For me, the amount of money I spent on MM in the last 6 months would have been inconceivable a year ago. I would have scoffed at the very idea of it. Things of course have changed.
Whether I would have been better of buying 1 killer MC cart is a legitimate question but doesn't really apply in my case because I'm new to the audio game and wanted to try a variety of reasonably decent, viz. Raul recommended, carts just to educate myself. My current end game is not to achieve the best sound because I don't know and cannot currently articulate in a substantive way what that is.
But even if I could, it wouldn't be clear what the rational choice is. Take an analogy with restaurants. I know people who save up a long time to be able to dine at the very best restaurants in the world, e.g. el Bulli, French Laundry. On my view, that money is better spent on dining at many second tier but still excellent restaurants. The 'best' is not always the most choiceworthy. Who's correct? I don't know, but it's far from obvious that the latter is wrong.
I thought Chris's whole point was to make public current purchasing prices so as to keep people from overpaying or getting ripped off because of ignorance. If someone persists and pays the exorbitant price anyways, well, price matches informed desire and there's nothing really to complain about. |
What? There is sex after marriage? |
Banquo, Even when markets have price data widely/publicly available people 'overpay' (pay more than the last person). Given that the information can be completely asymmetric in auction purchasing (if I have purchased a used cart from Seller X before but the other participants have not, I may feel I have a better understanding of what 'looks really nice' means, which will enable me to pay more (or be willing to pay less) than what the 'last price' was.
The way to make the data public might be for someone who tracks the data to post it once in a while. But again, sometimes more data is not really more useful because while a share of a stock is the same as the next, a used cart is decidedly not.
I expect this is more a case of caveat emptor than anything else. |
Fact is, I cannot remember what I paid for any of the MM and MI cartridges I bought in the last 2 years or so. It's all a blur. I can ballpark it at best. As in, I paid "a lot" for my NOS B&O MMC1. I paid "a little" for my Acutex. One conclusion I think will hold solid from this experience is that any one of the better ones of these vintage cartridges will do a better job of tracking piano than even the best of the MCs in a high quality tonearm. Both attack and decay of individual piano notes are more real. MCs may have some superiority in other areas, however. Not sure what those areas are quite yet. |
Agree with you Lewm. Apart from that, I've heard top MMs do all that top MCs do, with more ease, authority, weight and continuity.
|
Regards, Lew(m): Cannot answer to the B&O MMC1, but did have a relisten to the two NOS MMC4's that were picked up in a lot purchase last year.
Not impressed with the B&O's at that time, first thought was "what's all the fuss about?", but you asked so out they came for another listen. On my antique SS rig the MMC4 is an exceedingly neutral cart. Resolution is good with no overhang in the bass, the mids are accurate and there is no edgy "splash" in the hf's. Layering is also good and there is a very nice sense of air or openness. Unwelcome resonance is controled, as is surface noise. Quality of the bass is excellent but I prefer it to be a little more evident, the subs never broke a sweat.
What I did miss was a sense of weight or body. The soundstage was mid-hall and although there was no confusion or lack of insturmental seperation (or distortion) in congested passages, I did miss the quality of midrange presence that in some cartridges renders the rasp of the bow or the hammerstrike heard in a forte piano when closely mic'ed.
Both of the MMC4's exibited similar voices, they were a pleasing cartridge and may have needed more than the five or so hours each was used to be considered broken in. Once I was under the impression of a cantilever resonance in the 1500hz range. It was not repeated so break-in is a definite factor, take the above with the proverbial grain of salt. I do think it safe to say these are definitely not "mid-fi" carts, but will require close attention in system matching for best results.
SP-15/constrained layer plinth, EPA-250 TA, 1.2gm VTF @ 100k & 250pF. IMHO, etc.
