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 Nandric: in the past 5 months, I've bought 5 decent mm carts for an average of less than $200 each. That is to say, bargains still exist but one has to be quick. My most recent acquisition is the Shure ML 140HE: cart was $35 and a NOS stylus was $80--a tremendous bargain. I've used it for only 3 hours or so but can say it is very detailed (lyrics are coming through clearer than ever before) and relaxing at the same time. Perhaps my new everyday cart. Additionally, NOS styli are still readily available for some of them, e.g. empire 4000diii; at 155lc; at 20ss, and are relatively cheap, <$200 each. I'm done with buying carts though. On to examining tonearms--your specialty.
Nandric, I really do think it's the other way around: The mind is with LOMC; the heart is with MM or MI. At least it is for me.
Nandric. Good to see you got my little bit of dry Aussie. I mentioned the DL-S1 as it does have that neutral tone like the Technics EPC P100C mk4. It is OK to talk about MC's on this thread is it :-) ?
The DL-S1 does like a SUT thou, however I am sure your ASR will cope just fine with all active gain. Doesn't the current ASR Basis exclusive allow MM gain as well as MC gain?

Dgarrestson, good to hear you are enjoying the DL-S1. as you said, punches a lot higher than its price and a good cartridge period, as long as it is loaded/driven correctly by the phono stage.

cheers
Downunder, The Factory data sheet shows the Dl-S1 flat out to 70kHz with a 47K load. So far this is where I have it, though there are anecdotal reports on the net that it likes several hundred ohms.
Hi Dgarretson

that is interesting. My data sheet measures out to 50kz then is a straight mountain drop, not 70kz.

I would not take much notice about the 47k load on the data sheet, the denon 103r also has a 47k load and I have never heard of anyone recommending you load your MC stage open at 47k with the 103. maybe I should try it?

I am not sure why they only show the data sheet measure starting at 1kz and not 20hz ??

The DL-S1 sounds as if it is a db or two down in the upper bass/lower mids which gives it a clean lean (not in a bad way) sound. Nice pure clean sounding alternative to my other cartridges and no real hype about it.

Interestly the 103r has a better flat frequency response than the Dl-S1, at least in the 1k to 20k measures - there is no doubt the 103r is several db higher in the upper bass/lower mids which gives it a fuller sound.
Downunder,

Thanks for the suggestion and I will keep an eye out for one. I've used the 103D on a Grace G-660P tonearm (basically for the nostalgia of recreating the standard choice and set-up of the Japanese broadcasting compan to good effect. Sadly, the stylus broke on this baby. I'd imaging the DL-S1 would be an even better match. What do you think?
Dear Lew, It looks as if you enjoy contradicting me. The
mind or the 'ratio' should always chose for the $ 300 option above,say, 4K option assuming 'equal quality'. Anyway the economist seem to be sure about that. But even in your own 'vocabulary' the neocortex should choose for the $300 option although the limbic system may prefer the 4 K option (Urushi? ). This 'system' is , if I am right,
the modern expression for the old-fashioned 'heart'. However the limbic system usualy winns from the other if I am well informed.
Downunder, I am a student of Halcro and he give me some lectures about the Aussie humour. But I am alas not yet in
the position to judge if it is 'dry' or 'wet'.
Regarding the ASR. The embarrassing thing is that I am supposed to know the brand. I owned 3 previous , before
2009 , versions of both the amp. as well as the phono-pres.
All Basis versions had both MM and MC connectors. Except the version 2009. That is way I was 'forced' to buy the 2010 version. Now this drama was much larger (qua money) than Dgob's stylus. No wonder than that my empathy is so
'huge' in similar situations .
Regards,
Downunder says:

"I am quite impressed with the Denon DL-S1 given its cheap entry point of 500-600 odd bucks."

Where can I buy a DL-S1 for $500-$600 dollars?
Dear friends: Two very good opportunities with very good performers:

http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/auc.pl?anlgcart&1303177895&auc&3&4&

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1307833377&/Micro-Acoustics-3002-II-Micro-Fine

Not easy to find out and under 300.00!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Yes, when a vintage cartridge " decided " to goes well it goes and unfortunately there is " no return ".

I did not had that experience yet, only problems that fortunately were fixed.

Nandric: I don't know for sure exactly what VDH makes in a " refresh " but mainly is about cartridge suspension.
Now, for a new cantilever/stylus he has different work prices depending on the cantilever build material as the stylus shape we choosed but the work price goes from 200+ Euros to around 500+ Euros plus shipping.

I can tell you that he is the only person that fix and put his hands in your cartridge at VDH. This is a latest email from VDH:

++++++++++

Dear Mr. Iruegas,

Good morning,
Thank you for your kind email,

I will pass this information to Mr. A.J. van den Hul, he will be pleased to hear satisfied customers, because all the cartridges have been repaired by Mr. A.J. van den Hul himself….

Enjoy the music!

Kind regards,

A.J. van den Hul BV

++++++++++++++++++ "

so I think there is no doubt about.

I received my 100CMK4 three weeks ago from VDH. I sended twice in a row because my " ignorance ": originaly I sended to fix the cartridge rear plate that was loose and due to this I had some kind of troubles. Well the cartridge return after was fixed and with a change in a cartridge suspension damper that VdH detected was out of specs.
I mounted and for my surprise the right channel was dead, I was really dissapointed and under my " angry " I send it again ( with out checking nothing about. ) to " fix " it and when VDH received they told me the cartridge is ok on both channels so they returned and when I received ( again. ) I mounted and right channel just dead.
This worried me a lot so this time I checked and everything were right with the cartridge but the problem was ( from the first time. ) with the cartridge universal adaptor where the right channel+ was not mading connection with the pin's adaptor!!!!! What a relieve.

