticed that the cantilever is at a sharper angle than the old generic stylus I was using.I have had to increase the VTA to allow for this.
Are the Jico styluses like this?
Do you think the Jico SAS would be much better than the LP Gear one?
At the moment I think the 600 LAC is sounding better than the I have been using.Way better than a Denon 103 for example.
Some sad news: Kevin at KABUSA informed me that he has sold the last of his stock of NOS Stanton D22E/Pickering D3001E 0.2x0.7 elliptical styli. I just spent a few hours comparing these with the NOS stereohedrons and JICO shibata replacements using both Pickering XSV5000 and Stanton 981HZS bodies. These ellipticals sound nearly indistinguishable from the much costlier stereohedrons, preferable with some music. I regret not having given them a better listen when stock was available. At $79 they were an absolute steal.
Raul, I have not updated a few items. have a look now, you should be happier :-)

I gotta get a camera for the others
Not to be a nitpicker, Raul, but the data you quote say "less than" 50mg for the bearing friction of a DV507. This means to me that there is some sample to sample variation but that the value is always "less than" 50mg. However, one hopes that is a very conservative statement, because that's a fair amount of friction for a high end tonearm.
Dear Jtgofish: The 600LAC is a good Empire cartridge ( like almost all Empire's. ).

I never heard the LPgear stylus replacement and I think there is no SAS replacement for the 600LAC.

If you are going to buy a stylus replacement maybe is better to go with the original one. You can find here:

http://www.adelcom.net/EmpireStylus1.htm

or here:

http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=296

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Downunder: Thak's for your kindness.

Maybe you already know, my thoughts on that subject comes because other persons that I know they own ( by personal recommendation. ) vintage MM/MI cartridges does not list in their virtual systems. I'm talking on M.Lavigne, Doug, Vetterone(S.Doobins. ), etc, etc. Even and like you Halcro does not list his beloved Empire.

I know that some of them ( like you ) maybe have no time ( camera ) or is not important to do it or even they don't want to disclose these " humble gems " because maybe that could goes against their " personal image ".

Anyway, only my thoughts and every one makes what he likes, no problem about.

I'm proud of every single audio link in my audio system.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: Like you almost all audiophiles are totally unaware of the bearing friction " figure " in their tonearms and this fact is mainly because the tonearm manufacturers almost no one disclose that information.

In the other side we audiophiles really does not care about because we never had reasons to be aware and almost never no one speaks about. I really was unaware of its importance either.

I take real " conscience " on this pivot tonearm bearing friction important subject when I decided to design a pivot tonearm and latter on because these MM/MI alternative.

I think that we all make for " done " that the tonearm bearing friction is no single issue with our cartridge/tonearm quality performance and today I know that's not totally true.

Anyway, an additional analog audio subject to think about.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Back in the old days, tonearm-makers did make it a point to brag about low friction bearings, just as cartridge makers used to enclose a frequency response graph along with each cartridge.
Raul, interesting information on bearing friction. But are we saying that a low compliance lightweight catridge, that would have probably been use on a 5-10 g arm mass, can be used on a 20g or higher mass arm, if it has a lower bearing friction ?

Wayne
Thanks Raul,
Situation corrected although I did have the Garrott P77 listed.
The Empire 4000D/III Gold is everything you describe in your review...and perhaps even more.
I intend to add reviews of both it and the 1000ZE/X in due course, which are quite different to each other yet offer insights into vinyl reproduction which seem to elude most LOMC cartridges?
Wayne, I would say "no" to your question, if you want to make rules. As a rule, the need to match cartridge compliance with tonearm effective mass is still valid, but it is obvious from everyone's experience that there ARE other factors at play (e.g., the difficulty of measuring actual compliance under dynamic conditions, the other elements of tonearm design) that sometimes result in good sound from unlikely tonearm/cartridge partners. Anyway, really, the compliance/mass thing only applies to determining the resonant frequency, which only needs to be within a fairly wide acceptable range. After that, everything else (e.g., bearing friction, apparently) counts. So the bottom line I would live by is that if there is any reasonable possibility of a match, try it.
Dgob: The best information I can offer comes from Empire Sci.: Empire states all styli fit all cartridges within that family. Specifically listed are the 1000/900 series. Empire cautions that although the cartridges can be upgraded through the styli, the cartridge retains it's character.

Perhaps of greater help, output voltage for the 1000Z/EX is given at 5.0mv., 999V/EX, 999T/EX @ 6.0mv. The 999S/EX, 99E/X, 909E/X and the 90E/X @ 8.0mv output.

