Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Dear Halcro: +++++ " As Axel asked previously.........who suddenly decried that MCs are superior to MMs and that this was the direction that the High-End would take?
Is it the reviewers or the manufacturers? " +++++

this was part of my answer to that same question:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Has anyone here with an Audio Technica AT-15Sa tried a stylus for a AT-15Ss on it. Was it an improvement? If so in what way.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Badcap: I'm talking of an original AT SS stylus replacement not a " second source ".

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends:
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1249757667&/ADC-Astrion-cartridge-nos---used-styli

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Greetings,
Axel
PS: Best cart in my system for my ears this far... and it's an MM!
Dear Badcap: I was a little busy with the Koetsu Coral and AT PC-1 Supreme on hand but already return to its owners ( I will report on it latter in this thread. ).

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Greetings, Axelwahl: And Rual, thanks for your origional post and boldness in suggesting that "audiophile" sound reproduction can be had without going "boutique". Last night I played my vintage copy of TDSOTM with the Grace. I missed some of the brilliance of Alan Parson's engineering, at 11:00 pm, the Shure went back on. The Grace will go to my upstairs analog system, Pioneer SX-1050, Dual CS-5000 and Paradigm Reference 20's. A very sweet setup. I currently have a SAS stylus for the M97HE on order, which I am certain can be fitted to the M97xE. The stylus for the xE is interchangable with the V15xMR so it should provide opportunity for more knowledge about these marvelous MM cartridges.
Dear Timeltel: Good to know that that SAS stylus can works with my M97, thank you for the info.

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

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

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

Thanx.
Raul, I'm chastised! Your point about VTA is well taken. A retired instructor, my solutions usually involve fumbling, not those of a skilled technician. For VTA, I start with the tonearm down at the fulcrum and then raise it until the bass meets the treble. The Grace F9-E is now seducing the smaller Paradigms. At 100k. resistance it sparkles, capacitance 400pF for this one. I found it most musical with the tonearm slightly high at the back, the Shure at "about" 1.5 deg., very visibly down. VTA on the fly eliminates a lot of opportunites for my fumbling.
Hi Timeltel
you may want to look up: "VTA setting for 'parabolic' and 'elliptical' styli"
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1244713018

Find some more insights and entertainment on the VTA subject.

I measured the VTA on my V15 III again, and it is 1.5mm negative/down with 180g records.

Funny, or expected if you wish, the measure comes to pretty level arm on 'normal' vinyl.
It is still so sparkling (with the MR stylus) that I could go more down, B U T using a SME-V arm, it would start to touch the vinyl (at the rear arm end) with 180g records.

This would require fitting a shim, throwing out everything, plus I'm not sure if the sound be affected.

Have you compared the MR to the SAS on your V15 III?

Greetings,
Axel
Dear Timetel: Good. It will be interesting that you test different capacitance values, with 100K and almost in all the MM cartridges that I already try it 100-150pf are the numbers but is system/ears dependent.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Pryso: Yes you are right: positive VTA the tonearm is raised above/over the parallel cartridge body.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Normaly almost all the MM cartridges come with a integral stylus guard ( on MC ones I only remember that the Fulton comes in that way too. ) and through my experiences on different cartridges I hear a tiny improvement taking out of the cartridge body that stylus guard that produces reonances on its own. Of course that when you do this the cartridge has " nodefense " against accidents but IMHO is worth to try it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, Axelwahl, you continue to make good points. It seems many things relating to vinyl playback are system/ear/PREFERENCE related, the objective being to make the system dissapear, leaving only the music. The Grace is perfect for the Paradigms, the Shure V15-111 sounded brittle, even at 47K and 200pF, peak and dwell to my layman's understanding and ears. I think the AKG-P8E may also be a good match-up. On my ancient (4)Advents with the Pio. SX-1980, the headroom and definition of the Shure on a Tech. EPA-501H tonearm is unmatched by anything I've tried. I think it's called voicing.
Axel, my MR stylus died so long ago, I cannot compare, but if you don't enjoy your SAS stylus when it arrives, send it to me, otherwise, I'm interested in your comparison of the two stylii. I presume you ordered it from Japan as did I. The stylus is made to order and takes about two weeks to ship, I liked that thought. Mine opened up after about two hours of play(back). Removing the stylus guard makes an audible difference as well as lowering mass. Tonearm design becomes more a concern, but my Shure tracks like a freight train @1.1 gr. Your records should last forever.
Hi Timeltel
nope, I ordered my SAS from LP Gear. That came by Raul's kind initiative, and I'm told it has been shipped.
I'll keep you posted on the listening impressions.
BTW, I also find 1.1g VTF best with the MR.
It shall be interesting to see what transpires...
Greetings,
Axel
Dear Timeltel: Good that you mentioned the AKG-P8E that before I install my AT-200SS was my nest test on the list.