Well, I mounted in the AT 1503 with a Grace headshell and the quality performance was nothing less than " terrible wrong ". I check every single set up parameter but nothing changed.
I can't used the same headshell that in the past because other cartridge was already there so I try two other headshells and found out a very good match in a 15gr flat aluminum one where the cartridge shines better than ever ( maybe because that damper VDH changes. ).

The cartridge quality performance is outstanding for say the least and I could say that the cartridge is really sensitive to the headshell is mounted and here try to match it is imperative.

Btw, Halcro I think that even that you like your MK3 sample you are not hearing what these Technics cartridge can shows: that integrated headshell is a serious limitation for that. I hope that in the future you can get a stand alone MK3 or better yet a MK4 and you will see what I'm talking about. a real difference for the better.

After that I mounted my Astatic MF-100 in the Grace G-945 with the own Grace headshell ( the same I tested with the Technics. ) and performance was acceptable but not what I remember this cartridge could do it, so I try with a magnesium Denon one and here the MF-100 improves its quality performance at very good level. I don't have the time to following test it with other headshells even that maybe could be worth. I like what I'm hearing through it rigth now.

On other subject I agree with Lewm that 700.00 for a Technics refurbished is not high if like he said and all of us already know a re-tip for a LOMC top cartridge has a price that could goes 4-6 times that " low " price.

I don't agree either that today vintage price cartridges is high.
I want to ask: high compared with...?. We have to think that even today we can get vintage MM/MI cartridges for less ( lot less. ) than 1K dollars that IMHO outperform almost any other cartridges out there regarding its prices.

Of course that all of us want to buy any of those great great MM/MI cartridges for less than 100.00 but this is un-real.

Gentlemans, if I take my AT 20SS ( or any other top MM/MI cartridge. ) and I hear it with out knowing is a MM vintage one ( but a today LOMC cartridge ) and the audio dealer tell me its price is 5K in offer I can tell you that I take it with out question because IMHO the important subject here is the quality performance cartridge level and not if it is vintage or not or if it is LOMC or MM/MI.
For time to comes we are lucky enough to have the opportunity to follow buying the vintage MM/MI alternative for " penauts " even today designs like the Ortofon 2M Black or the Clearaudio Maestro or the AT 150MLX.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul - I picked up that Sonus Gold on ebay last week on your recommendation - I am using it tonight and it is a nice little cartridge. thank you - I am very much enjoying it. The seller advised 1.7g initially to be lowered to 1.5g after 20 hours ?

Is this in your opinion a good representative of a quality MM out there - Is the AT 20ss or others like it that much better in your opinion ?

Cheers Chris
Dear Raul, You are a credulous person wich is a credit to
your personality. But the buseness persons know the 'value'
of the PR. They are in particular very fond of mythology and Van den Hul is also an grandmaster in this trade. According to his own story he is doing carts and retip in
his spare time. Ie he need to run his cable and electronic
companys. In addition he is also involved in the reaserch.
Even we in Holland are not able to approach him directly but only via his dealers. I was not able to find the address of his BV ( limided liability company). BTW your letter was not from him personaly but from his BV. Why are
they so persistent in convincing the customers that he himself is doing all the work even the 're-tip' service?
Well dear Raul if you are not able to compare the prices how should you decide what to choose?
Besides do you know how this re-tip work is done or what it
contains of? According to the other re-tip service that I
mentioned before the 'replacement of the stylus is much more difficult than the replacement of the cantilever with the stylus already furnished'. They buy those as components from their supplier (see J.carr about his supplier of styli).
I made a comparission for the benefit (I hope) of our members. The USA Van den Hul dealer 'Eugene HI-FI, Oregon'
ask $300 as min. charge ,$80 shipping, boron cantilever +
line contact stylus $600-$ 700.
The Dutch HI-Fi Studio start with 99 Euro for an aluminium
cantilever + elliptical stylus while a boron cantilever with line contact stylus cost 250 Euro. Postage +/- 1o Euro. BTW I don't believe that this retip work is some kind
of rocket science.
Regards,

Hi Folks,

In my measurements of a range of cartridges recently, I have succeeded in identifying what I believe are the Cantilever resonances. (model the electrical behaviour, deduct the measured behaviour and you have an approximation of the cantilever resonance)

Based on this I am starting to strongly believe that cartridge "tone" is driven primarily by the cantilever - and that detail is in turn driven by needle minor radius, and total effective moving mass. ie: it is all in the stylus.
(Cartridge design will affect the efficiency of the conversion of this into an electrical signal, and cartridge damping/potting and other design aspects will affect other forms of Vibration driven Intermodulation)

Now what I wanted to raise here is that in most cases I am seeing a cantilever resonance occurring between 8kHz and 21kHz (8khz being the extent of the influence of the peak - the peaks themselves tend to be between 11kHz and 21kHz)

As examples: ADC SuperXLM - 21kHz, AT440MLa two smaller peaks 11k & 16kHz, N97xE-SAS 15kHz, Ed Saunders VN5MR 11kHz

When one takes these cantilever resonances and adds to them the suggested 100pf/100k loading - the 100pf extends the electrically flat frequency response, but with 100k loading an AT440MLa has a 1.5db peak at 30kHz dropping gently down to flat at around 8khz (electrical response only) - add this to the cantilever resonance and we have measurements that give a 3+db rise (2.5db @11k, 3db @16k over 3.5db @20k)

With cartridges like the ADC's or Ortofons (very similar cantilever resonance profile these two) - they have a sharp peak just outside the audible range (21k) with the effect then coming down in a smooth line... but add to this an electrical resonant peak - and we can easily see +9db @20kHz

Overall the effect that I am seeing from 100pf/100k is improved smoothness through the low to high midrange - followed by a level rise which varies depending on cantilever design (and cartridge inductance)

To achieve something approximating a flat frequency response in many cases requires that a lower R load be used, and in some cases a high capacitance so that the electrical drop off in response is balanced by the mechanical resonant rise in response to achieve something close to a flat frequency response.