Some Empires in this range have the cartridge designation printed on an adhesive film label. Perhaps your example came with similar identification but it has fallen off?

Anyone familiar with Signet cartridges? Information/opinion specific to the AM (Analog Master) or MR (Maximum Resolution) versions would be appreciated. I've happened onto a number of NOS stylii for these, the AM20 (nude minature elliptical) is very nice but I've not been able to find a cartridge for the MR 5.0 (5.0 basic, 5.0-e and 5.0-mr) series for which I now have a redundancy of styli. Packaging for some are the Signet U.S.A. label, others show AT, made in Japan as the source. Apparently these, as well as the OC-9 and the 440-ML were Signet designs and continued by AT when Signet was purchaced by them in the ?early 90's?. Thanks in advance for any information.
Dear Wayne: Tonearm bearing friction is important factor/target in any tonearm design and IMHO has main influence during playback in either cartridge compliance.

I posted several times that whatever cartridge we have ( regarding compliance ) we can try in the tonearm we own whatever the tonearm effective mass and heard/hear it.

I tested several cartridges/tonearms with out cares about effective mass/compliance and till today I can think was ok for me.

I'm not saying that it is not important the tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency because it is but I think that we are worried to much on it and maybe we have to put our " thinking/effort " on opther important tonearm/cartridge subjects.

I posted that the resonance frequency tonearm/cartridge " figure " is a point to start but not the one that decide my final " road ".

In the other side, if we analize the tonearm/resonance calculation formula/equation we can see that we need the manufacturer Tonearm Effective Mass value:

we take it from the tonearm manual specs and here emerge an important question? ( at least important to me ):

in what place/position the tonearm manufacturer " put " the tonearm counterweight to calculate the tonearm effective mass?

the tonearm counterweight is the heaviest weight that counts in the effective mass calculations. If the counterweight was/is at the very " front "/nearest to the tonearm pivot ( where the counterweight effective mass is at minimum. ) we have a tonearm effective mass that is IMHO not real because in no cartridge/tonearm set up the counterweight is in that position.

If we move the counterweight at a more " real " position the tonearm effective mass is different and not for 0.3grs but maybe for 2-4grs due to the high counterweight weight.

Those differences in grs. in the real tonearm effective mass makes a difference in the resonance frequency calculations that could goes over 2hz-3hz.

So we really don't have a precise/accurate tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency value.
To this fact we have to think/add that the cartridge/tonearm " react " not in a static way ( tonearm/cartridge in rest. No playback. ) but when are in playback through a recording.

Maybe I'm wrong but this is what I think about and my advise is that you make what I'm make and made about in the last 10+ years: forget that tonearm/cartridge resonance " figure " because TODAY we can't be sure if the value that comes out from those calculations is TRUE and if really has and makes a " difference " for the better:
how can we hear/heard or discern ( and be sure. ) a quality performance change due in specific to that tonearm/cartridge resonance " figure? .

I'm aware that the subject has its self importance level and that's why we in our tonearm self design are on the research to choose a tonearm effective mass that can put " calm " in my brain it does not matters the cartridge characteristics.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Dear Halcro: Yes, I was aware of the Garrot. I think all those MM/MI cartridges you own are really great.

Btw, I'm sure that all of us right now are already waiting for your Empire's reviews!!

regards and enjoy the msuic,
Raul.
Dear Lewm: In those times IMHO more than " brag " about was at least to things: first a " fierce " competence in the cartridge and tonearm market and second maybe those designers not only take care about but thinks that the tonearm bearing friction was an important subject and something to disclose for the customers were aware about.

I'm sure that all tonearm today designers take care about, the question is: why choose not disclose it?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Timeltel,

Many thanks for your curteous help. I've resolved the issue now and the adhesive label that you reference is the cause. The 1000 ZE/X also has a round stylus fixing pin in contrast to the 999 series and their diamond shaped ones.

The 1000 ZE/X is interesting and better than the earlier model that I had exchanges would have led me to believe. Although it doesn't scale the heights of the Technics 100Mk4 or Glanz G5, it is a quite detailed performer and great fun.

Good luck with the Signet data search and I shall of course contact you if I come upon any related info.

As always
Hi All,

I've still not found time to test the ADC Point Four cartridge but have come across a bit more info. There's a very positive review of it in The Gramaphone. You can find it at: http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/November%201964/107/805510/TECHNICAL+REPORTS#header-logo.

Of course, I'll comment on it when I find time to fully audition it and if I find it to be worthy of such

Till then...
Regards, Raul. It seems to me that from simply observing audible and visual cues one can determine if the tonearm is appropriate for the cartridge in use.

