Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Hi Raul – yes the 4000 dIII Gold - too many emails.

Think of me as the guy that likes to travel light as can be seen by my nude sp10 and the tonearm that floats on air. That cartridge appendage came off right away as I saw it not helping the sound. I want to see the stylus too :).

Your desire to ensure we get the most out of these MM’s is much appreciated. This Empire is a cartridge that I could be happy with if I had no other. I will compare it to my Benz Micro Ruby MC 3, Virtuoso and when my XV1 comes back from repair when time permits.

The family is not amused right now with the time I am spending playing with these small mechanical devices and not attending to their needs. They see me aligning these cartridges and now believe that dad has lost it. They are happy though I sense that the swapping out of different speakers into rooms has stopped - at least for now.
Cheers Chris
Dear Henry,
again you did a very good job in recommending the TK7SU to me. I received a NOS unit and put it on my FR-66s on the blue Micro 8000. The signal is going via a Crystal Cable Dreamline Phono to the EMT JPA phono ( also a pre amp) and via balanced Cheetah to the WAVACs, finally being transported via Stealth Dream Speaker Cables to the X-Over of the Bavarian Voice.
Absolutely no colorations but a sound being produced by a MM cart I have never listoned to so far. This Signet is a wonderful cartridge. many thanks.

best & fun only -Thuchan
Dear Eckart,
I'm so pleased you hear the Signet TK-7SU the same way many of us here, also do.
I'm particularly pleased that this opinion of yours comes through hearing the cartridge via the most impressive collection of high-end components I think I have ever seen?
And particularly............powered by valves which some on this Forum, seem to think are too 'warm' for MMs?
As with most things in audio Eckart........you have gone straight to the 'top' IMHO with your sampling of MM cartridges.
Your findings are valuable indeed :^)
Cheers
Henry
Dear Thuchan: Good to see you are now well " seated " on the MM/MI alternative.

Btw and IMHO: don't you think to many tubes on your analog set up?, especially when you are talking of " colorations ". Of course that everyone " kill the cat " as he likes.

Hey Downunder here appear a tube system that likes MM cartridge, so not only SS are good for that source alternative as you thinked.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul,
I think that you and I are in agreement about the value of removing distortions throughout the analogue audio chain.
As you imply......this is not as easy as it seems for often we unaware that in fact we have been happily listening to 'distortions' of one kind or another for a long time?
It is only when a particular component is inserted which 'lowers' some distortions, that we recognise a true improvement in our systems IMHO?
Regards, Nandric: I appreciate those who cite sources. In matters of interest I find it aids in collecting additional information. It is also a handy device for defering blame when wrong ;-).

Peace,
Sorry Professor, I obviously overlooked the importance of the strategy mentioned in your last sentence.

Peace,
Dear Timeltel: I forgot. That Thuchan tonearm/cartridge set-up could tell us and confirm that the best/ideal match tonearm could be not always the one that puts things on the 10hz ideal resonance frequency but the one that like us. You " blame " me several times because my tonearms are " non adequate " for the cartridges but nothing is perfect.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hello, I don't know about wooden arms, but I have a Sonus Formula IV. It's a 4.05g eff mass, aluminum unipivot. Mine has a custom aluminum headshell which brings the mass closer to approx 5g. Eff length is 240mm. Inertia moment is 5213g cm2 with 5g cart/stock shell. This is extremely low. This arm sounds spectacular with high cu carts. IMO it outperforms every other low mass arm.

I don't relate to using a high cu cart with a 35g arm. It's not that I doubt your results, it just that I wonder how much better it could be. The physics are irrefutable.
Regards
Dear Fleib: +++++ " I don't relate to using a high cu cart with a 35g arm. " +++++

me either and yes: ++++ The physics are irrefutable +++++, even the Thuchan set up goes around 50grs not 35 grs like in one of set ups.

What in this regard tell us " physics " ?: well it gives the value/number/frequency where an arm/cartridge combination due to effective mass and compliance that set up resonate. That's all nothing more.