In effect we are limited by the stylus designs - and no amount of loading will adjust for a stylus designed for a different loading profile.

Take a look at the catalogue literature for the Technics EPC-100 series - with the hollow boron tube cantilever.
Technics showed a graph with resonant peak somewhere above 50Khz (probably 70k or so) - the sales flyer is not exactly precise!
The flyer also shows diamond rod resonance as being substantially lower (circa 30k?)
(see the technics pickup systems flyer on VinylEngine)
And obviously such relatively crude materials as Aluminium have a resonance even lower down (base on same dimensions and design - not shown on flyer but implied)

These cartridges achieve +/- 0.3db 20-15kHz and +/-3db 15-80kHz (!)

So even with cantilever resonances so far out of the way flat F/R is only achievable between 20-15kHz

There has been a conversation with regards to the various signet models fitted with differing styli.... seems to me the discussion is about the styli and not the cartridges.

So far - using the example of the AT440MLa (which many of us own) best results are showing up at R loadings below 47k and above 20k - exact optimal value depends on personal preferences and system capacitance....
Personal preferences in that due to the nature of the response curve, one has to trade off midrange droop and HF rise. - ie one can configure for almost no midrange droop - but you will get some HF rise. And if you accept a bit more midrange droop you can have the HF performance more in line with the rest. - An imperfect world unfortunately.

And all this because I decided to try to work out the optimum loading for a bunch of cartridges....

bye for now

David
Dear David, This is exactly what we are waiting for. No
subjective feelings and semantic acrobatics but measured
performance. This is the difference between the myths and the actual world. I hope you can bring more 'light' regarding the cantilever material: aluminium, boron, beryllium, diamond, etc. We need to pay more depending on
exotic materials but the question is always if this make
any sense. Thanks!
Kind regards,
Dear Dowunder/Dgarretson: I agree with you about the Denon DL-S1 quality performance level, I own it.

In the last 3-4 years I posted several times that this cartridge is " a must to have " and not because its very low price but as both comment because its very high quality performance.

I bought mine directly from Japan ( all the info comes in japanese. ) and from the very first moment I was impressed with and I posted about.
In those times its retail price comes around 700-800.00 and not easy to find out in USA, today its price goes to 1,350.00 and even at this higher price IMHO it is a bargain for a LOMC cartridge.
This cartridge is a real LOMC champ for " penauts ". Of course because its " low price " LOMC advocates don't take it in count.

Now, I agreee with Dgarretson: this is a very low output cartridge and needs a good active phono stage ( very low noise. ), please no step-up transformer here if you want to know what I'm talking about, and take care about tonearm match because the cartridge has low weight and for a LOMC cartridge has high compliance. If I remember I loaded at 100 ohms and tested between this value and around 750 ohms with preference to the lowest impedance value but this is system dependent.

Goatwuss, you can get second hand for 600.00 through Agon ads. The last one I saw was in that price range maybe Downunder was the buyer of it.

Anyway, if any one is still on LOMC samples then this Denon is IMHO a " must to have ".

Regrads and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Ct0517: +++++ " Is this in your opinion a good representative of a quality MM out there.... " ++++++

certainly IMHO it is but as good the Sonus Gold is there are better MM/MI cartridges The 20SS that you name it is one of them and right now you have the opportunity to buy the Sonus " big brother " to the Gold: the Dimension 5, this one you don't see it very often on sale ( this is the second time I saw it in the last 10 years!. ) and IMHO is the best Pritchard design ever ( former ADC designer and Sonus owner. ).

You can see it at Agon cartridge auctions.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul, I think there is a business called "Comet" in the US that is selling new DLS1 for less than $600. I thought I read that on Vinyl Asylum, where the DLS1 is also getting favorable mention, from Dave G, as well as from many others.
Raul, glad to hear that you like the DL-S1 as well. I bought mine from Comet Supply for USD$525 delivered. Comet listed it as out-of-stock, but my sample arrived in 10 days.
Dear David,
I agree with our friend Nandric.
Very interesting and valuable measurements and conclusions. I also hope you will expand thereupon?
Perhaps the Professor (Timeltel) will have some thoughts on your studies?
That is if he survives his race around Indianapolis?!
Best
Henry
Just ordered a DL-S1 from Comet for $509.

Wanna hear what all the buzz is about.
Audiofeil, please share your impressions when you can. I would also be very interested in knowing your impressions re the perceived output of the cartridge vs. the actual output spec (mV). The stated spec is .15 mV, which would put it in dangerous territory for my setup. In my experience some cartridges seem to output more (sometimes much more) than the rated spec, regardless of the groove velocity standard used to measure output. In my setup .2-.3 mV output is on the cusp of being inadequate.
Hello Raul, Did you get to listen to the Signet TK7su with and without the AT20ss? Any thoughts?

Danny
Dear Dlaloum: Thank you for share with us your very interesting cartridge research.

IMHO the MM/MI cartridge " world " knows very little on several subjects as the one you mentioned or at least there is no specific information over the net. Whom have those kind of cartridge information could be the cartridge designers and maybe not either them.

There is no doubt that the cantiilever has a specific " weight " for the cartridge " tone/signature " along some other important cartridge factors by design.

The research you attemped is a hard task and very difficult that knowing " measures " on electrical/mechanical resonances we knew how the cartridge will " sound ". This is: the frequency response in an amp can't tell us almost nothing about its " tone ".