Just as over-damping of a low mass tonearm will result in excessive flexing of the cantilever and result in audible tracing or tracking problems, a tonearm not suited to the cartridge (by reason of mass or bearing friction) will cause the cantilever to move outside of its optimal position. This results in the cartridge percieving a false signal generated by inertial/momentum induced tonearm movement (or failure to follow the groove) and not from the recording. Excessive wear of the the stylus and vinyl are likely, damage to delicate suspensions is also a possible consequence. This applies, of course, to the discussion of high compliance cartridges.

Resonance concerns aside, your advice to try it and see lacks the specificity we are seeking but is most appropriate. Your comment on the position of the counterweight is also noteworthy. IMO, best audible results occur when, with proper VTF applied, the weight is approximately midway between the extremes of available adjustment. Headshell weight and composition, TA mass, bearing friction, to damp or not, cartridge weight, isolation and compliance are all "points of interest" on the road to good audio. Like a Key West waterfront juggling act, one just can't know how it'll come out until it's done!

Signet. Anyone?
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " a tonearm not suited to the cartridge (by reason of mass or bearing friction) will cause the cantilever to move outside of its optimal position. This results in the cartridge percieving a false signal generated by inertial/momentum.... " ++++++

sorry my ignorance but: which or where are the " foundations " that could confirm these statements?

antiskating, stylus near its life end, wrong set up, bad tonearm damping, even just a bad tracker cartridge or a combination of these factors could shows what you are telling too.

IMHO there are a lot of things that are not very clear on the subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Aolsala adnn Timeltel,

Just started to audition the ADC Point 4 and, straight off, I have been surprised by what $5 can get you!! I think Aolsala is correct that they perform best with copper leads and phono' cables. Need more time to get over the shock and newness of it and then to give my critical faculties familiarisation time before making any fully qualititative assessments but it's very promising at this point. I'd say that its got something special (not surprising for ADC cartridges maybe but), even when heard on the back of playing the Empire 1000 ZE/X!?

Stay tuned
Addendum,

Sorry, should have noted that the most obvious features that stood out on my initial 5 hours of playing the ADC was its timbre and sound stage. These are what made for a very interesting comparison with the Empire.
Dear Dgob: Which ADC you own? the Point 4 or the Point four E that comes with an elipthical stylus instead spheric.

Btw, Adelcom seems to me have on sale both original stylus for the Point 4.

THis ADC cartridge is really old: 1963! ( I think )

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Timeltel, I have a Signet MR 5.0 ml.I had a me but suspension gave out, and replaced with supposedly better stylus. I used it from late 80's til a few years ago. I always enjoyed it but IMHO it is not as good as the cartridges mentioned in this thread.

I am going to install it on my table tonight and reconfirm. Where are you located? Maybe I can get it to you to see for yourself.

Danny
When I ordered a replacement stylus for my Empire 600LAC I also bought a new Stanton 681EEE cartridge.
I set this up in VPI 10.5 tonearm/Technics SP10 with Kenata plinth and had a quick listen.I thought it sounded quite good but not a patch on the Empire.
Since then I have set it up in a Grace 707 tonearm/Kenwood KD500 direct drive[one of the marble plinthed ones] and am astounded by how good it sounds.
It is vastly better than that other budget wonder-the Denon 103.So many MC cartridges sound refined and clear but lack vibrancy and musicality by comparison.
Regards, Raul. You ask a simple question, to answer it requires your patience.

From authoritative sources:

"The net effect of a poor tonearm/cartridge combination, whenever a large undamped resonance
falls within the audio band, is that oscillations may be excited by the recorded signals, producing a
rising bass characteristic with distortion and mistracking, and whenever the resonance is below
10 Hz, disc defects such as warps and ripples will throw the arm into gross oscillation, thus producing
severe variations in tracking pressure and dramatically reducing trackability. This
results in distortion and a lack of detail.

Incorrect force, wether it is too low or too high, momentarially moves the cantilever out of it's optimum position. There may be repeated, if momentary, losses of contact with either or both groove walls and repeated instances at which force exceeds the bearing strength of groove walls."*

*James Brinton, Bureau Manager for the journal "Electronics", and President of the Boston Audio Society. Published in "High Fidelity" magazine, 1975.

"Let us consider the function of the tonearm. When the tonearm/cartridge system is in play,
we wish to have the stylus tip follow the record groove and displace relative to the cartridge,
generating an electrical signal. Meanwhile, the cartridge shell and tonearm should remain a
fixed distance from the local mean record surface, riding the warps and other inaudible low frequency
excitation as a cork might ride the waves on an ocean. Whether or not these objectives
are achieved in any system is a function of the dynamics of the tonearm/cartridge mechanical
system."*

*S.L. Phoenix, Assistant Prof., Sibley School of Mech. and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell University.

"Any stylus cantilever motion not due to groove modulations is -or becomes- distortion in the cartridges output. The cartridge, after all, can't be expected to tell the difference between motion caused by the groove and that caused by the movement of the arm alone"*

*Bob Graham, article published by the Boston Audio Society, 1975.

What I make of this (and supported by observation and common sense) is that a tonearm can respond either too greatly or too little relative to the vertical and lateral displacement parameters of a cantilever. In case of a warp, the ability to recover from high velocity modulation or disturbance, excessive mass has the effect of driving the cantilever out of it's optimum position or slowing cantilever recovery. This may also have the outcome of the stylus plowing through groove modulations or excessive stylus wear. Tonearms of too little mass (relative to cartridge compliance) have their own set of concerns. Again, obviously. In extrapolating from the words of Mr. Graham, changes in the position of the cantilever are responsible for the generation of signal, wether due to groove modulation or tonearm motion.

It is perhaps urban legend and I do not have a written reference at this time but the reports of ADC XLM(1) and Sonus Blue Gold cantilevers pulled from their pivots by inappropriate tonearms are plentiful, the most frequent suspect was "Tonearm too heavy". I am personally aware of one instance with the original XLM. There are also reports of these cartridges spitting the cantilever out for no apparent cause.

Although it would be great if one could simply crunch numbers and determine from remote a certain cartridges specific response to a given tonearm, there have been too many agreeable combinations which when technically considered would be thought a mismatch. One does need to be very aware of potentially counterproductive tonearm and cartridge partnering when making this choice. Of course.

This is about as complicated an explanation as my simple mind can provide. Simplistically, signal is generated by the movement of the stylus/cantilever relative to the position of the tonearm. When they start going separate ways, it's not a good thing. Whatever the cause.

Raul, perhaps I should have been more specific in the post you've questioned, in respect of your expertise you are owed this explanation. My statement was a reference to tonearm induced distortion as a tonearm generated spurious signal.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Of course, you're welcome to agree or not.
Acman3: Greetings, Danny. Please do refresh on the Signet when you find the time. I have one MR 5.0 "basic" stylus, four of the "E" model and even more of the "ME" (micro elliptical, nude mount). So many of the AM10 & 20's I feel somewhat guilty but they practically followed me home.

Tonight I've learned there is also a MR 5.0"ML", thanks to your post. Rumors of nude Shibata, titanium and berillium cantilevers too. I've indications the output for all MR 5.0 series are the same except for the slightly higher output "basic" but there is a difference in the coil windings I've not yet been able to pin down. I think so, anyway. A favorable comment would add impetus to my search. My residence is in Kentucky, just south of the currently steamy Ohio River and I thank you for your kind offer.
Dear friends: Time for a very especial and hard to find in NOS Grace cartridge:

http://cgi.ebay.com/GRACE-F-9E-ll-cartridge-/290469962395?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item43a15be29b#ht_500wt_1154

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: Thank's for your time.

My question comes because there are several reasons why what you point out can happen.

All your " references " not only makes sense but that's what in theory can/could happen and that's why the importance on tonearm bearing friction, tonearm damping build material, tonearm build execution quality, TT mat and obviously tonearm mass.

+++++ " producing a
rising bass characteristic with distortion and mistracking, and whenever the resonance is below
10 Hz, disc defects such as warps and ripples will throw the arm into gross oscillation, thus producing
severe variations in tracking pressure and dramatically reducing trackability. This
results in distortion and a lack of detail. " +++++

how can we have a direct " relationship " between this statements and tonearm/cartridge subject " today "?

I have no doubt that in 1975 and before the " normal " tonearms of those times were build with maybe lesser care about because the market " demands " maybe does not ask for " more ".

At the end part of the 70's Grace, Audio Technica, Denon and Technics ( between others ) take the " flag " to " solve " many of those tonearm/cartridge playback related problems.

It is precisely at the end of the 70?s that appear the almost very first " high end " tonearms like Audio Technica: 1100, 1503 and 1010, Denon: DA-308, 309 and 401, Grace: G-1040 and 940, Exel ES-1000, Technics EPA-500, Stax UA-7, Lustre GST-801 ( dynamically balanced. ), SAEC's or ADC and Infinity ones.

All these tonearms has something in common: very low bearing friction that tonearms designs before 1975 did not and not only this but almost all those after 1975 tonearm designs comes with a high care on self tonearm damping on its build blend materials used.