Fortunately, and I don't know for how many time, the 20SS ( now that I almost finished to fine tunning. ) has an " unimaginable " quality performance that even give me some " fear " to " touch " it anymore.
There is no magic here only several steps of better quality performance of what we are accustom to heard/hear with any other cartridge ( MC/MM and vintage or today. ) out there, yes is that good!

Btw, it seems to me that you own several very good MM cartridges and I don't know if you already have the ADC Astrion because if not IMHO I think that you can appreciate its quality performance. I bring this topic again because the one that is on the Agon ads is still there.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Greetings, Raul. You always give me something to consider. Now, back to the capacitance thing. I dug out an old manual from about 1977, the following is part paraphrasing and part quote. "MM cartridges have resonance peaks at high frequences". These peaks increase with resistance, resonance FREQUENCIES are changed with load capacitance, "higher capacitance increases resonance frequency and peaks are increased". Essentially, you can tune your cartridge across its range by adjusting capacitance AND resistance.
The given load resistance for the following cartridges are all 47k. Cart. capacitance for: ADC XLM 11 (IM), 275. AKG P8E (MI), 400. Empire 2000Z (MI), 300. Ortophon VMS20E (MI), 400. Shure V15-111 (MM), 400-500. Stanton 680EE (MI), 275. The advice given is that turntable capacitance (in 1977) was usually between 75-150pf. Subtract 100 (nominal turntable capacitance) from the given cart. capacitance. For instance, the AKG: 400(cart. capacitance)-100(TT capacitance)= 300pF load capacitance.
I have noticed that by changing capacitance, the upper midrange responds with the same effect a 100kg resistance has on the high end. Too low capacitance results, to my OLD ears, in murky bass and muddled midrange, but this is just my opinion. I am NOT a technician.
The Shure V15-111/SAS @100kg and 400pF, negative VTA, is, IMO, superb, but one's speakers need to be capable of pushing a lot of air.
The AKG P8E is a great cartridge, I am fortunate to have the original stylus and one still unused.
Thanks for your interest in my posts, I hope some of this is useful and my apologies for the length.
Thanks Rauliruegas I appreciate your help. the cartridge I have now is the AT15Sa I am thinking about getting the AT15SS stylus for it and was wondering about the differences in the two. My ATSa seems to be a very good cartridge too.
Here is a relevant question for all retro-adapters to MM cartridges. What are the best sounding MM phono stages? Most "modern" phono stages are designed to maximize performance with MC types. As Raul found in designing the phono stage of his preamp, good results are not synonymous between MM and MC. Do any of you have a sense for this subject?

Also, while we are talking of MM cartridges, what about MI cartridges? Raul specifically named a few (e.g., the B&Os) that he liked at the outset of this thread, but the subject of MI designs has not been pursued. MI cartridges potentially have lower moving mass than even an MC does and yet higher output than an MC, closer to MM levels.
Dear Lew: The one MI that I know because I own other than B&O are: AKG, Empire, Sonus, Nagatron.

About its performance against the " pure " MM the subject IMHO is not if it is MI, MM, IM or whatever but in the design and execution of that design.

We have great cartridges independent if are MM or MI. The Grace Ruby and AT 20SS are MM and the Sonus D5 and AKG P8E and B&O MMC-2 are MI, well its quality perfromance is almost at the same level and very hard to say which is better.

ON your other quetion on phno stages and like you say what you find in the market are phono stages dedicated to MC ones where you can run too MM but not at its best.
The MM cartridges are different than MC ones and its needs are totaly different too that's why the MM cartridges need a dedicated ( means designed on porpose. ) phono stage wth facilities to load impedance changes along capacitance ones, overload margin, etc, etc.
Maybe I'm wrong but IMHO and for what is my knowledge ( of other phono stage designs. )there is no other that our unit designed on porpose to the precise needs to obtain the best on MM/MI.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
and even that and like Axel say: these " humble " cartridges perform in great manner.

Raul.
Well, there are numerous tube preamps with insufficient gain for MC (the ones that require or suggest using a SUT with an MC). Any of these might be more or less suited for MM when used without a SUT (meaning that they might be especially good sounding with MM, or not). I just wonder whether anyone has made such an observation. On the solid state side, there are the Graham Slee phono preamps that do appear well suited for use with MMs, have some adjustability, and don't cost an arm and a leg. There are probably many others that I don't know about. Raul, thank you for the added info in the longer of your two posts above. I knew the B&Os were MI, but I did not know about any of the others you listed. I am also curious about the upper level MIs made now brand new by Soundsmith. Altho you have commented on their B&O-like efforts, I think Soundsmith would claim that these are not the products by which they would want to be judged.