This " hard task " that depends by the cartridge " playback environment " ( how it's surrounded. ) makes " things " so complex that this is why no one really makes with a scientific " process " the whole research to predict not only the cartridge behavior but its precise playback " tone ". I could say that there are so many factors with direct and indirect influence in that subject and due to its relationship in between we could have hundreds of factors to control and to identify in a given mathematic model ( Nandric unfortunately things are not so easy as we want it to be. )

++++++ " Overall the effect that I am seeing from 100pf/100k is improved smoothness through the low to high midrange - followed by a level rise which varies depending on cantilever design (and cartridge inductance) " +++++

unfortunately I don't have the inductance value on my cartridges and I did not take its measure. What I take care is that any change in capacitance value does not affect that midrange frequency range in favor of the high frequency range.
With out the right tools ( other that our ears ) is difficult to stay " there ": to many variables and difficult too to know what in reality we are hearing: where resides the frequency deviations and how these deviations correlate with what we are hearing.

+++++ " To achieve something approximating a flat frequency response in many cases requires that a lower R load be used, and in some cases a high capacitance so that the electrical drop off in response is balanced by the mechanical resonant rise in response to achieve something close to a flat frequency response. " ++++++

several cartridges specs are 47K with 300pf-450pf. In no single case I readed lower than 47K as a manufacturer spec but I readed from audiophiles here ( I think Halcro and Dgarretson, can't be sure about. ) and in VE that report good results around 25K-30K even I tryed ( years ago ) 30K with no success but only by ear and with a lot less experience than today.

About your Technics example: I have on hand the frequency response chart of my 100CMK4 that shows flat response ( I mean flat dead flat with no deviation. ) to 20khz loaded at 50K with 100pf ( I want to assume: total capacitance. ). The cartridge bandwindt is: 5hz to 120khz.

Now if you see the Grace F9F information in VE you could see that the measures were taken at 100K with 80pf with a peak of 2.5/3.0 db at 30khz and flat to 50khz.

The Empire 4000D3 goes to 50khz loaded at 100k and 100pf ( I think Acutex and the Dimension 5 has the same behavior. ).

I own these cartridges and that " improved smoothness through the low to high midrange " you are talking about is there.

Yes, cantilever build material has a specific sound but the own cantilever design ( length, tapered or not, hollow or solid, how thin, etc, etc. ) contribute to that cartridge tone/color.

Thank you again.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul, You are somehow always 'balancing' between the
'incredible complexity' and 'symlicity'. The latter are
connected with general statements about all carts from the
60is as well as the (general) assumption that no or very
litlle progress is made since. So J.Carr, van den Hul, Jan
Allaerts, Lukatschek, etc. are selling old stuff in a new
package at best. But they all are experimenting with the 'old method' of trial and error with all kinds of materials: wire,magnets,alloy,styli,cantilevers,etc.,etc.
You own,if I am correct, some Allaerts cart(s). So you should know their technical specifications and I have never seen such specs. by any cart whatever. Are those irrelevant?
'Sciance' consist meanly also of this 'old method'. The reason is simple: without trying you get nowhere.
So I was glad to see that at least someone (David) made some efforts reg. cantilever materials. To me this is the only way . So in my philosophy we should encourage and praise him for the effort and not, like some philosopher, invent problems for the sake of argument only.
Regards,
Dear Nandric: I applaud the David effort or any other person effort on almost any audio subject.

I'm not an expert on cartridges about how determine the cartridge " tone ", due that I'm only an amateur about it's complex for me to figure what is in reality happening. If my post does not reflect this then I confirm that applaud David effort and that for me is still more complex.

I would like and I think that all of you will appreciate if an expert could share with us his experiences and knowledge about. Yes, I'm thinking in J.Carr, who one else but him: thank you in advance.

Anyway, IMHO a cartridge is a set of sub-sets " systems ", I mean sub-set a cantilever/stylus, other cartridge suspension, other coil/motor , other cartridge body , etc, etc. and IMHO each sub-set has its own " weight " in the final cartridge " tone/voice ". I'm not saying it is eaxctly as I said and that's why we need the J.Carr knowledge on the whole subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Acman3: Due to my address error two packages were " losted somewhere in USA and in one of them comes the TK7, fortunately yesterday I found it and I think that next week I could put my hands on it and then I report about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
somebody asked earlier what the differences between Audio Technica AT22/23 and AT24/25. I think that difference is in diamond. AT22/23 uses 0.12 mm square diamond with 0.2x0.7 elliptical cut and AT24/25 uses 0.08 mm diamond with 0.2x0.8 elliptical/line cut.
Dear friends: Another Denon S1 source:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Denon-Audiophile-DLS1-DL-S1-Moving-Coil-Cartridge-/140536944203?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20b8a7964b#ht_1375wt_1139

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul, As far as I know you was the first to mention
the similarity of our hobby with fashion. In some other thread I refered to the first MC cart wich coused the MC
'stile' : the Supex. Than we have also the Linn-LP-12 wich
coused the 'conviction' that belt-drive is superior to all
other kinds. There should be many more examples of the same
phenomenon. There are different 'frameworks' to explain such behaviour: 'leader-followers'; 'mass-psychology';
'inclination to belong to some group', 'division of labour
(the experts)'; 'novelty expectation', etc.
It should be obvious , it seems to me, that manufacturers
will follow whatever 'fashion' is actual. While all of those 'frameworks' make (some) sense my preference is for
'the division of labor'. We all are accommodated to this 'actual world' by experience and (consequently) our expectations as well as anticipations are 'preconditioned'
Ie 'the A knows much more about b than I do, so...'
In our forum this should be 'visible' by our 'authorities':
the R for the carts, the H for the 'nude projects', the T
for the tonearms, etc.
So we (the rest) don't like the situations in wich R contradicts H or T or the other way around. Because this is
very confusing. Ie 'confusing' in the context of division
of labour and expectatons entailed in it.
Regards,
Hi Raul

thank you for your response.

Let me first say that from a pure listening (the ears rule) perspective, my vintage Quad ESL57's fed from my Quad303's are among the sweetest speakers I have ever heard.
They do not extend far up or down - but the midrange is superb. I have also owned the 63's and 989's - so as a listener I am definitely of the religion that midrange comes first and damn the bass/treble if it affects the midrange.