Peace, |
Dear Timel, Reading your excellent description of the sound of the MMC4, I got an eery feeling for the sound of those vintage straight-line B&O tts with B&O cartridges. (I have no idea what cartridges I was hearing in those days.) A very polite and correct sound but not sufficiently "earthy" or visceral to capture my fancy. This is what I summed up by using the term "hi-fi-ish". We'll see soon how the MMC1 and MMC20CL perform in perhaps a better turntable and tonearm. The MMC20CL in particular has many adherents. Raul, do you have any recollections of your impressions of these cartridges? I know you said back then that you ranked them ahead of their current equivalents being made by SoundSmith,
Another question is the P-mount adapter. Are there any recommendations? The adapter can have quite an effect on sonics. On eBay there is always the pfanstiehl version but little else to choose from. |
I don't think that MMC series is P-mount. I use original B&O adapter for my MMC2 to mount on standard 0.5 inch. |
Regards, Lew: IIRC, SoundSmith carries the proprietary mounts for the B&O carts. You might want to check the geometry of the pins before ordering.
Peace, |
Regards, Lew: Perhaps the carts you heard in the past were the MMC4/5...Took a look over at VE, the MMC1/2/20CL are nowhere near the same animal. The 4 is a titanium bonded ellipt., 2.12mv output and 20db seperation (explains the narrow soundstage) on alu. cantilever (hint of resonance). The 1/2/20CL, saphire cantilevers and high quality nude styli, 2.9mv, 1 gm VTF. Moving iron, recco. cap. 400pF. Specs read like a good recipe for a low or low/mid eff. mass TA. Best I can tell, 4gm with mount. Good luck, let us know. |
Thanks for the tip on Soundsmith for an adapter. MM20CL sure looks like a Pmount sitting in its case, to me. Cripes, I haven't looked at the MMC1 in so long, I have forgotten what came with it; perhaps it has an adapter included. Mine is in original box. |
If I remember correctly the Soundsmith adapter is only good with the Soundsmith cartridge, but they can clarify that for you.
I also believe the MM20CL uses a proprietary B&O adapter.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but I missed an adapter last week on Ebay for my MM20CL.I had been looking for a while. If you find one before me let us know what you think about the B&O.
Danny |
Well, Lew: Dig that thing out & see if it still has the brochure with it. Share the info & if you're ever down this way I'll treat you to a seven course meal. Around here that's a hot dog and a six pack.
Peace, |
Dear friends: By coincidence now that we are talking on B&O here an alert:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Bang-Olufsen-MMC1-phono-cartridge-SAPPHIRE-CANTILEVER-/320705621119?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4aab8b6c7f#ht_1086wt_1139
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
My MMC1 comes with its own special adapter, I now know. Good thing, too. The unusual arrangement of the pins at the rear of the MMC1 make it unusable with a standard adapter. Ergo, that one on eBay that you just cited, Raul, may not be so desirable if one does not own the proper adapter. I guess it can be bought from SoundSmith(?) I seem to recall SS charges $50 for it. |
Dear Lewm: The B&O cartridges looks like a P-mount cartridge but certainly are not at least not belongs to the T4P ( P-mount universal. ) standards.
All the typical P-mount cartridges ( Grado, Technics, ADC, Shure, Audio Technica, Empire, Azden, Andante, etc, etc. ) that we know share at least these " standard " characteristics: same cartridge weight, same cartridge VTF, same stylus to top cartridge plate height and same stylus place distance for similar overhang, same pin connectors codification and same stylus angle. This permit to the P-mount owners changes in cartridges using the same universal adaptor/headshell with out need to change any parameter than the electrical ones to listen different P-mount cartridges, a very nice " touch " and a Bravo! for all those true P-mount cartridge manufacturers that for once in their " lives " thinked in we customers and gives what we need: good!
The B&O cartridges are way different an out of those P-mount standards, example: the P-mount standard on VTF is 1.25grs and the B&O MMC1/2 is 1gr. and the other P-mount characteristics are way different too like the cartridge pin connectors codification that's is different.
Normally the B&O 20 models and the MMC1/2 comes with a B&O dedicated adaptor to use it in any tonearm. The models like the 20CL has two options: that dedicated B&O universal adaptor or a B&O dedicated universal removable/bayonet headshell similar to the Saturn in the Acutex line. For the MMC1/2 the only choice is the dedicated B&O universal adaptor that time to time comes through ebay or we can ask to SS.