All these " new " tonearm designers understand the huge importance of that J. Briton studies ( you posted ) along others one made for them to " solve " or put at minimum those problems.
We can find from those times that Technics not only goes to 5mgrs figure in tonearm bearing friction but even design a dynamically damping tonearm mechanism ( EPA-100 ) that help about.

I own or owned almost all these tonearms along some today designs where through my experiences in almost none I detected problems that I discern comes because of tonearm effective mass mistmatch.

The build quality and care in those tonearm designs are really high and put at minimum distortions that happen and fortunatelly some of us can't detect even in a high resolution system.

You can read my post on the Audio magazyne review of the Ortofon MC2000 where the resonance frequency was as low as 5hz ( Technics EPA-250 tonearm ) and through all the review time the reviewer can't detect any single trouble because of that.

I posted too that with the Ortofon M20E Super and the tonearm where I test it the resonance frequency was as low as 4.3hz with a great quality performance.

I read somewhere that early ADC cartridge designs ( very high compliance ) was on purpose designed for 6hz resonance frequency.

I'm not diminished the tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency subject or any thing you posted because even if some of us can't heard/detect " distortions ": " things " are happening.

In our tonearm design and mat design ( and now in our cartridge design too. We already start with. ) our main target is to " disappear " those kind of distortions and I can tell you that we IMHO already had/have success.

Anyway, an adding important issue to this dialog is that we point out and be aware of all those different factors ( between others. ) that have influence in the quality performance of any phono cartridge.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, great info between you and Timeltel, How about a few more arm suggestions at various price levels, that will work with all the cartridges we are talking about. New/Current and old, Jelco, SME etc...
Regards, Raul. Open discussions of damping, bearing friction and eff. mass were just beginning in 1975, as was the popular understanding of the impact on playback quality. Designs available to the high-end consumer seem to have followed innovation by perhaps two or so years, application continues to build on this groundwork today.

I selected these references since they were descriptive of the concerns being discussed here and were presented in an understandable manner, even for me. My apolgies if my previous post was vague, and as always your response and questioning was mannerly and, under those circumstances, very appropriate.
Raul,

Thanks for the suggestion and I already know of several sources where you can find NOS styli for both the Point 4 and Point 4E. As you probably know, they share the same bodies and are interchangeable.

In line with your conversation with Timeltel, I could add that I'm using the Point 4 on an Audiocraft AC3300; albeit the 'LB' version of that tonearm. Really great with this and a very wide range of other high compliance cartridges.

Cheers
Dear Dgob: No I'm not interested ( yet ) in the Point 4.

I'm now trying to give a second opportunity to the ADC 25 ( that suppose was the better ADC/Pritchard design but the XLM II.

I have on hand the ADC 25 ( red and blue dot stylus. ), the 26 and the 27: all the that ADC line!
I bought them at low pricew but nothing like your $ 5.00 Point 4!!!

This same designer designed the GE cartridges when he worked at GE. After that he found ADC and designed MM cartridges: 1, 2 and 3 denomination models.

Now that you own that Point 4 maybe could be a good idea to look for a Sonus Dimension 5 Calibrated that was the lattest Pritchard design and compare against his earliest ones.

I own the Dimension 5 that I already rated high and better than any ADC I heard it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dgob: +++++ " the Point 4 and Point 4E. As you probably know, they share the same bodies and are interchangeable. " ++++

yes I know that. Sorry to insist: which one are you testing now: the Point 4 or the E version?

Thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,

No need to apologise or insist. It's the Point 4. I've not given it enough time but I think it's an fine cartridge for its point in Pritchard's evolution. It casts a very large and sonorous sound stage, has a warm midrange and does that ADC voodoo with timbre. Maybe not as 'good' (here I use that comparitive term meaning, detailed and extended at the upper frequency extremes) as the Empire 1000 ZE/X but is in relation to that cartridge as the Empire is itself to the Technics 100Mk4.

Incidentally, I saw Downunder's honest reference to the Technics in his updated System's page. I wholeheartedly concur with his views that it is that good that your system is heard through the cartridge and have attested to the same within my own System's page. Limited only by partnering equipment and I dare say it's a quite different beast in the environment of each of us lucky owners. A truly great cartridge and (along with the Essential 3160) the tool for judging, adjusting and selecting every other component.

Although I'm no longer chasing any MM/MI cartridges, I will remain open to the occasional bargain and so the Sonus and your other suggestion might end up spinning on a TT near me. This seems increasingly likely given the constantly surprising kindness of fellow audiophiles and Agoners.

Cheers
Raul,

Do please let us have your impressions of the ADC 25 when you've had time.

Cheers