Having said that - a certain stubborn perfectionist streak persists.... and Nirvana can only be achieved with perfectly linear response within the audible range... so the midrange must remain its beautiful self, and we need to refine, add, and do that which is required to complete the audio spectrum. (even if at my age I can no longer hear past 15k consciously.....)

Having recently received a stylus for my AT20SLa (ATN15ss)

I ran it through a measurement cycle (measured F/R using pink noise at 4 capacitances and 5 resistances - 20 combinations).

Then I take the data and plug it into an excel spreadsheet where I combine an electrical model, calibrated with the measured performance (to estimate the mechanical resonance) - and then interpolating from the measurements.
Using this I can then use excels "solver" to try out an infinite series of possible R/C values in a search for the lowest possible variance in level within a given frequency range.

So far my best results (numerical modeling - no listening involved... as I am trying to winnow the possibilities down to 2 or 3 for listening) - this table shows the total variance in db for each capacitance/R combination (so +/-1db = variance of 2... etc...)

VAR VAR VAR VAR VAR VAR
1) 20 - 20K Hz 8.76 8.88 7.81 8.63 7.81 16.38
1) 30 - 18k Hz 5.89 5.98 5.36 5.80 5.36 12.69
1) 100 - 15kHz 2.94 2.94 2.37 2.90 2.48 6.04
1) 700 - 15kHz 1.72 1.76 1.26 1.68 1.27 6.04
1) 1k - 15kHz 1.71 1.76 1.26 1.68 1.05 6.04
1) 50 - 13kHz 3.07 3.07 3.07 3.07 3.07 4.83
1) 50 - 15kHz 3.07 3.07 3.07 3.07 3.07 6.69
PF Tot 76 58 409 104 380 100
R Tot 34 36 27 33 26 97

At no stage (even with limited frequency range) does a numerical approach start to point the way to 100/100 (I have included the 100/100 values for reference - or to be precise the 100/97)

Also as I have mentioned before there is a low end hump goin from 100Hz to 700Hz with a peak of around 1db around 300Hz... so this is factored into all the above measures when including that frequency range. (so far this is common to all the MM/MI's I have measured)

Cantilever resonance on the ATN15ss peaks at 22.5kHz but its influence goes all the way back to 6kHz.
This is why getting the audible range flat seems to be best achieved with R <47k and C around 400pf.

What are other people's experiences with this cartridge?

(At 60pf/97kohm I measured +1.4db@10k, +5.5db@16k +9db@20k)

Is the issue perhaps that it has become fashionable to have a rising high end (in the style of many MC's)?
And perhaps those makers that have pursued that profile have been most successful.... (hence the expiry of Technics/Matsushita in the cartridge game?)

In my search for a combination that achieves a flat linear response - I appear to be swimming upstream against the flow of audiophilia!

bye for now

David
Dear Dlaloum: Good work again.

I'm with you in that both frequency extremes should not affect the midrange range when we be testing impedance/capacitance values: equilibrum could be the word here.

If I remember the 15SS has the same 20SS berylium cantilever and everything is similar on both cartridges but that the 20SS was hand-calibrated.
Well I just heard it ( three weeks ago. ) and I loaded with 400pf-450pf ( 300pf+cable capacitance. ) at my usual 100k on impedance mounted in the AT 1503MK3.

Now, I think that I have to measure the FR deviations that are arriving to my ears because according your calculations I can see taht achieve flat frequency is not an easy task but at the " end " what IMHO is important is what is arriving to my ears.

Now you really put me in some trouble because I need a first rate microphone ( that I don't have. ) and obviously the hardware/software tools to make it in very precise way.

I made measures time ago of my room/system response but nothing to accurate and this time I want to be accurate as the tools and my skills permit it.
Unfortunately I don't have the time to do it in the short time but this is a target to achieve.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Nandric: +++++ " Because this is
very confusing " +++++

do you know, mainly, why IMHO does not exist an audio mathematic model/tool that could give us precise answers that we are looking for in any audio subject?

because the first " task " is to list all the parameters/factors that has influence in direct or indirect way and not only this but its relationship in between.

do you know that other than temperature the air density on site/place could be one of those factors?

it is logic that when you, me or other person analyze some audio subject almost always we left many factors away/out because we did not knew about or because we can think are not important or we think has no influence.

Normally I like to put things in perspective, my perspective, that could be different from yours or other people because each one of us ignorance level is different. A forum like this permit that each one of us learn or at least confirm what each one of us thinked on an audio subject.

Nothing in audio is so simple as we want to think. Yes, it is not rocket science but the complexity comes for so many factors/parameters where any audio subject is sorrounded.

If you read the latest posts on the Downunder thread about the tonearm/cartridge protractor you can see/read " things " that with all respect has no commom sense or at least don't take in count all the variables: almost all the persons there thinks that in playbak ( dynamic ) what we are hearing depends in specific of the protractor accuracy on set up with out taking in count other variables that have influence.
I don't or did not posted about there because people could think that I want to put some " ice " in ( no drinks. ) the thread warm 's party mood and certainly this is not my attitude but to put things on perspective a different one. I don't want to " touch " about in this thread if I decide then I will post there.

Anyway, as I learn on audio subjects as my point of views change according.

I think that was Dgarretson who posted here ( to a question of mine. ) something like this:

" I change because I learned/grow-up. "

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul

I considered organising a calibrated Mic, and doing the whole end to end thing...

But room EQ is a whole different beast - and the associated psycho acoustics are critical. (so reflections delayed by a certain amount of time will not affect imaging, but do affect overall tone, etc...)

So I have left that aspect of the environment alone for now.
I do a substantial amount of listening using headphones - as these are a very critical tool, but also because I share my home, and do not have a specialised listening room!