If you read the main thread page you can see that in those times I put those B&O models like a top quality performers. Maybe you bought it because of that. Through the time I posted no less than six-seven alerts on these cartridges and one way or the other I posted about its high quality.
This is at least the third time that you ask on B&O when you are an owner and where I can't understand why some one ask about quality performance in an audio item he owns and that never heard it, nothing wrong with that but is something weird for me.
Nevermind, your post " move " to listen again my MMC2 and I mounted in the Grace G-945 with a 15grs Dynavector 507 headshell. 100k on load impedance along 200pf added capacitance, VTF 1.0gr, SRA/VTA positive, azymuth centered.
In that set up the performance is nothing less than spectacular nothing less that a cartridge quality performance that belongs to very top out there. I compared against the Empire 1080LT and 4000D3, Technics 100CMK4 and Audio Technica 160ML.
IMHO the cartridge is so good that in many ways could put the 100CMK4 on " shame " and yes is IMHO better than the 1080LT/4000D3 and at the same level than the 100CMK4 ( stand alone cartridge model. ( Btw, I tested the 100CMK3 integrated headshell and the cartridge is good but nothing that compares against the mk4 stand alone model or even the 205MK4 stand alone model. The ones of you that are looking for the Technics my advise is that forget about the cartridge integrated headshell models: a waist of time and money and try/wait till you find out the stand alone models. That headshell IMHO " destroy/degrade " the cartridge performance and from a very high quality performance in the stand alone models the integrated ones IMHO comes down to an almost " average " one. ).
The B&O will shows any limitations we could have in our system and this means that IMHO if this cartridge can't shine really shine in your system the problem could belongs on the cartridge matching set-up or due to system own limitations: the B&O MMC1/2 is a real jewel a real and amazing device where throught it you can discover what's recorded on your LPs.
The cartridge ( MMC1/2 )is so small/tiny/fragilethat you could think/ask your self how is that works so fabolous but did it on spare. Well, good that with these B&O cartridges I left the mediocrity performers behind.
I don't know when but surely I will make a " serious " and wide review on this gem, I need to compare too against the " Royal " AKG P100LE too.
In the mid time my advise is that any one of you buy the MMC1 or MMC 2 as soon you " see it ".
Btw, the SS similar models are good but IMHO are a little on the hi-fi side with out the tremendous natural feeling of the music that owns the B&O original ones.
Btw, for the last three-four years the price of the B&O MMC2 in NOS has no changed in this source:
http://www.lpgear.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=LG&Product_Code=BOMMC2&Category_Code=B_O
you can see that the price is 300.00 less than the price on that ebay seller.
Lewm, lucky you are that already owns that B&O MMC1 in NOS condition and I don't think you paid for it the " today " cartridge asking price.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Btw, could you believe that this tiny( cartridge weight only 2.5grs. ) gem running at 1gr in that non ideal cartridge/tonearm resonance frequency set up track clean and in spectacular way ( not colored but real/true. ) the Telarc 1812?, well it did: I can't believe it!!!!
Lewm, do you like the piano music? well you will be on heaven with this B&O cartridge.
Raul. |
Btw, due to its very neutral " color " and lower distortions the B&O MMC 1 or 2 maybe you need to hear it with 0.5db to 1.0 db added to your normal SPL system everyday listening.
Raul. |
Maybe more, that depends on each audio system behavior.
R. |
Dear friends: Maybe you could think that the MMC3, 4 or five could give you the MMC2 and 1 MAGIC, don't make a misunderstoon/mistake: IMHO the differences between the lower steps models in that B&O cartridge series is abysmal for say the least. Btw, I own too the cartridges in the 6000 series and even a SP12 or 15 I can't remember. I always be confident on B&O very good and serious cartridge designs.
So now that there is the source for the cartridge is IMHO the best time to buy it while it last in NOS condition and through a confident source.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
I forgot, IMHO this MMC2 B&O cartridge sample beats any known LOMC cartridge out there: no contest on that comparison.
Enough for today on that B&O cartridge.