That frequency resonating number can't tell us in specific way which will be the cartridge/tonearm behavior during playback and IMHO neither can't tell us in specific not only the quality performance level of that set up but nothing of what we will hear as " sound ".

I don't have any doubt that the Sonus Formula IV ( that I owned several years ago as other very low effective mass tonearms on those times. ) is a good match for high Cu cartridges but this is true for other medium/high mass tonearms.

Through the Mörch tonearm I have a very low mass tonearm but I don't use it often because ( between other things. ) is not so user friendly as my other tonearms and for me that I'm testing so many cartridges that is important.

I posted several times that through an Audio magazyne review the LOMC Ortofon MC2000 ( Technics TT/tonearm. ) measured 5hz on tonearm/cartridge resonat frequency, the reviewer can't believe it especially because not only the cartridge showeed great performance but " negociated " in clean/accurate way the Telarc 1812 cannons with out single trouble.
This is not unique, my AT 20SS ( 34cu ) with 35grs on effective mass goes around 4hz and makes a great job fenomenal job I have to add during playback of that same Telarc recording: sensational recording IMHO.

Yes I know that that resonat frequency is important but important if we related with other several factors that have influence in the tonearm/cartridge final quality performance level, stand alone IMHO that resonant frequency has no real meaning for me or at least I'm unaware of this.

Could a cartridge/tonearm combination performs better with a measured resonat value of 10hz ( everything the same ) instead 6hz?, yes could be but who knows that " yes " .

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hello Raul,
***What in this regard tell us " physics " ?: well it gives the value/number/frequency where an arm/cartridge combination due to effective mass and compliance that set up resonate. That's all nothing more.***

I disagree. Arm/cart res freq is an overvalued aspect of the relationship. MOI (moment of inertia), bearing friction, damping are all of greater importance IMO. Arm design and energy transmission/dissipation, including relative mass of parts, is critical.

I'm well aware that good results can be obtained will res freq that is far from "ideal".
Regards,
Regards, Raul: You may be interested in Peter Prictchard's intentional introduction of cantilever resonance at 6hz. He felt these low-level resonances added depth or body for improveing the perception of low-bass performance and said so. This is evidenced by his very high-compliance designs.

I do understand your system to be highly refined and most evidently exquisitely tuned to your taste but as discussed in the past more than one road leads to Rome. "Every creature on the earth pursues its own way. Even if it is an animal or a plant, its way should not be thwarted. This is the law of Nature. Obey Heaven and God. Respect others and yourself." Morihei Ueshiba. O Sensei, founder of Aikido.

The fundamentals remain constant; only their application and the subtleties of their implementation change. In this we must all find the recognition of self together with surrounding conditions, such as temperament, personality, style, taste and listening evironment. The crux of the matter, as in life, is the quality of execution.

As to choice of TA, it is not unimaginable that no matter what, a cartridge simply does not perform as one would wish. In this case, Henry will be able to assist, his steel toed cartridge calibrator is available and should it be thought necessary, I'm sure it would also be effective in redistributing the mass of an unhappy tonearm.

Peace,
Dear Fleib: Yes, I agree: it is important and I'm not diminished the subject.

My personal problem with is that testing so many cartridges over the time it makes things more dificult if I try to be always in that 10hz ideal number, not that I can't do it because in the old times I always did it but from some years now different cartridges showed me high quality performance even that were out of that ideal resonance frequency number and this fact made that I decided not to be absolutely orthodox in that matters.

I'm with you.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Timetel, well said. I have learned in my studies (long time ago) that we all are influenced by wishful thinking and prejeduces we carry around for a long time.
So if we still have two well working ears and our eyes are good enough for a safe alignment we even have an opnion or an imagination how the cartridge might sound or not.

Sometimes we are surprised by the result but the difference needs to be a substantial one, as I discovered when I exchanged my " 2 weeks interim long XLR cables from Mogami" into Audioquest Cheetahs. My god - if I would have been satisfied with the Mogami session the MM carts had not seen the light they could and did.