At this stage all my measurements are in a simple loop that has Cartridge/TT/Phono Stage and ADC (Analogue to Digital Converter).
The ADC is connected via a 10m digital cable to my media PC, where I can then measure/analyse and manipulate the data.

I am absolutely certain that everything can be taken another notch up using Room EQ, but the amount of time and effort involved in this hobby is infinite and the amount of time I have available is strictly finite. (some time needs to be reserved for actual listening too....)

I have yet to do a full calibration test of the JLTI phono stage I am now using - I did this with my previous Creek stage... but so far have taken the JLTI on trust and reputation. At some point when I have an afternoon free I will test the JLTI (attenuated output from my DAC providing signal into the phono stage, output into my ADC for measurement)

My philosophy is to get each step in the chain as technically "right" as possible, so as to minimise the dependency on "synergy". (which I believe to be code for unintended equalisation in most cases!)

Once each part is as well set up as possible/viable - then final polishing is potentially provided using Digital EQ. (for room effects as well as for frequency response defects...)

Also once the signal goes digital it obviously needs to be kept that way until it comes out at the power amp....

bye for now

David
Dear Raul, 'Because this is very confusing'. You selected
this part from my possible 'fremeworks' to explain the behaviour of the 'ordinary people' , those who seek advise
in our forum. Ie from their perspective and not from the
perspective of the so called 'specialist' or'authority' as
I named them. I somehow think that you are medical doctor.
If so you can imagine a patient who is confronted with two
contradictory opinions of his doctors. This is what I meant
with 'this is very confusing'. To my mind this is very similar with our 'Dr. R; Dr.H and Dr.D'. Respectively 'specialist' for carts,'nude projects' and tonearms in the perception of the 'ordinary members', that is. We all want the best cardiologist for our heart, the best lung specialist for our lungs, etc.,etc. And this is what I mean with 'the division of labour'. In the actual world this may be 'wishful thinking' but I realy think that this is a smart strategy. I never heard anyone stating:'' I don't care what kind of doctor I will get.''
So the strange thing is that understand every single sentence you wrote from your perspective but this is not the answer I exspected because you abviously misundertood what I wanted to say. We in Europe thought for very long
time that 'authority' and 'truth' are the same. So Aristoteles 'ruled' for more than 2000 years, till Galileo.
Since Galileo we (I hope) are aware that those are different 'animals'.

Regards,
Dear Dlaloum: I can see your point, good.

++++ " My philosophy is to get each step in the chain as technically "right" as possible, so as to minimise the dependency on "synergy". (which I believe to be code for unintended equalisation in most cases!) " +++++

yes this is " all about ". IMHO a time-life work. I'm on this " stage " from some years now. Over the last times what I'm doing is fine tunning my audio system with out changing main hardware.

This fine tunning task is not only a " creative " one with good fun " charge " but IMHO the one that it is not only worth to do it ( a must I have to say. ) but where the quality performance rewards are beyond Nirvana beyond what we never imagine we can get/achieve.

It is an exciting stage because all we can or could find out is NEW: nothing that we already experienced elsewhere.

This fine tunning system stage IMHO define very clear/precise where you really are: are you still changing/buying hardware? if yes then IMHO you are not still on this almost final exciting stage and you are not because you are not satisfied with what you heard in your system : you are depending on that " synergy " that you very clear states.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi David, congratulations for your heroic experiments.
I've found that this "unintended equalisation" extends to the time domain also, as well as in the freq response and this contributes to the final perceived tone of the mismatched components. So, we have to extend our search to matching the power amp with the actual x-over and speaker units also. I have experienced this very clearly when I had the Sonus Faber Guarneri together with Goldmund monoblocks/line pre/phono stage. It was a huge crusade for many of us here in Greece to figuring what was going on with these 2 brands/actual model units. We have found the best synergy in pairing : Guarneri/Jadis Defy 7 and Goldmund/Proac Response series. Some components due to a strictly unique & viciously personalised tuning at their design process, can drive the customer to build his whole system according their idiosyncrasies, but while this could arise either from some technical misunderstandings or perhaps from an intention by the mnf to build a "different, more sophisticated & exotic" component (I don't bite this!), it is always possible to find a matching partner that together they can reproduce glorious results. Unfortunately this "synergy" thing that we used to accept as a normal procedure when we choose our set-up, is the epitome of our corrupted times where the research is displaced by marketing & "objects of art". Me too, I firmly support your statement about "unintended equalisation" but since we were not manufactures to apply our findings, neither we can purchase everything we have an interest for, and make our bench and listening tests afterwards, we can only suggest to every enthusiast to stop reading the magazine's reviews and never proceed to buy a thing without prior listening in his home. Of course as Raul have propably meant, we may try to finetune our items by changing some of their innards, (if I get it right) but not everyone has technical knowlege and soldering abilities to experiment with this and is not right to violate the warranty of a pricey "hi-end" amp or speaker.
BTW have you ever try a current mode pre-pre with no caps in the signal path? At this configuration the cartridge is shelf biased as it is an integral part of the circuit. I'm curious for your results on this topology.
Regards
George
Dear friends: A nice price for a very good performer:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nagaoka-MP-50-Phono-Cartridge-Stylus-Needle-MP50-/260772913226?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cb746e04a#ht_1160wt_1139

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,

I know I have been pressing you to retry the Astatic MF-100. However, I have done so because I was surprised by my own experimentation with it. Your response is brief and the quality of exploration is therefore obviously not as deep as it might have been.

If you get the opportunity/time, do try it with the lightest tonearm you can find. I think it might still surprise.

Happy listening

As always
Dear all, Finetuning is always a necessary method to improve combinations and lines of High-End units, e.g. rewiring of old school tonearms, isolation issues, electcrical issues and so on.