Raul. |
Raul, You are a piece of work. Thank you for raising the value of my NOS B&O MMC1. I probably should not use it at all, because that would lower the value. I think I paid $600 for mine; that was the most money I spent on any of these MM/MI examples. My reason for bringing it up was simply to generate discussion; thanks for the discussion. I was getting a little bored with the Signet stylus discussion that came before. Also, since I have many cartridges here that I have not heard yet, your and any one else's opinions help me to decide what to listen to next. I don't like fiddling with cartridge installation, so it is my inclination to listen to what is installed in the system on any given evening, and I only get one or two hours a day to listen to music. All of these are reasons why I asked about the B&Os.
By the way, I posted before you did on the need for a special adapter for the B&O, so if anyone is considering buying the one on eBay, they should take into account the extra $50 that SoundSmith will charge for a custom adapter. Peter Lederman does not much like making them, either, so you may have to wait. |
Dear Lewm: Good. Now I can asure you that everyone here will wait for your MMC1 " today " experiences.
Yes, the B&O gives us another discussion level away from mediocrity.
Ok, when do you start your B&O listening?. Btw, 600.00 for the MMC1 is still a bargain: you have to take in count that that cartridge is the " hand selected " MMC2.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
MMC1 actually has smaller diamond cross section and lower effective mass then MMC2. I can dig my MMC2 manual for exact differences. |
Dear Siniy123: Yes, you are right:
MMC1
Description: Nude multi-radial Contact Line diamond, mounted on a sapphire cantilever
Tracking force - grams: 1
Diamond Stylus: Cont. line nude
Cantilever tube: Sapphire
Effective tip mass mg: 0,25
Compliance mg/mN: 30
Frequency 20-20000 Hz=/-dB: 1
Channel separation 1000>dB: 30
Output mV/cm/s RMS: 0,6
Cartridge weight gram: 1,6
MMC2
Description: Nude multi-radial Contact Line diamond, mounted on a sapphire cantilever
Tracking force - grams: 1
Diamond Stylus: Cont. line nude
Cantilever tube: Sapphire
Effective tip mass mg: 0,3
Compliance mg/mN: 30
Frequency 20-20000 Hz=/-dB: 1,5
Channel separation 1000>dB: 25
Output mV/cm/s RMS: 0,6
Cartridge weight gram: 1,6
through the Beoworld site we can read almost everything about B&O World.
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi Raul, thanks for mentioning you tried the Technics integrated headshell 100CMKIII. I thought of buying one already but the price was very high for a used sample. I didn't know the integrated headshell degraded the performance.
I wonder how the Technics integrated headshell models sound with the Technics EPA 100MKI or MKII tonearms? I thought the Technics EPA 100MKII tonearm and integrated headshell 100CMKIV was said to be a hard to beat combination?
What about the "upgraded" Soundsmith B & O based cartidges, are they even better than the original MMC1 and MMC2 models? According to your praise of the original B & O models it would be very hard to improve the original design. |
Dear Timeltel, My Irish friend tells me that an Irish seven course dinner consists of a 6-pack of beer and a potato.
So the MMC20CL will not work in the MMC1 adapter? Too bad. |
I owned the MMC2 and it does require elevated gain levels to fully appreciate its qualities. It provides excellent detail and a stable soundstage and imaging. A neutral and accurate performer is how I recall it: in my particular set up.
I sold mine (as with so many other gems!) under the influence of my Technics EPC 100 Mk4. Definitely worth a listen especially for those not yet convinced about the reputed limitations of most MC's. |
Raul, What is the effective mass of your Grace tonearm? Due to the relatively low output of the MMC1, I will want to feed its output directly into the MC stage of my Atma-sphere MP1, as I do for the Stanton 980LZS, which means the MMC1 could ride in my Reed tonearm with 14g effective mass. (Probably also the adapter adds a gram or two.) On paper, that's not the best match for a cartridge with a compliance of 30, but.... |
Dear Travbrow: The stand alone Technics 100CMK4 or MK3 are cartridges that today that we know the clear importance of a matched headshell to the cartridge along the quality of the headshell wires deserve really this.