In this case my preassessments would have been confirmed that a MM cannot sound like a MC - but I am not living in Rome and sometimes I go and open the door - that helps.

On the other hand it is always easy to say everything sounds perfect or is "just the best". I myself try to avoid describing by adverbs because I am not a native speaker in English, I am always admiring the many nice expressions being used - wow.

If you are very critical on a unit or cart you might end up with a bashing from the camp lovers. Nevetheless we cannot compare our testing conditions and it is always the person which influences the results. So far so good.

What I might see from an Audiogon page is how open the owner is in testing, selling & buying. This is maybe one precondition for a good judgement bases. If one sticks 20 years with the same cart it is ok but not helpful for getting lots of information - and mayybe also not helpful for the cart itself...
Dear Fleib: Normally I'm dogmatic on audio important subjects but I took some " relax " from that dogmatic and IMHO correct attitude after " live " so many discrepancies between what in theory must be happen and what really happened on the reality through system playback due to the imperfect an imperfections in our beloved audio hobby.

So, many times what things must be did/does not on true home system life.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: I already had your Pritchard reference on that subject: there are no " secrets " over the net.

+++++ " tuned to your taste but as discussed in the past more than one road leads to Rom " +++++

this is the difference that you today can't understand but maybe in the future you could do it when learn about: IT IS NOT TUNED TO MY TASTE, period.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Timeltel,
It is only the rest of us who have systems we actually choose and like, and compromise with the various distortions that Raul promises are everywhere in audio. It is obviously true that more than one road leads to Rome, but perhaps that is where the rest of us are lacking... We are all heading for Rome! It seems at least one of us claims to have found the road to Olympus so as to meet up with Apollo!

And those who are careful with their mythology history will know where I am going with this... :^)
Arm/cart res freq is an overvalued aspect of the relationship. MOI (moment of inertia), bearing friction, damping are all of greater importance IMO. Arm design and energy transmission/dissipation, including relative mass of parts, is critical.
I agree.
There appears to much we don't understand about tonearms and cartridge matching?
I can confirm Thuchan's experience as I have tried many high-compliance MM cartridges on both the FR-64s and FR-66s with excellent results.
I believe this demonstrates just how good (and universal), these two tonearms are?
Put a very low-compliance LOMC into these two arms and they are spectacular.
I've found the same thing true of the Continuum Copperhead tonearm which sounds wonderful with high-compliance MMs as well as with the low-compliance LOMCs.
The Graham Phantom II on the other hand, whilst good with the low-compliance LOMCs, could simply not handle the high-compliance MMs?
A great universal tonearm is a rare and valued beast.
The great MM cartridges like the Signets, can sound just a smidgen better in lower-mass arms like the Micro Seiki MA-505s or SAEC WE308 but we're splitting hairs here really?
Dear Raul,
Please don't take it as an 'insult' when Timeltel says your system is 'tuned' to your preferences?
This is surely what we all have done?............especially over 20, 30 or 40 years?
The fact that you see your 'preferences' as being 'neutrality' and 'truth' is probably not too different from many of us here however the 'truth' and 'neutrality' to you, may be subjectively different to mine?
We see regularly that some of us agree on some things and disagree on others in this Forum?
This simply shows a difference in preferences and experiences and is nothing to be aggressive about.
It is when you believe that your 'preferences'.......and only your 'preferences'.......are the right ones, that you rub people up the wrong way?
As Timeltel says.............Peace.
Dear Halcro: No, I did not. For years my system was tunned to my preferences as almost all of us did it over 20-30-40 years as you said.
I left this secure step in the Audio Learning Curve I think more or less 6-7 years from now and pass to other new ( for me ) up steps in that ALC.

It is logic reactions like the T_bone one or other persons when we can't understand exactly what on hell is happening with Raul. I have no doubt that many of you sooner or latter will be " there " and then you will understand what today has no " foots not a head ".

Btw, I don't know why people think that all audiophiles must stay on the same ALC step level, makes no sense. IMHO it is obvious that some group of audiophiles are in the same ALC step level, other group could be at lower steps level as other groups of audiophiles are several steps a head: something wrong with this?, I don't think so is the way things are.