In terms of moving mass, MM types and MI types lie on both sides of MC types (MM much higher, MI much lower), so it does not seem likely that moving mass per se has anything to do with why you guys are finding so much delight in these old products. Perhaps it is just the robust voltage output, which makes life so much easier for the phono preamp, that is the root cause.

I intend to give these cartridges a try, as soon as I can find one to buy. And I am in the market for a reasonably priced MM- or MI-only preamp. I have to say that I go back a long time in this hobby, to the days of MM cartridge dominance. I owned my share of Shure V15s (Type II, I think), Stantons, Deccas (SC4E, London, the one with the conical stylus that HP used to adore), and ADCs (XLM, to be specific). If my sonic memory serves, the best of them all was the Grado TLZ, whereas I really did not like any of the other Grados. (The TLZ was much faster than any of them.) I also have fond memories of the ADC and good moments with various Deccas, but I really never did like the Shures very much and felt they could not compare to most of the rest. I always had a vague feeling that something was lost with the advent of MC cartridges, now you guys are making me think I might have been right.
Hi Lewm,
you say:
>>> Perhaps it is just the robust voltage output, which makes life so much easier for the phono preamp, that is the root cause. <<<
-- this is what I commented on some time before, and I think it must have a LOT to do with the ability of a phono-stage's 'effectively' pumping up micro-detail from 0.3mv or less, compared to having 'the full Monty' of 3.5mV to ~ 5mV that is offered by an MM.

It has been mentioned by the highly regarded phono/pre-amp designer Allen Wright (and NOT in joking), to truly get the best from an MC: "You literally have to count every electron..."
It is my contention that even a lot of the better MC phono-stages are ultimately not up to this task, and it is here where a good MM will score by making the phono-stage's job A LOT easier.

Using an MC with an SUT is doing something similar, alas not quite as efficient as a good MM will do it, YMMV.

Greetings,
Axel
Axelwahl,

I use the Essential 3160 and it has state-of-the-art MM, MC and line stages. I can say without doubt that you can gain different benefits from different cartridges. Price is no guarantee: I sold my Allaerts MC2 Gold in prefering my Nagaoka MP50. Yet I think the Dynavector XV1s/t holds its own with any cartridge. For me, the key questions regarding cartridge selection are:

1. How good in the relevant phono and line stage through which I am hoping to hear it/them?
2. What tonearm am I going to match it with?
3. How good/compatible is the rest of the chain in the system (speakers, liustening room and electronics)? and
4. How much am I willing to spend?

With your own individual listening experiences (meaning, venues at which you have heard most live performances, types of music and sounds that you prefer, hearing capacity and more psychoacoustic factors) to the fore, these elementscan make it possible to find your own best cartridges of both the MM and MC variety.

But that is just my opinion
Hi All,
back to MMs for a change.
My current V15 III with MR stylus is now tracking with total ease one of the known 'difficult' LPs, "La Boheme" DECCA SXL 2248.
None, of my previous MCs (only a few that is) managed such EVER.
Immediate difference:
The V15 III is quoted as having 22.5cu compliance, all MCs are between 12cu to 16cu.
VTF of the V15 III is 1.02gm, VTF for the MCs was ranging from 1.8gm to 2.6gm!

This even brings about the question of better compatibility of MM carts to 'older' type of vinyl, could that be the case?

In a previous thread about 'sibilants' Doug mentioned SXL 2248, as one of his 'test items'!

The other LP "so long so wrong" by Alison Krauss..., side 2 last band, 3rd cut (another test item) is still slightly sibilant, but again less than any MC was to date. (I did I try!)

So, tracking distortion (sopranos, massed instruments, etc.) and sibilants seem not of the same source of trouble either, just to mention.

Greetings,
Axel
>>The V15 III is quoted as having 22.5cu compliance, all MCs are between 12cu to 16cu.<<

Absolutely not true.

There are Dynavectors, Denons, Koetsus, and Shelters under 12.
Hi Audiofeil,
:-) MY MCs!!!!! sorry, I though that was implied.
So again:
>>> all **my** MCs **that I used for comparison** are between 12cu to 16cu. <<<

Now to less than 12cu, I guess would only make the issue worse?!
But if you think otherwise I'd be interested to hear your findings, since as always YMMV.