In the old times Technics as other cartridge manufacturers, for good reasons, designed the integrated headshell cartridges not only as a more " user friendly " device but with the resources on those times they surrounded the cartridges with what they thinked were the best for it, but that was 30+ years ago and IMHO today there are a way better " road " to make things and to mate those cartridges. There is no contest between a good stand alone cartridge set up and its counterpart headshell integrated. This one is not only limited by the integrated headshell but for the old internal wires.
About that combinations with the EPAs and the integrated 100CMK4 my take is the same: nothing beat the stand alone ones. Btw, ( could be ) but I don't think that the integrated headshell Technics that weights around 19grs be the best match for the low mass EPA MK2, anyway IMHO the stand alone is the way to go.
I think that you save money and time not buying the Technics integrated headshell ones: not worth to have it and now that we have those beautiful B&O MMC1 and MMC2: why do you need those Technics?. Btw, these B&O looks like a very good match for your MK2 tonearm.
About the SS " upgraded " models IMHO these ones even that are good performers ( I heard the SMMC1 and 2. ) does not match the " perfection " on the original ones. Several B&O owners that own or owned both options vote for the SS ones and I understand why: hi-fi sound especially on the high frequency range, the originals IMHO are truer to the real thing.
If you can I urge you to get one of those B&O babies: 1.6grs and running!!!!!, incredible.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Lewm: I'm not 100% sure but I think is 15grs with out headshell. Taking this value my B&O set up resonate at around 5hz and performs just splendid.
If the Reed tonearm could handle the very low cartridge/adaptor weight then you have to try it, seems to me a good option.
About it's output gain yes it is lower than other MM/MI cartridges but nothing near a LOMC or near to the 980LZS but you can try with the lower gain your Atma's can.
+++++ " which means the MMC1 could ride in my Reed tonearm with 14g .. " +++++
maybe I loose something here but what is the relationship between the gain in your phono stage and the Reed tonearm? why are related?, makes no sense to me but certainly that if you posted then there is something there.
Btw, be extremely care when you handle that tiny MMC1, especially when you clean the cartridge pin connectors and when you use the stylus guard. All is so tiny that is very easy, with out care, to have an " accident ".
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Lew, the MMC1's medium-low output may work well with your modified MP-1 phono stage. However if the cartridge's DC resistance is in the hundreds of ohms as is typical of most MM/MI,you will likely experience high background noise level and lackluster dynamics. (I am unable to find an impedance spec for the B&O on the net.) This was my experience running a high-impedance low-output MM into my nearly identically modified MP-1. The 980LZS has a nice low impedance to complement a MC phono stage. |
Dear Lewm, I am so sorry for you cause you had to wait for the answer such a long time.
No - there is no sex after marriage.
I hope you did not went into an adventure without sex- you know people in the best ages regard the best sex as a wonderful dinner after or before a wonderful audio session.
any questions?
best & fun only - Thuchan |
Dear Raul and Dave, (1) The Reed tonearm and the MP1 phono inputs are within physical reach of each other using 3-ft interconnects, which is why I linked use of the Reed to use of the MP1. Plus the Reed has XLR connectors and the MP1 has XLR inputs. (2) I have set up my MP1 with switchable gain ("low" gain is good for cartridges with output between ~0.6 and ~1.5mV; "high" gain can handle any cartridge with output less than 0.5mV) and with switchable 47K, 1000R, and 100R cartridge loading. So if I set MP1 to low gain and 47K, should be fine with B&O.
Yes, Dave, I can run the 980LZS into 1000R; sounds very very good. |
Dear Thuchan, When I contemplate what my poor wife has to put up with, I cannot wonder at the condition of post-marital sex. |
Dear Kravi4ka: If I remember you own the Lustre GST-801 that due that it is a removable headshell design can works with those MM/MI cartridges using different headshells.
Seems to me that you could not need an specific tonearm for that and instead to invest on tonearm plus the MMC4 or 20EN + the Nagaoka: if I was you I will go at once for the MMC2, why not?, blow away all the other ones you name it and maybe every one you own.
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Siniy123: The B&O MMC1 and MMC2 is a similar case as the AT-15SS and 20SS: hand selected for the MMC1 and 20SS.