Audio in this regard is no different from ( example ) race cars: there are pilots at the top Formula 1 and there are pilots in Formula 3 that can't ( suddenly ) in Formula 1 level with out learn first what they need to be " there ". All is a learning process.

Seems to me that people think that because have 40-50 years of audio experience that's enough and this is a mistake because if it is true that years of experiences are important IMHO it is more important which kind of experiences and which quality level of experiences we have that how many years we have on audio.

I don't want to be more specific or go more in deep about because all of us are extremely sensitive when some one " touch " our system or our knowledge-ignorance audio level. So I stop here.

Btw, you and me agree on that: Distortions and/or distortions absent are almost all about audio. This is a main key to be " there ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
A suitably modified version of Plato's concern in the Euthyphro: Is an audio system less distorted/more neutral because I prefer it?; or, Do I prefer an audio system because it's less distorted/more neutral?

When Raul (or whoever) asserts that he isn't tuning his system in accordance with his tastes, I understand that to mean that the question of distortions is, for him, independent of the question of his preferences. So, when someone suggests that Raul (or whoever) prefers his system only because it's his, they’ve made a mistake, not about his preferences (it’s true that he prefers a neutral minimally distorted one) but rather about the subject matter at hand. He wants to talk about an objective conception of distortions/neutrality; some others want to discuss Raul’s psychology, which may be an exhilarating topic but has nothing to do with the conditions pertaining to whether an audio system is neutral.

The objectivist’s position then needn’t involve the insistence that his subjective preferences are the only ones that count, let alone the correct ones. On the contrary, that seems to be a feature of the “After 25 years in audio I know what I like, so that’s correct for me” point of view. This use of ‘correct’ makes it a deliverance of insight into one’s preferences, and results in what one can call ‘audio solipsism’. Every man’s system is a world unto itself and there’s no reasoned way to getting from there to here.

Note that the fact of disagreement amongst Nandric’s ‘audio authorities’ on what counts as a neutral cartridge does not imply that objectivity is a fiction; it just shows that the correct judgment is difficult and perhaps impossible for us to achieve.
Dear Eckart,
What you said about the Audioquest Cheetahs interconnect cables is intriguing?
These cables enabled you to hear 'into' the MM cartridges far better than the Mogami interconnects?
What do you think it is that 'opens up' the MM sound through the Cheetahs that LOMC cartridges don't seem to need?
Cheers
Henry
Regards, Raul: O.K., your outfit isn't tuned to your taste. I don't see how I could possibly be more agreeable.

In order to save you the effort, permit me a review of my gear, as you promised earlier to do.

There are four standmounted Paradigm Signature S4's arranged front and rear, which, as everyone knows, are a fine mediocre speaker. Their measurement are consistent with OSHA safety standards, "what you can't hear can't hurt you".

Amplification can be refered to as "Pseudo-Satisfactory-No-Comment Output," utilizing at least one transistor per channel. Listening tests will confirm these measurements. You have never heard music reproduced like this before. There is very little muddiness in the bass range, due in part to the fact that there is no bass range. The four subs are superfilous but serve well as lamp stands. Instrument detail is generally lacking, but it is occasionally possible to tell the difference between a trumpet and a snare drum. This may the first amplifier you have ever heard that makes organ records sound like all the pipes are playing at the same time, continuously. Although the dynamic range is not too good, the system does offer plenty of listener fatigue.

I hope you enjoyed this, but I must confess portions of the review were softened in consideration of my own excessive sensitivity on the subject. Parts of the review were borrowed, but not the components themselves as no one will consent to borrow them. This does, however, do much to relieve my sense of insecurity.

Peace,
Dear Henry,
the Cheetah provides a more stable and a little more powerful soundstage. It sounds very transparent and wide, so opening the whole room. I am not new to this experience when changing from copper cables to excellent silver cables.
It might not be related to a difference between MMs and MCs. Its just been the timing when I changed the cables. Nevertheless it could be that MMs need a very good signal transportation, I don`t know.