Thank you for pointing out this lack of clarity.
Axel
Dear Axel: +++++ " It is my contention that even a lot of the better MC phono-stages are ultimately not up to this task, and it is here where a good MM will score by making the phono-stage's job A LOT easier. " +++++

I can say you that there are a few mc Phono Stages up to the task. Yes it is a little " easy " a MM design because less gain stages but the subject here is to know which are the preise needs of that " humble " MMs.

Now, we can't think that the differences on quality performance between MM and MC cartridges reside mainly in the phono stage performance because the MM cartridge design against the MC ones are totally different, both are transducers but each one works in different way ( like electrostatics speakers against ribbon ones or dynamic/moving coil ones: all are transducers but work and " sound " with different quality performance level. ) and that's why sound different, it one works according its own technology limitations and virtues.
Each cartridge technology has its own " signature " and the phono stages are the ones that have to take care to preserve that " signature " intact ( obviously that the TT/tonearm/cables/set-up are part of the equation too. ).

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul,
interesting that you 'consider' the phono-stage, all things +/- equal, as of 'less' influence on some these MMs marvellous performance. That's powerful!

To say it again, and I'm now busy with an AT140LC which YET AGAIN outclasses all MCs I had in my system to date.
This in terms of palpability, sound stage, realness or more true to instruments like violin, guitar, flute, etc.
When it gets to full blown orchestra, I think, I just do not have the system to bring the 'Chicago with Reiner' into my room, it's good, powerful yes, but there are limits.

Having said that, no MC could overcome this purely physical obstacle either, and neither would I expect it. Not even if I'd listen to Grand Utopias with Boulder's biggest monos (marvellous as they all are).

Thanks,
Axel
Dear Axel: +++++ " interesting that you 'consider' the phono-stage, all things +/- equal, as of 'less' influence on some these MMs marvellous performance. That's powerful! " +++++

not exactly, maybe I don't explain in the right way.

What I'm trying to say is as important is the quality performance of the phono stage as is very important too that we don't lose the merits of the MM technology design that is diffeent from the MC design and in the differences each other are the foundation of each design quality performance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,
thanks for clarifying that point.
>>> ... that we don't lose the merits of the MM technology design that is different from the MC design ... <<<

It cold be said otherwise, that all an MM is doing make life of a phono-stage more easy, and that was all there is to it.

As you point out: that's not the whole story.

Thank you,
Axel
PS: I did a change over to 'Elite EEI 500' --- sooner or later I need at least two tonearms, because this one ALSO sounds so good. Punchy bass, clear resolved treble. Now I find out why you 'only' have 10 arms mounted... :-)
Dear Axel: and next month you will need 5 tonearms", such is life and so good several MMs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hm, >>> and next month you will need 5 tonearms...<<<

Maybe you will let me know how do go about that, without forsaking the odd bottle of "Château Lafite Rothschild" ... change to "Château Mouton Rothschild"? Eish!

Listening last night to some of "A. Vollenweider's" Albums, using the 'EEI 500' right now, I thought this getting like the equivalent of an IMAX movie. (Recall I do not have such big speakers, Burmester 961)

The size of stage this MM can create is just incredible, it has to be on the vinyl of course - and most do not have such extreme staging, and surely 'massaged' by all the mastering used, but still!

I of course listened to all this with MCs before. Mostly I wouldn't even bother to go through the whole album, and now this.

I'm still baffled, about what synergy is creating this sound from a ~ 35 year old MM cart.
Not one MC has done this to date, and I wonder if it ever will, YMMV.

Axel
Regards, Rual: I have a Shure M97xE on my backup Dual CS-5000, typically used to test used lp's or when belt drive seems more appropriate for the selection. It is a very listenable cartridge, especially at its price. For this cartridge, I received from LPGear a JICO SAS N97HE stylus.
The plastic body for the N97HE differs in two observable areas: The N97HE has a small plastic flange on the top surface carrying a decal (stereo). This must be removed. Scoring with a hobby knife and carefully flexing this flange until the plastic fatigued was a simple solution, clean up with a needle file might be considered. Others may prefer a different method. The second variance is in the inside width of the shroud carrying the stylus guard and brush, perhaps 1mm wider and not a concern.
V15VxMR and M97xE cartridges were listened to, each with the three (now) interchangable styli. The turntable used was a Technics SP-25 with the EPA-501H tonearm. Load capacitance was at 200pF and resistance set for 100kg. Both cartridges showed sequential improvement in linear response and leading transients, the progression being from eliptical to MR (micro ridge) and then the SAS stylus. I was not surprised that I prefered the M97xE cartridge. Bass drive and midrange clarity were superior, as well as timbral accuracy. Detail was much improved and highs were well presented, defined without the impression of brightness. A listener commented "you can hear every insturment" with the M97xE cartridge/SAS pairing.
I enjoyed the M97xE with the supplied stylus, but the SAS alternative, in my system, resulted in (I'm avoiding superlatives) a noticeable improvement, as though a veil had been lifted from the music, allowing the M97xE to perform more to it's potential.
Hi Timeltel,
sorry I'm a bit slow maybe, but can you make it a bit more easy for me.

So what was the progression again on the **V15 III only**. Starting with ??(you mentioned 3 styli), then MR, then SAS.

I only get the M97xE part, which is relating to Raul's agenda.

Thanks,
Axel
Timeltel
one more thing, very important to know:

Did the SAS want a different SRA/VTA?

As background, I running into trouble with the large negative VTA on many of these older carts on my SME-V due to the conical fat-end of this arm touching warps in the start wax, lifting the stylus right out of the groove.

I'm loath to fit any hims as they mess with the arm / cart / res. tuning.

Axel
Greetings Rual: and,
Hi, Axel, you don't miss a thing. Hope I can answer your questions.
1: the V15-111 has been my standard for 20 some years, the SAS stylus is the best REPLACEMENT (or original) I am aware of.
2: Visual and dimensional comparison of the M97xE and the V15VxMR shows them to be identical, the styli are functionally interchangable. The V15-111 insert is not compatible.
3: The V15 type 111 was removed and the M97xE ($60, Amazon) installed. I began with Steely Dan, Gaucho. First elliptical, then micro ridge and last the JICO N97HE (SAS). Improvement was audible with each stylus change.
4: The same proceedure was implemented with the V15VxMR. At each step, the M97xE was cleaner and much more detailed, greatly more so than I would have thought for a "budget" cartridge.
5: The M97xE opened up with a slightly positive VTA, all three styli were very close. The SAS was most the most sensitive when changing to a different wt. lp. When I placed the JICO on this cartridge, I also found it lighter. Because of this, VTF was just 1/2 gm. to start but still it performed nicely. At just over 1 gm., bass presence increased with no impact on midrange or treble clarity. The same was true for all three styli.
It will take some time to determine how the M97xE/SAS compares to the V15-111. Most other cartridges (I am aware of break-in time) haven't stayed mounted for long. The M97xE/SAS is now in its' fifth day. After I'm fully acclimated to it, I'll exchange it for the V15-t3, but the two seem largely comparable for now, both are very fast, uncolored and detailed.
Regarding the V15VxMR, the cartridge seemed so designed for a specific voice, I had difficulty pinpointing VTA. Back into the bottom of the drawer with it.
As you observe, this relates to our thread-host Ruals' interest in the M97xE, and the availability of optional styli for this cartridge. Having the elliptical xE, the micro ridge xMR and the SAS styli made a good place to launch from. Please don't anyone take it as a review.
Timeltel,
>>> Regarding the V15VxMR, the cartridge seemed so designed for a specific voice, I had difficulty pinpointing VTA <<<

In my case it needs to be negative (down arm) VTA/SRA from my normal spacer ~ (1/2") 12.7mm to ~ 8,7mm = 4mm delta, and equal to about 2.5mm negative.
Without this, that V15 III VN35MR sounds very aggressive in the treble.
Due to my SME V arm's down limitation it is as low as I can go thereby I a have no difficulty in 'pinpointing' VTA in this scenario... :-)

I was **hoping** that SAS could do with some negative VTA.

Please keep us posted on your further findings.
Thanks,
Axel
Greetings, Axel: >>>The SAS stylus did not change VTA noticeably<<<. I did adjust for VTA, always starting from down and then bringing it back up. Visually it settled in near the prior position for an elliptical stylus. I did not scientifically measure for any change. Hopefully you are good to go, now.
Dear Lew: You can add to your list of MI cartridges these ones too: Acutex, ADC, Astatic ( some models. ), Stanton/Pickering ( some models. ). Maybe there are more, I can't say it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: Due to what you experienced and posted here ( thank's for that. ) I already order the SAS stylus for my Shure M97xE.

As you posted with its original stylus the M97is a good performer that I like it over the V15V, I'm " exited " to hear it with the Jico SAS stylus.

This kind of MM carridges experiences are with high comfort because we are discovery cartridge after cartridge some " new " experiences even with, like the M97, very very low price ( less than 100.00 ) MM/MI cartridges.
So we are all of the ones to decide to try the MM/MI alternative a " beautiful " learning experiences wth a lot of fun.

I have at least eight years working and learning on these " humble " cartridges along the LOMC ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.