Here is what the B&O people said on the subject:
+++++ " The MMC1 and MMC2 were essentially the same cartridge with the MMC1 using the best specified diamond tips. " +++++
that's why the channel separation in both, B&O and AT, top of the line cartridges is a little better but all these cartridges ( in its own line. ) performs similar.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Thuchan: +++++ " we should also keep in mind that for three overprized cheap vintage MMs you can get a very nice MC?" +++++
that makes no sense to me. Maybe because you are a little " newcomer " to the MM/MI analog source alternative, let me to ask/explain about:
Why anyone could choose that " very nice MC " option ( I don't know in what range price is that " very nice MC option ". ) against one, not three as you posted: it does not needs three, " overprized cheap vintage MM/MIs " that outperforms that " very nice MC " for 1/10 the money you have to pay for the LOMC one?
That makes sense to you?
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear friends: Your choice:
http://www.schallplattennadeln.de/AKG/AKG-System-mit-Nadel/
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
I'm not sure if in the last link the price is only for stylus repair/fix or for the AKG cartridge with a fixed and new stylus made by them.
Sorry but no english in that site. Anyway IMHO is a good news for that persons interested on AKG cartridges (??) or a source for fix their AKG ones.
Raul. |
Dear friends: This is to all the B&O community interested on a different source ( from SS one. ) for B&O repair cartridges:
++++ " Recently Axel Schurholz (www.schallplattennadeln.de) in Germany has added to the choices available by offering a reconditioning service for worn or broken B&O MMC pickups. Obviously this requires that the customer provides an exchange unit but once this condition has been met the pickup can be rebuilt to any one of a wide choice of specifications, regardless of the original grade of the worn unit. " +++++
this comes direct from B&O. Axel is an oficial/authorized B&O cartridge service center.
From here I can say that that last link was for repair cartridges.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Raul, Within the US, isn't Sound Smith also an authorized repair service for B&O? Plus do they not manufacture cartridges sold under the B&O name, if there are any? |
Dear Raul, The AKG styli from Schallplattennadeln are not original but from their own making. The same apply for the B&O styli and carts. Thy buy B&O carts themself, repair them if needed and resell them. I think that Americans should first try Sound Smith as Lew suggested.
Regards, |
Dear Raul,
as you know I am not addicted and also not dependent on any audio church. When I am exploring into a new field I do it with enthusiasm and on my own experience in my room which provides plenty of experimentation lines available.
Regarding the MMs I made a discovery at the weekend. when testing a FR-6SE I realized that this cart coming in a pretty good condition produces a very nice open sound, good for voices and small jazz combos. When I put a FR-7f in the same line - via the same Phono Pre (EMT JPA 66) - I do hear a difference.
What do you think the difference is? Yes, the punch is greater, the pressure in a very comfortable way is more direct - maybe thanks to the Bavarian Voice. What do you think?
best & fun only - Thuchan |
Says Thuchan: +++ No - there is no sex after marriage. +++ Such a comforting thought (to some of us...?) And Raul, Dear Thuchan: +++++ "we should also keep in mind that for three overprized cheap vintages... +++
Oh hell? So just go easy on the diamonds? I do say that sucks, but then there you go. Can't have it all as we know --- (eventually). Enjoy the music never the less, Axelle :-) |
Dear Dgarretson/Lewm: The B&O MMC1/2 DC resistance is 750 ohms.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Dgob: I think that could be interesting for you ask Axel if he can help you to fix your Technics P100CMK4:
info@schallplattennadeln.de
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear friends: Axel Schurholz told me that he can repair any MC or MM/MI cartridge. IMHO seems to me that a good alternative for some of us:
www.schallplattennadeln.de
info@schallplattennadeln.de
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Nandric: This German ( Axel ) cartridge repair source is as SS an authorized B&O service center.
There are only two oficial authorized B&O cartridge service centers: SS and that one in Germany.
IMHO maybe is time to try with this German source instead SS not only because the SS delay repair time but because of quality too. More on this latter.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Travbrow/friends: If you read the main page on this thread you will find that I prefer the B&O originals over the hi-fi like SS ones. My statement on that subject was way before this B&O oficial review about.