But sometimes you have to enter new fields and maybe also test new hardware. I did with the EMT JPA 66 phono stage. Thanks to Henry and Raul I got an Empire 4000 D/ III and having it adjused via the "finetuning" calibrations on the EMT I now know that this is a very serious contender for some MCs.

best & fun only - Thuchan
Dear Eckart,
Welcome to 'The Dark Side' :-)
The Empire 4000D/III is a fine cartridge with many likable traits IMHO.
There are also many other vintage MMs out there which bring other strengths to the table (pun intended).
There is a thought, sometimes voiced here, that those with SS gear seem to like MM/MI cartridges whilst those with tubed gear seem to prefer LOMCs?
With your highly refined tube systems, it will indeed be interesting to hear your further thoughts on the Empire when you have played it for awhile?
As you say......"Fun Only".
Cheers
Henry
Regards, Raul, all. So, Axpona and then further south for two days at the tight infield road track at Daytona for SCCA (Sports Car Club of Am.) competition were really interesting. For those with an interest in such, a race prepared Subaru WRX shamed all other entries including numerous 'Vettes, Porches and BMW's. And, a certain vintage RX-7.

Returned to find an ADC mag. headshell from a succesful ebay transaction had arrived with a stylus berift Empire 8000 X/VE already mounted, an unexpected bonus. Found I already had an OEM 2000E stylus to fit. With the .3 x .7 elliptical it plays much like the Azden YM-P50VL without the the "VL"'s subtle hf finesse and speed. Bass is very solid with bottom-end transients well defined. Even at 300pF shunted cap. & 100k res. mids are warm, the Empire classic lushness to the point of near euphonia. Hopeing for a little more in the hf's.

Wondering if anyone knows the cartridge--- with a finer stylus (Shibata? .2 x .7 elliptical?) would the 8000 sound twice as good as the vaunted 4000D-111 ;-)?

Peace,
Dear Geoch: +++++ " Of course as Raul have propably meant, we may try to finetune our items by changing some of their innards, (if I get it right) but not everyone has technical knowlege and soldering abilities to experiment with this and is not right to violate the warranty of a pricey "hi-end" amp or speaker. " +++++

my " fine tunning " approach goes " deeper " and beyond what you states.
Let me try to explain ( I hope I can do it in away you and other people could understand it. ) what I'm refering to:

when we mount a new cartridge ( and I mean new one. ) we make the overall set up with out real " fine tunning " because at least we have to wait for the cartridge suspension settle-down but after 20-40-100 ( whatever. ) hours then the cartridge is ready to start/begin the cartridge FT work and why I'm saying " start "?: because over more playing hours not only the cartridge will shows full to specs but we will be full in " synergy " with the cartridge quality performance level: we knew exactly how the cartridge performs and is in this very first moment when we really start the FT work with minute changes on VTA/SRA or VTF or Azymuth or load impedance/capacitance or...or......
This FT work is a FINAL work: the end.

For we can translate these FT work to the whole audio system first we need to have some audio/music system " estrategy " to define when the FT system work will start ( like the one Dlaloum has ):

++++ " My philosophy is to get each step in the chain as technically "right" as possible, so as to minimise the dependency on "synergy". " +++++

any one decide which one be his " audio system strategy FT approach " and the Threshold to start the audio system FT work.

When this happen then means that you already decide that each audio link in your system will lives inside the audio system almost " forever ".
This is that the audio links fulfill your audio expectatives/priorities on the whole audio system chain.

When you are there a change on hardware can't give you a better quality performance but only a different one because you already acieved your system " FT threshold".

It is here where the " serious " rewards will comes, rewards on quality performance level: almost inimaginable improvements.

If it's true that part of the FT work could be what you states is not necessary a must to do it instead what Thuchan touched on the subject always is welcome along: minute changes on speaker positions, minute changes on your seat position and what you use to seat it, a re-set of your room interactions, room temperature, etc, etc.

Btw, the meaning of the audio item Synergy in an audio system is a word ( synergy ) used by the AHEE ( Audio High End Establishment. ) to hide all the " imperfections " in a system or in a single audio item, example: you change a real better speaker cable in your system and things are that now you don't like what you heard it and decide to return to the old cables because you think that this one makes better synergy and IMHO this is un-true.

IMHO the real fact is that when a better audio item ( really better. ) goes in the system chain and we don't like what we heard is because that " new " audio item always tell you that something is wrong/hide somewhere that audio system and not that the " new intrusive " is not " up to the task ". Many times these new intrusives " undress " your system.

IMHO the word Synergy has a true audio meaning when we are talking of electrical system impedance loading through each audio link. THis electrical system impedance match IMHO is a must to have.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
That's why there is no new hardware in my system in more than 5 years past.

Raul.
Come on Raul, you are investing in your new tonearm and other projects which I do understand. Maybe regarding the amps I might have a new idea - just an idea, psst - will not motivate you to leave your philosophy but life is changing all the time or are we becoming too old for rock`n roll to young to...

Best & Fun Only - Thuchan
Thank you Raul for your explanation, now I understand that you have reach the acceptable level before 5 years, while I'm almost in the final meter of the race. Using an all tube set-up is confusing. The quality but also the personality of each tube (even the regulators, not to mention the rectifiers) but especially in the gain stages & buffers are a whole world of difference. The transformers, the caps and most of all the resistors & the hook-up cable is another world to consider in conjunction with the previous of the tubes. It seems good to have this kind of multi-choices, but in reality it is time consuming, expensive and dangerous. Because in the process, you pass from many dissapointment steps that can direct you in a wrong path. It is a puzzle with countless pieces and sometimes looks like a problem with different credible solutions, but you can never be sure that you offer the best of them. All this effort must done of course without changing speakers, or cables, or anything on the source during the componentry choice. I know I'm closer now. I feel the vibe every time I push the 6 power switches ON, but I'm exausted my friend. And if my wife or my kids want to listen to some music, it is impossible to make it happen if I'm off the house. Do I regret it? Considering the time, effort, expense & dissapointments...Let me listening some more and I'll tell you NO!
Thank you my friend for your gift to inspire people like me
Dear Thuchan: Well: how can I say?, let me add some subjects that I don't posted in my last post:

I started my FT system " trip " many years ago when I been aware ( taken in count. ) that with what been out there ( audio items. ) I never could acomplish my home system quality performance targets.

After several steps to be nearest my FT threshold I decided to design a Phonolinepreamplifier which the one I could live " forever ".

After this critical step and when ( IMHO ) I knew with certain that for a " long time " nothing could " touch " it ( the unit in my today system. ) my next step was into the tonearm design after knewed nothing out there could help to attain my targets.
I ( along Guillermo ) almost finish it and today, like with my PhonoLineP, I know with certain that nothing could " touch " it for a " long time ".

I already give the very first steps for a self cartridge design because no one I know fulfill my targets today. When this audio item comes " alive " must have a quality performance extremely hard to beat in a " long time " or never comes " alive " from my part and I will take it what is out there.

Amplifier goes next but maybe TT first ( I can't say it. ) and if God give me the joy to still alive then I will try speakers.

+++++ " but life is changing all the time or are we becoming too old for rock`n roll to young to..." +++++

fortunately the AHEE already puts its rules where one of them ( and the AHEE does not even know it. )is: high end grow up very very very slow.

Do you think that my very old speakers and amplifiers are too " old " for rock'n roll?, you already has the invitation to confirm it or not.

Thuchan, I always support that our audio/music hobby ( quality level performance. ) depends mainly not on money but in our ( each one ) knowledge-skills/ignorance level that at the same time define our audio/music targets to be achieved.

I know that what I'm posting could be something " new " for you or could be something you are not experienced yet so could be that you don't agree with me but IMHO I think there is no reason why you could not agree.

I can tell you a simple example: while the Micro Seiki TT " stage " or the Technics/Denon " stage " is something that many people are " discovering " in full I left those " stages " ( as many others ) years ago and " running " to improve and grow-up.
I can say the same for digital source ( yes Halcro " blame " ( in good shape, he is my friend. )for this my digital " attitude ".).

Do you know what?, IMHO I feel like a 25 years old person but with all the knowledge and maturity of an old man as I am and this is fasinating to me and give me the exictement to go a head!, I can't lose only win.

My whole " process " to be HERE it is not only a long one ( and not finished yet. ) but a learning one and it's full of many subjects and " detail " on those different subjects that maybe I need a " book " to explain it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul, thanks again for the invitation, next time I am in Houston I will have a good list for potential visits and as I do know the time a Continental Plane needs reaching your home is not that long we might have a chance exchanging ideas personally.

Of course interpretations from the distance are always somehow fuzzy. A system which might look very expensive or even is designed very nicely not necessarily needs to sound great.

Sometimes the details are not to be seen from images etc. Nevertheless you get a glimpse of understanding of the user`s philosophy. Changing or modifying a system - no matter what kind of amount on money or intelligence you do invest - means "you are in the working status". Not doing anything means "you are in the sleeping mode". This doesn`t mean good or bad, proper or improper but it could indicate as Geoch assumes that you "have arrived" since five years. You are a lucky man. All we others being on the quest all the time may look like still searching for the path of believe and disbelief :-)

We all know it is not black and white, at least those who are not dedicated to a certain church, showing the wonderful attitude to learn from others, as you do.

You are right this hobby keeps us young even if we are nearly getting a club of "wise and grey haired gentlemen" from which the kids never would take an advise. Maybe we are living on a remote and distant island, at least me...

Best & Fun Only - Thuchan
Hi Raul,

I particularly like the idea of a self designed cartridge.

I have been disappointed somewhat by the SAS stylus - when I found the mechanical resonance to be within the audible HF range (13-17k Hz). (this being for a SAS M97xE stylus)

The original Shure V15VMR claimed a mechanical resonance at 33kHz, the Technics EPC-100 claimed a resonance above 50kHz...
With mechanical resonance so high up, the audible range becomes predictable, and driven primarily by electrical parameters (inductance/capacitance) which are more easily controlled for an optimal result.

With this in mind I wonder whether any of the stylus/cantilever manufacturers out there provide specifications for the resonant frequency of their styli?

Has anyone measured some of the Soundsmith retip/recantilevers with the Ruby cantilever to identify their resonant frequency?

What do Expert Stylus Co. in the UK provide in the way of cantilever? (and VdH in Holland?)

Has anyone measured other alternative cantilevers ?

We have a wealth of superb cartridge generators available to us - most without styli.
It is relatively easy to get hold of an AT15, or V15V, or 999 .... but getting the the ideal stylus for them is a whole different matter.

What are your thoughts on this?
How would you approach the problem of the stylus/cantilever for your own cartridge design?

bye for now

David
I'm using NOS AT15SS and can attest that this is magnificent cartridge. It is mounted on Audio Technica 1010 tonearm. great match. The tonearm seems to be designed to carry this cart. Even that manual shows AT15/AT20 mounted.
Cartridge manual tells that spec difference between AT15SS and AT20SS is 33 vs 35 db in channel separation.
My cartridge response plot shows the same linearity as AT20SS spec.
I guess that AT15SS is a lot like AT20SS and many AT15SS are up to the AT20SS spec. Of course the number of cartridges marked as AT20SS is much less. This how marketing product range works.
I seriously doubt that AT did any more selection when producing replacement styli and marking them as AT15SS or AT20SS. This I found when my AT15SS original cartridge stylus outperformed NOS Original replacement AT20SS stylus.
Dear Dgob: Never mind. I'm not totally satisfied with the MF-100 on the Grace tonearm, it sounds good but only good not" great " as I remember this cartridge can shows last time when I mounted in the AT tonearm.

I will try ( I can't say when. ) again following your advise ( thank's. ) and in the AT too.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.