BTW thanks for your compliments. One day you need to hear the system. Tomorrow two very experienced Englishmen will arrive having a listening session in front of the Bavarian Voice - before the High End starts in Munich

best & fun only -Thuchan
CABLES? Some German king appointed 100 Alchemist with the task to turn lead ,wich was very abundant in his kingdom,
into the gold, wich was in very short supply. Ie the state
treasure wich was identical with the kings treasure was nearly empty. He got this idea from his philosophy teachers
who introduced him in the so called 'quantity versus quality' issue. According to the most influential of the
German philosopher it was possible to turn quantity into
the quality as well as the other way around.
The king even appointed an special servant with the task to
inform him each day about the progress. Many of those commited suicide because there was no way to disappoint your king more then twice. To shorten the whole story we can report that the king discharged all of them (100).
Without any income those alchemist needed some new trade so thy invented a new name for their trade as well an new name for themselfs. The trad was called 'amalgam' while their own name become 'metalurgist'. And for some reasons they become succesful. Some more then the other as is usual
in any trade but those from the Nord and those from the Ost
were the most succesful of all. Thy succeed in selling what
is essentialy copper (wire) for 5 x the gold price. So this
dream of the Alchemist become at last the reality althout
in some other form. I am curious if Cheetahs is even more
successful?

Regards,
Hi Timeltel,
Welcome to the club. My system sucks too, and I cannot know that because I have not learned anything over the years, because if I had, I would only know that I don't know. I am, therefore, blissfully ignorant about being blissfully ignorant. Which is convenient... Because otherwise, being learned (or at least further up the Learning Curve), I would have to confirm, with authority, that I did not know whether I was ignorant or not.

Yours in blissful ignorance,
Dear Raul,
It would certainly help me, and probably everyone else here, if you could really explain what you are doing, if indeed it is correct to say that you seek lowest possible distortion without regard to highest possible happiness, in designing and implementing your audio system. I can only imagine then that you have a well equipped audio lab with much test equipment, including distortion analyzers and acoustical measuring devices, so as to obtain the best possible measurements from your electronics and in your listening room. Is this so? It sounds like audio Hell to me, especially since it is a well established fact that as regards electronics, "we" (meaning the audiophile faithful and the electrical engineers that love us) have only a faint idea what distortions are worth measuring. Surely, it is well known that lowest possible harmonic distortions of a sine wave resulting from a pure tone are not the key to Nirvana. Transistors do really well in such tests, however.

Having said all that, I also say that I have learned a lot from you by picking and choosing among the bits of advice you freely give, and I thank you for that. Carry on.

By the way, it seems intuitively obvious that Fleib's points about tonearm/cartridge matching are spot on. Yet, I also take seriously the testimony of Thuchan and Halcro that those big heavy FR tonearms can work well with MM cartridges. I don't know what to make of this paradox.

And Henry, there are only so many question marks available in the Universe. You are using them up rapidly.
Regards, Banquo363: In order to conduct effective communication one must first establish an agreement of terminology. LeFleur's model of communication might serve as an illistration: If a signal is being sent but not recieved, there is no communication. If the signal is distorted (static) but is recieved, then communication is not effective. The ideal situation is what LeFleur models as the two-way flow of communication, in which clear signals are sent and recieved in both directions.

I do believe the difficulty evident in this subject is the definition of "tuning", and Raul's use of the auto analogy can be useful. If an auto enthusiast should replace spark-plug wires or adjust the compression ratio of his shock absorbers, he would not be incorrect to say he had "tuned" his ignition or suspension. I have no difficulty in relating this concept from auto to audio. To replace tonearm wiring, change isolation platforms or to find the footers that bring out the best performance, I really don't think needs extensive justification to be considered "tuning" a system. Most consider it a positive attribute. In the other extreme, if one observed an equalizer with the classic "smiley face" settings or tone controls set to 10/hf's & 7/bass, this might be evidence of "tuning to taste", but most would agree it evidence of deficiency somewhere in the audio chain.

To continue the auto/audio analogy, if one were to gather a varied group of drivers and propose that Indy cars were superior to F-1, F-1 to CanAm, Daytona Proto., NasCar or a 2,200 H.P. rail accelerating from 0-400 in 2.3 seconds, !wow!, (a term I recently learned from Thuchan), a spirited discussion would be likely. We are comparatively a well educated, well adjusted bunch. Although it seems that recently there has been a lot of smoke and not much light, I hope the quality of discussion will continue to reflect positive values. Your post certianly does.

BTW, I learned, at the age of six, that I didn't like Brussell Sprouts. In spite of their often touted nutritional value, many decades later this conviction remains. I think them a way to ruin a perfectly good cheese sauce. And that, my friends, is my position on subjectivity.

(Hi, T-bone: Your rig sucks too? Mine is so bad I've affectionately named it "Hoover". After my next serious downgrade, I'm thinking "Electrolux", Electra for short, which it frequently does.)

Peace,
Dear T_bone, There begins the true insight: knowing to not
know. But then you should avoid stating that your system
'sucks'. This presupposes some knowledge about your system.
If I am well informed you own many components. So you can start the whole adventure from new hypothesis on.

Regards,
And Henry, there are only so many question marks available in the Universe. You are using them up rapidly.
LOL
There are many more question marks in the Antipodes Lew, than on your side of the world?.........and also.......full-stops :^)
I confess I love my system, and it definitely does not suck. My system is better than it has ever been, and my hearing acuity is worse than it has ever been. Perhaps this is another definition of audiophile Hell of which I spoke above. What would LeFleur say about that? Henry, thank you for your good sense of humor.
Regards, Lewm: He'd say you're going to experience a substantial increase in that part of your budget allocated for discretionary purchaces.

Peace,
Dear friends: My advise is that you go for this cartridge hile it last, worth that low price for a great performer:

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1310917542&/Micro-Acoustics-3002-II-Micro-Fine

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
hello Lewm,
***By the way, it seems intuitively obvious that Fleib's points about tonearm/cartridge matching are spot on. Yet, I also take seriously the testimony of Thuchan and Halcro that those big heavy FR tonearms can work well with MM cartridges. I don't know what to make of this paradox.***

There are too many variables. When you think about it, why should we assume that matching vertical dynamic cu to eff arm mass is all there is to it? There are so many other aspects of cart and arm design/performance that come into play, it becomes unpredictable. I think we have to use experience to find what works, and/or what what might work better.

That brings up another aspect. Many of us take different paths. I start out at 47K and keep capacitance very low with a MM/MI. If I want to change the load I use resistance as much as possible. Why? Final results sound better to me. For me, this is right or wrong. For others, their results or methods are just as valid for them. I get greater clarity and transparency with lowest possible capacitance with any HO cart. That value might vary, but that's how I do it.

If changing a tonearm cable can make a great difference, why should we presume that everyone will get the same results? Most everything else is different.
Regards,
Dear friends: I still see " alive " this cartridge:

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1310917542&/Micro-Acoustics-3002-II-Micro-Fine

it is weird that still available due that IMHO beats many of the cartridges you own and it is not easy to finding in this good conditions.

I don't have any connection with the seller and post it because is a very good opportunity.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Banquo363: +++++ " When Raul (or whoever) asserts that he isn't tuning his system in accordance with his tastes, I understand that to mean that the question of distortions is, for him, independent of the question of his preferences. So, when someone suggests that Raul (or whoever) prefers his system only because it's his, they’ve made a mistake ..." ++++

thank you, I really appreciate your very high ( non-biased ) " brain correct perception ".

Years ago I decided ( for many reasons ) that I should grow-up and up-grade/improve my home audio system experiences with a main target on " mind ": neutral/accurate performance with lowest colorations/distortions.

Well, that target is more easy to said it than even figure how to achieve it and this was my very first " problem "/question: how to achieve it? how to know what means neutral/accurate? how to be aware of distortions/colorations? how to improve for achieve that main target?

To many questions and no certain answers. So I have to put on " paper " everything I knew on the subject and how that knowledge-ignorance level could help me. I made a lot of research over the net to learn the roads to be there. I designed a self in deep training process that permit me to be aware of : neutrality/accuracy/distortions in any home audio system. I try/listened dozens of home audio systems and dozens of audio single devices/items ( in my home and in other places. ). Even we designed a : neutral/accurate free of colorations Phonolinepreamp, we are finishing a tonearm with those characteristics and as some of you knew we are too on a cartridge design with similar targets.

That self training that I have and that continue each single day gives me the tools and skills to achieve that main target and at the same time is that process that permit to be aware of quality performance characteristics in audio devices under comparison as the cartridge ones.
I'm aware of several " things " that some of you can't be and not because I'm better that some of you or because my system is a better one or because I have " golden ears ": NO, it is only because I'm trained and you not.
Everyone can do it with the right training.
Some of the differences between some of you and me on the cartridge comparison subject comes because that critical difference on that training between you and me.

Oh yes!, my system not only is nearest to that target but on the subjective point of view it makes really good too.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Folks,

A question and a request...

1) has anyone listened to the classic Quad JVC cartridges - the X-1 and X-2 (and their baby brother the Z-1)?
I have heard occasional mention of these as top cartridges but they appear to be sleepers.

These seem to have been Native JVC cartridges as opposed to JVC badged AT's. (or I may not be aware of the equivalent AT's?)

I have a Z-1 but no stylus
I have a X-2 stylus but no cartridge.

Which brings me to the second item
2) Does anyone know where I might find a X-2 cartridge ?

bye for now

David
Raul&Banguo 363, The knowledge involved in this discussion
between, say, Raul, Halcro and Timeltel is 'inter-subjective' for one part and 'objective' for the other . When someone refers to,say, Newton or physicist theorys in general then he is not refering to his owm brain but to
'public knowledge' in the sense of 'available to everyone'
in principle. This part imply statements about the 'objective knowledge'. The 'subjective part' imply statements about : beliefs, convicions,etc. and those are called 'propositional attitudes'. Ie all three are refering to their own brain. But there is no satisfactory logical interpretation of propositional attitudes.
The so called 'substitution rule' fall away.

Regards,
Dear David: I owned the X-1 and own the Z1. I think these ones are native JVC ( Victor Nivico. ) but like you said some people think comes from AT I can't say for sure, are good cartridges but unfortunately there is no source for original stylus that I know.

Perhaps some one else could help you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Banquo363/friends: Sorry, many " things " that I posted to you were not " dedicated " in specific to you but for a " general " other people knowledge.

There are a lot of information from my part on the whole subject: why those tiny/small/large differences in what I hear and in what some other people hear?, maybe could be useless to give more information other than this one about my ADS L2030 speakers:

first than all: when I bought it I was more an audio " enthusiast " person that a knowlege one that was " impressed " more by the speaker specs, " size " and 50% off price than in its quality performance. I bought it in Laredo,TX at Metex International that was a low/mid Fi audio distributor: Pionner, Denon, ADS, JVC and the like: no audio listening rooms here, I bought it with out listening it and under sales-man " pressure " because was the last speaker pair ( I really think now that was the only one that they can't sold it for a long time. ).

Well, I was not aware why ADS calls this L2030 " Professional Monitor " till I found out that ADS designed/builded in specific for Telarc Records a monitor that achieved the Renner/Woods high targets to monitoring live their recording sessions ( Telarc used Threshold electronics powering the ADS. ): ultra wide frequency and dynamic range, freedom from sonic colorations, extremely low distortion, high image accuracy, superb dynamic linearity, hihg power handling, very fast transients response.

These characteristics are not my words but ADS/Telarc ones, even some of this characteristics I really don't know exactly what means.

Anyway, The L2030 comes from that ADS custom made for Telarc's monitors, some of the latest Telarc recordings were monitored live with the L2030 powered in bi-amp fashion by Threshold.

Through my Agon virtual system any one of you can read the up-dates I made it on these ADS speakers looking to improve its already good quality performance to today audio/music reproduction challenges. Btw, the ADS L2030 tweeters and main midrange are IMHO a stellar drivers even today.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dlaloum: I owned original Victor X-1 cartridge. I think that these were made by collaboration between JVC and Technics.
I bought 2 NOS Original styli from UK source, but unfortunately on both suspension collapsed within 10 min of play. I sold both body and 2 styli as ports or for repair.
Finally I came across AT155LC original body. Having owned several NOS original AT155LC styli for last 3 years I tried it on 440Mla body (great upgrade), 120E (much better), AT160ML (great cart), but when I tried it on matching AT155LC body...OMG! what a cartridge. Instant gratification, easy to listen dynamic sound with zero compression and very involving. Immediate and enveloping soundstage. I glad that I stocked my AT155LC styli supply while back. I think that this is top cartridge now in my stable, if not the best one. Tonearm: AT1010, Headshell AT-MS8 (8gr).
Dear Siniy123: It is not a surprise: the 155 stylus was tunned for the 155 body. Very good performer indeed.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Slightly OT. If anyone wants to see a photo of my SP10 Mk3, go to my system site. Unfortunately, it appears that only one photo is allowed per piece of gear in a system. Raul or someone asked about photos, which is why I mention it here.
Dear Lewm: Good, very good: I'm sure you are enjoying.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul

thanks for the response

I have a stylusless Z1, I believe the body may be compatible with X1 styli (not sure)

I came across an X2 stylus going cheap so I picked it up.... now I need to find a cartridge to go with it.

As an aside - Jico are making SAS styli (as well as Shibata) for the Z1, X1, and X2....

So there may be great potential in these...

bye for now

David
Dear Dlaloum: I was unaware that Jico is making stylus for those cartridges. As you posted: a very good future potential, I will try it and let you know.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: You can't see this one very oftemn in this NOS status and price, IMHO the best Shure ever:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rare-Genuine-Shure-ML140HE-Stereo-Cartridge-w-N140HE-/160590867717?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2563f62d05#ht_500wt_1156

this one is other opportunity:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Grace-F-9-Phono-Cartridge-Stylus-/140551469504?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20b98539c0#ht_500wt_1156

and this Acutex top of the line:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Acutex-LPM-M320-III-STR-Saturn-Headshell-/320701796983?pt=Vintage_Electronics_R2&hash=item4aab511277#ht_500wt_1156

the second best:

http://cgi.ebay.com/RARE-vintage-Shure-Ultra-500-pick-up-cartridge-RARE-/150608889403?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2310fd463b#ht_7508wt_1139

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul, I understand your intention by mention to us all
those carts that you 'discovered' on ebay. But to me it is like let out the plot of some thrilling movie. Do you think that we don't look at ebay?

Regards,
Thanks for your alert Raul, much appreciated as always.

As for the 1080LT, my opinion mirrors yours exactly, albeit your former one. I find it dull, boring and non engaging. The highs lack energy and is terribly unexciting. Frequency response seems flat, right up to the point where the high frequency quickly tapers off in its amplitude (loses energy). A very very smooth and refined cart nonetheless.

Arm - light
Headshell - light aluminium
Load res - 47k
Capacitance - just the interconnects

All solid state electronics, single ended non-feedback battery powered.

I dont have many arms and I wont buy an arm just to make one cart work, so if you will recommend one arm that would bring out the best from the 1080, 4000DIII and Ortofon M20E, I would definitely look for it and buy it.

I for one have tried many of your recommendations and have so far found them all to be spot on. Which makes me comfortable in taking up your always well meaning suggestions.

What I'm most glad for is my relatively young age, because I have seen here how age has eroded the wisdom, common sense and perspective of some. Something you have escaped :)

Keep stating your original opinions, it is much valued, instead of the parroted dribble that some continuously dish out like they have no experience or finding of their own. I find the "so and so said this and that" statements completely valueless.

Hopefully this thread returns to its original course, where new MM gems are introduced/shared. This has been one of my favourite reads. Thanks Raul!