I own both carrtridges on this review and are similar on performance, the 20 was a substitute for the 5000:
+++++++ """ As promised, here is an independent review of the two competitors for your attention when looking for a new cartridge.
The rivals are an SMMC20EN from Soundsmith against an MMC5000 which has new suspension and stylus with a Shibata diamond from Axel. The SMMC20EN costs $279.95 at time of writing (June 2009) and you will need to factor in shipping and customs if in Europe. Prices start at $149.95 and go up to $1599.95.
A re-tipped 5000 with an original Shibata stylus as reviewed here will cost €265, which is the most expensive option offered. Prices start from €89 and work their way up.
As a test I’ve auditioned the Soundsmith SMMC20EN along side a rebuilt MMC5000 from Axel Schurholz. The MMC20 style of pickup can be used in a wide range of B&O’s better turntables, highlights being the Beogram 1700, the Beocenter 1800 and the Beogram 8000 of the Beolab 8000 system. It is the latter setup that was used for these listening tests, the stable nature of the turntable mechanism and the clean, insightful nature of the phono stage in the amplifier make together a very useful analytical tool as well as a fine audio system.
Starting with the MMC5000, it was clear that the characteristic B&O sound, that is smooth, relaxed, pleasant and highly detailed, was there in full measure. Tracking force was determined by the use of a test record rather than relying on the maker’s basic figures; this is the most accurate method and is the only way to extract maximum performance. The optimum setting for the MMC5000 was found to be 1.4 grams, a figure close to that recommended for the original. What was particularly impressive was the wide and deep soundstage that the rebuilt MMC5000 was able to construct, instruments and voices could be instantly placed with unerring precision, this, combined with the alluring tonal balance made for a highly enjoyable listening experience that encouraged the detailed re-exploration of familiar recordings. If one had to be critical it could be said that the focus of the MMC5000 was a little soft, the detail was certainly there but to appreciate it fully it was necessary to settle into the performance and pay careful attention to the most delicate of sounds.
The pickup itself was well finished and apart from some small traces of glue visible around the clear plastic stylus guard showed no signs of having been dismantled.
Moving onto the Soundsmith it was immediately obvious that the two pickups were very different in character. The SMMC20EN appears to have been retuned for the digital age, gone is the smoothness and niceness and in it’s place is a sharper, more aggressively detailed sound that is more akin to that of a CD player than a classic turntable. The SMMC20EN required slightly less down force (1.3 grams) to track correctly but because of its brighter sound the limits of the LP system were more audible, it was never sibilant but it certainly verged on it at times. Some recordings were also overlaid with a steely glare that could very occasionally blur the imaging.
Whilst the SMMC20EN is undoubtedly a competent piece of equipment its appearance leaves much to be desired. The original B&O pickups are styled to precisely match the arms that they fit into but the plastic over body of the SMMC20EN is too big and slightly the wrong shape so it never looks quite right. On the Beogram 8000 this wasn’t too much of a problem as the arm is concealed most of the time and the dust cover is heavily tinted but on more exposed models such as the 4000 range the appearance would offend the connoisseur’s eye. Soundsmith must be congratulated however on tooling up to produce their MMC range, it has saved many a Beogram from disuse.
To summarise, the choice of pickup depends on what you want it for. If you have an immaculately restored system from which you want authentic appearance and the distinctive “B&O sound” then the reconditioning service offered by Axel is something that requires further investigation. If on the other hand your musical tastes require a harder edge than B&O typically caters for and you can live with the looks then the Soundsmith is an excellent product which will bring you a lot of pleasure. """" +++++++++
well, as you can read that not only confirm my findings on the SS " signature " ( same signature with its Strain Gauge one. ) against the original ones but speakls on better " build " quality from Axel.
IMHO if a B&O owner is satisfied with the cartridge quality performance he owns then Axel is the answer. If you want a different cartridge then SS is the road but here you will have a non B&O original quality performance level. So as the review stated: is up to your own priorities on quality performance.
For me Axel is my " ticket " and right now I'm sending to him a 6000 and three AKGs for refresh.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |