Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Dear Raul, The next day I bought 2 MM carts that you recommended and was not in the position to participate in the (next) poker play. My poker partners should be angry at
you but I am grateful. The paradox in my case was: buy some MM carts to save the money.

Kind regards,
Regards, Raul: There is no reason any of those who visit this thread would not be extremely concerned with the issue of distortion. Once identified it should become objectionable. It is difficult to believe there are those (other than the famously distorted guitar work of such as Carlos Santana or Joe Bonamassa) who would deliberately introduce such into their musical experience.

Possibly some insight into the difficulties experienced when trying to communicate the properties of a cartridge could be explained by this snip from a published work by Tom Holman:

While attempting to measure the transient response of preamplifiers, some rather surprising results were found. Many preamplifiers did poorly on a test which was not thought to be particularly severe-the reproduction of a 1-kHz square-wave spectrum. Square waves were chosen over other kinds of nonsinusoidal test signals as they were
found to correlate perfectly with asymmetrical signals, and the resultant spectrum is easy to analyze. As a test source, a fast square-wave generator with good symmetry was used. This square-wave signal was passed through a signal-pole 30-kHz RC low-pass filter to an accurate RIAA preemphasis network which incorporated rolloff in addition to the single 30-kHz real pole beyond 50 kHz. The signal, now at an rms level equivalent to the 3.54 cm/sec “0” VU sinewave test signal, but containing the sharp transients associated with the RIAA preemphasis, was applied to the input of the device under test. The output from the preamplifier should be a reconstructed square wave with only odd harmonics present. In fact, the preamplifiers had very different output spectra, ranging from identical to the input spectrum to a unit in which the second harmonic is down only 13 dB representing 22% second harmonic.---of fifteen currently available phonograph preamplifiers tested, all but one exhibited anomalous high-frequency behavior when fed a test signal from an actual phonograph cartridge.
Several sources are possible for this kind of distortion--.

Establishing a "common listening reference" would be a useful tool but the implementation a difficult task and might be equally descritive of components downstream from the cartridge. Still, watching with interest and appreciative of the intent.

Your last post on the matter is strong evidence that the well voiced and informed observations of an individual can be meaningful.

Peace,
Dear Raul & Timetel & Nandric,

regarding finding a joint testing ground, more explicitely a joint listening experience on the bases of comparable preconditions, I do think that it might be the most simple way to build up your own Assessment Scheme when following some recommendations on carts and testing it on your own system.

If a recommeded cart is fine you know you may follow recommendations of this guy the next time too, if not you will not do so. Of course you need
to invest a little and also go for some risk but most of all it is one's own
experience and assessment in front of the home system which counts in the end. You may use your favourite LPs not a standard collection - in the end it is all subjective, you will never reach an objective point of view.

This platform might be a more reliable bases than the industry driven reports in magazines ( which are only good for images of the product and maybe the manufacturer's address - not more!).

best & fun only - thuchan
Dear Nandric,

I was tempted by older Audio Physic designs but never went for them. They are still a good buy even today. When I am in the US i am always surprised how many German designs are positively rewarded ( of course there are good ones, among many e.g. Blumenhofer). It is the same way when you look on US products in Germany. Maybe the distributors do a better job than the magazines (???).

and you are right I am not very patriotric in this kind of understanding. But as you know I am a fan of EMT and STUDER and NEUMANN, so you will at least find some German or German related products on my inventary
list. You even bring some more money into our economy which is good...!

You mentioned this great record of Miles Davis. I was able to organize a master tape copy of "Kind of Blue" playing it on the Studer C 37. I have to admit I never heard the trumpet of Miles in such a lively way. And this is how music makes our life different than with background noise in the supermarket...

best & fun only - Thuchan
Nandric,

You leave me with nothing to say except repetition and to acknowledge that you obviously hold a faith (concerning Kant, Hegel, Frege and logic) that I do not possess.

Not a pressing concern for me, I must confess! Maybe, time will bring new reflections for us all.
Dear Thuchan, I am sorry but I can only respond in 'philosophical' way. Starting with the 3 worlds of Frege. We all use this division implicit. When we refer
to, say, the FR-64s, we are refering to an physical object
(aka the physical world). When someone state that he values
Mozart above any other composer he states something about
his own psychology or mind (aka the world of psychology). When we refer to the 'skate force', VTF, FTA, compliance, etc. we refer to 'objective knowledge' and not to our own mind, brain or psychology (aka the world of objective knowledge). So it seems that our subjective preferences mean 'everyone for himslef'. But what about learning? Can you explain my admiration for Schubert's 'Wintereise' without my understanding of the German languge and the German influence in my intellectual development? Any influence is a function of time. So no a priori assumptions are possible. But what is more important
we can discuss our preferences with others and try to share
our love for music. Ie learning from aech other. BTW ,as you know, I share with you some interest in some 'trumpet'in an abstract way already. This would be not possible without mutual empathy and understanding. However I am not
impressed by your 'old stuff' at all.

With German regards,
hello i am looking a giving MM cartridges a listen to on my triplaner setup. ive been MC since returning to vinyl and presently using a zyx universe on my TP. back in the day i was a happy music lover listening to decca, audio technica and ortofon cartridges. i believe the last was a ortofon fl20 super.
i have an ear 834p for phono amp dutys. classic rock and roll/blues are my most listened to music. if any of you MM users are spinning vinyl with a TP which MM cartridges match up best. thanks
Dear Waynefia: I know that you ask by curiosity and that you certainly are not a " rockie " on audio analog subjects, so my post is taking in count that.

I'm with Halcro when he said: " I personally don't care what shape the stylus is if it does the job. ", :

IMHO a cartridge is a integrated set of sub-sets cartridge parts where the stylus shape is only one of those cartridge parts and that IMHO even that has influence in the cartridge quality performance level it is not the one that define the overall cartridge performance.

A cartridge designer choose the cartridge different " places " build materials, stylus shape, coil type and material, size on cantilever or cartridge body, cartridge compliance, etc, etc. and tunned the cartridge to achieve the designer targets. He will choose the different cartridge parts ( including stylus shape. ) that be near or match those quality performance targets.

Elipthical or not, sperical or not line contact or not is only an important link ( as all the others. ) in the cartridge build chain.

What Timeltel posted on the stylus shape subject has IMHO no real meaning and IMHO is a misunderstood on the whole cartridge quality performance subject. Example of what he posted:

++++ " A minature .2 x .7 elliptical on micromass cantilever offered really solid bass, the kind that impacts the solar plexus. Good bass, as in the controlled kind. Visceral.... " +++++

well the same can be achieved with any kind of stylus shape depending on the designer targets and how good the cartridge was voiced.

The same for: ++++ " The nude .3 x .7 ellipt. sounded distant, as " +++++, that's the way those cartridges were tunned/voiced and nothing more.

The stylus shape question is for " rockies " in similar way when some one ask for different cartridge cantilever build materials. We can't aisle one single cartridge part ( stylus shape, cantilever, coils, etc, etc ) and say that the cartridge quality performance comes mainly from there.

Through this thread we already used almost every stylus shape made it and almost any cantilever type. We know what each one of those tested cartridges performs but we can't say that its performance level and characteristics is because the stylus shape or the cantilever.
Even when we are changing different stylus replacement ( even from different cartridge models. ) we know what we are hearing but certainly we can't know with certainty why because we don't know if an aluminum cartridge cantilever in two-three different cartridge models are build exactly the same: hollowed, tapered, same size, same aluminum type ( blended? ), same walls cantilever thickness, real same compliance, etc, etc.

As I said we know what we heard and almost nothing more. So it is not only a misunderstood that post but useless.

Now, a cartridge designer can in very specific way to know the precise influence of stylus shape because during the cartridge build process and everything the same he can test different stylus shape and know for sure its individual " impact " on that design.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Stltrains: The ones I know ( a priori. ) in this thread is: Lewm and out of the thread I think Dougdeacon.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: That " common listening reference " ( as you name it. ) is for the moment out of my " front desk " ( other that is the process I use day by day. ) till people want it be prepare for and feel the necessity about. Sooner or latter this will be..As an example: Halcro tooks more than a year after readed my subwoofer thread to take action and this was after readed and confirmed about with a " pro " opinion and some of the ones that " die for their top BD TTs " took more than three years ( after I posted about. ) to go with the DD TTs like the SP-10s.

+++++ " concerned with the issue of distortion. Once identified it should become objectionable. It is difficult to believe there are those .... who would deliberately introduce such into their musical experience. " +++++

problem is that normally they don't identify. That Common listening reference process help to avoid it.

Anyway, maybe next time!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards, Raul: Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? The gentleman asked a good question of me and I'm fairly sure it was slightly more complex than it appeared on the surface, or perhaps I read it to be so. I hope the answer was to his satisfaction. Just reporting the facts, Cap'n.

Peace,
Dear Timeltel: I know he asked you not me but IMHO I think ( that almost always in the forum. ) any one could add something about and this time I decided to do it: just for the newcomers, as you said.

Btw, all the audio links in the audio chain are important and " delicate " but perhaps the phono cartridge ( the source. ) is the most one because works at the " microscopic " world and interact with so strong/hard " forces " down there that we can't even imagine where even 1-2 degrees on temperature difference makes a difference. Almost everything could alter the critical relationship between cartridge and tonearm/LP grooves. IMHO we can't try to make or try to appear things " simple " around cartridge subjects because are way complex and IMHO till today no one has the Bible on the whole subject. Certainly we amateurs did not.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul, I agree with you on stylus shape, except for one shape, spherical. Nearly every report or review I have ever read on cartridges with spherical styli suggests that spherical styli can do great midrange but not so great bass or treble. This is not to say that one could not be happy with "just" a fabulous midrange sound and only so-so bass and treble.
Regards, Lewm: So, you're still listening to your Acutex with the 320 stylus and have not yet tried the 315?

Peace,
Dear Nandric,
you will forgive me this question: is philosophy helpful in understanding and describing the world and it's functioning giving explanations  for daily life? and if you decided to go for a certain model does it give you answers on psychological implications? or does a philosophical model only allow you to avoid facing the pure and hard reality, the facts while circeling around...? I know this is provoking...
subjective vs. objective is a good field approaching it from a philosophical perspective. sharing preferences is more or less a matter of aesthetical mind or of having made real experiences (or not).

I do understand that you cannot cope with "my old stuff" and you need not 
to understand or to like it. I remember very well when I was in a state of mind not being prepared to understand or to value something the way I later did.

dealing with a certain field means you have to dig into it. many people 
stop here fearing to be drawn  into "dark or misleading territory". And not necessarily one has to enter the so called "vintage field".
It is in the end a matter of experience,  no philosophical model, no exchanging of preferences on a platform like this will substitute the listening experience to a master copy on a C37 or a wonderful piece of vinyl on a big Micro Seiki or EMT. I know I will not convince you by words. I only will give you the idea it is worth a try listening to some old (and good) stuff in a fine chain. 

But this means you have to leave "your world". No philosophical model will allow you justifying your resistance doing so cause you need to explore the world (outside), the real truth. Bringing down your cognitive dissonance in this conflict you might end up in believing it is better staying at home.
So it's up to you: staying at home or step a little outside the door. Whatever you decide going for you may get answers from your philosophical model when integrating and maybe Frege is of help...

best & today: fun only with old stuff - Thuchan
Dear Raul, It's been awhile since I was last here. My apologies if I am repeating something already said.
I realized that you asked my opinion about inductance and I failed to comment. In general, I consider 400mH to be the line of demarcation. That is not to say that a value of 450 or 500 is hopelessly compromised, but 600mH or above is a dis-qualifier imo. Some popular carts have as much as 900mH. Oh how we like our mellow colorations. Sweet - maybe, clear and articulate - not a chance.

Inductance as a property of the output voltage is probably the greatest compromising factor of the MM/MI carts. Increasing resistive loading does virtually nothing to address this. Keep shunt capacitance as low as the cart will allow. Look for high frequency resonance as high as possible. Here is your defensive interceptor missile:

Actual measured MM vs MC comparisons (Ortofon at VE, AES summery) show that electrical resonance is near meaningless. Hagerman and Ellison are dead wrong. All phase nonlinearities hinge on high frequency resonance regardless of design. It is only damping of the moving system that tames the rising high end of a MC cart. That damping also causes phase divergence. The thing that makes the MC listenable also compromises imaging and clarity. The same is true for a MM, but the presence of capacitance combined with the cart inductance will lower the high frequency resonance. Some MM carts have a very high resonance, as much as 50KHz. These are often 4-ch designs. They will exhibit better phase linearity than many MCs.

Some might come on your thread with a hidden agenda. I believe that the truth will set everyone free.
"All warfare is based on deception" - Sun Tzu

BTW, a little rust on the magnets is no problem. Carefully remove with some sandpaper or mini file. These magnets do not degrade with time. The rubber dampers don't either. 30 year old dampers work as good as new in vast majority. It's the suspension wire that usually goes. Old rusted Decca carts are worthless - cheaply made and another overpriced POS imo.
Regards,
Dear Lewm: Spherical, I own the 103 that neves was my cup of tea, I own the Supex S-100 that comes with two stylus one of them spherical but I don't tested yet and the Fulton High Performance that's a great performer including in the bass.

There are not many top cartridges with spherical stylus shape and I have to admit that I don't remember reviews on that kind of cartridges. So I really can't argue on precise way about, our self cartridge design is not taking in count a spherical stylus for it.

I'm only an amateur but I can't understand why all those reports you readed about.

Anyway, good that you agree on the overall post subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Thuchan: +++++ " in the end it is all subjective " +++++

maybe you are right in your " Assessment Scheme " but in mine exist a specific " objective weight " along some subjective " charge ".

Let me understand your opinion or better: please explain me what is the specific subjective weight when you are testing cartridge tracking distortion in a real music LP and one cartridge track perfectly that " torture test " and other can't. Where is the " all is subjective "?, a cartridge can track that track or not: this is an objective fact not subjective, this is only an example and are several of them.

I think we are talking of different whole subjects. I understand that you can't understand what you don't know what you don't ever experienced and that was one of the reasons of my proposal here. No, I'm not willing to go on that road any more.

IMHO, inside the " full subjective road " hide 99% of the mediocrity ( I'm not talking of you. ) because that " I like it " has no argument against it. In the other side IMHO the " subjective road " not only hide gross errors/distortions ( because we are unaware of them. ) but preclude growing-up in a better direction, that's why the high-end is where it is after all these years: almost no advance and we prefer that way that put under scrutiny our system and our music-audio knowledge level. This scrutiny is not important because all of us will be under same circumstances, what is important is to be better audiophiles. With the " subjective road " each one of us are " alone " like in a desert with no help around instead through the objective road IMHO we are surrounded by several tools that gives us " water " when in the desert. Is dificult for me try to explain the whole meaning, sorry.

You own a new phonolinepreamp and it's out of my mind ( other than flexibility. ) why some one like you that are looking for the Nirvana took that choice, I know perfectly all the EMT " problems " that preclude first rate accurate and neutral performance. Of course the " subjective road " defend it against any argument but this is not what I'm talking about: I'm talking about to achieve true Nirvana and even beyond it.

Anyway, my advise is that we need the " objective weight " in our each one audio item tests and audio item opinions, why not? where are the obstacles that preclude some " objective weight " ? whom told us we can't? whom told us is useless? maybe the AHEE? and please don't answer: a subjectivist!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul,
I think that maybe Thuchan's 'subjective' proposition relies on the fact that no matter how many 'objective' measurements you care to supply........if 'I don't like it' is the net response........what good is your objective evidence?
To put it more bluntly........the cartridge that tracks your 'torture test' may still sound inferior to me, than the one which cannot manage that feat?
Rationalists to the right of them
Objectivists to the left of them
Purists in front of them
The subjectivist said
If it pleases me, I will
Impact and definition
It suits me quite well
Boldly I wandered
Into audiophile hell

Fleib: And you read Sun-tzu!

Lew, Raul, regarding styli, a thought: It's where the rubber meets the road. Diminishing it's importance is in itself revealing.

Ya'll carry on.

Peace,
Dear Halcro, In Thuchan's thread your complaint was:'who has done ...any scientific testing of' i.a. headshells.
Why should this be relevant for any 'subjective approach'? If I don't like it...what good is your objective evidence?'
If this is your opinion then you can't have it both ways.
Those are contradictory statemens. For Thuchan who thinks
that he has no need for any 'phylosophy' I will mention
American pragmatism .
My point was that we all use those '3 levels' of thinking
in our discussion. We are talking about physical things
which can be described in physical terms. We also 'value'
those things (say carts) and can see different opinions
about the same cart. Are those opinions contradictory? Yes.
But if we add the subjective context of individual valuation then there is no contradiction because this is not about the thruth -values (true or false ; tertium non datur). I mentioned 'anti skate', VTF, compliance and can add cantilever materials and stylus shapes. We my call the knowledge about those 'inter-subjective' but the problem
then is that there are so many people who have never heard
about those terms. So I prefer 'objective knowledge' to which we all refer one way or the other. Ie it is not possible to choose between 'subjective' versus 'objective'.
We need both for our discussion and use them continual. That some of us are not aware of this fact is another question.

Regards,

Dear Raul,

if we all would be a peer group knowing each other personally and also having had the chance to listen to each other system we might get closer to your objective parameters. I understand your approach finding comparable preconditions and to counterbalance them over  the distance. Only I doubt it will work.

Regarding the EMT JPA 66, which is a pre-amp as well as a complex phono stage, I am in good neighbourhood with some Japanese and German afficinados that this is the ultimate machine. What I like is not only the sound and the variations you may play with, especially when it comes to MM cartridges. No, technologically the two output transformers (which phono stage does carry them) enable a different sound experience you may have with the EMT 139st too. Also the 6 inbuilt SUTs are of such good quality you will throw away most of the contenders...

This is first accurate and best performance. Some poeple told me this cannot be possible wihout special elements on the circuit etc. Forget this bullshit talking. It is the overall concept and the implementation which leads to this wonderful result even when the design is not the most attractive.

subjectivity is no free ticket for telling results on an item which most other audiogoners cannot share. the crest for objectivity nevertheless is a good attempt limiting extreme assessments e.g on the abilities of a MM cart. I will not disencourage you doing so. I am only trying to show some of the obstacles...

best & fun only - Thuchan
Two deaf, but able to speak , man meet each other and have
the following conversation.
A: Hi John, are you taking a stroll?
John: No, no I am taking a stroll.
A: Uh, sorry, I thought you was taking a stroll.

Raul is convinced that there is an 'objective' correlation
between the 'technical propertys' of the components he is
experimenting with and the quality performance of them. He
is searching like a scientist for the explanation of what
he hears in the process.
Thuchan is interested in in some components depending on his own taste or preferences. He can buy what he like. He does not care about 'technicalitys' nor about what the other think about his gear.
There is nothing against one approach nor the other. Everyone is free to spend his own money as he prefer.
But if our dramatis personae are not aware of the difference between those two approaches they will communicate as those deaf man.
As I see their 'communication' Raul has difficulty to understand what Thuchan is talking about and Thuchan is a priori skeptical about Rauls undertaking. To my mind there
is no communicatione at all between them.

Regards,
Dear Timeltel: I'm not diminishing anything, including the stylus. Please read again my post.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Halcro: Yours is the fifth time that link comes here. Thank you to bring it again. Quite relevant, btw.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Lew, and others interested in stylus shape, back in the last days when Gordon Holt was still at the helm of the good ship Stereophile, his preferred cartridge was a Shure V-15 something-or-other with a conical (spherical) stylus. As I recall he wrote up his comparison with the elliptical version and found the conical to better replicate his master tapes. Since Gordon was so much into Fulton products (speakers, wire) at the time, that might also relate to Raul's comment.

As for the Denon 103 (basic conical version), I appreciate that Raul may not favor it but there remain a good many hobbyists who do.

Like EVERYTHING in this hobby, we can take guidance for others who we respect but ultimately we must listen for ourselves.
Dear Timeltel, I must confess I am a troglodyte in these matters. When I am enjoying a cartridge I tend to keep listening to it. So, yes, I have not yet tried the 315 or the MMC1 or etc. I do not much care for the pursuit of perfection in lieu of happiness. I have not been doing much listening these days, for one reason.
Dear Halcro: I think that you still don't understand the whole meaning on my test process and I understand why.

A tracking distortion LP ( real music recorded. ) test ( not a test tone test LP. ) where two different cartridges performs different, between other things, tell you that the cartridge that performs better in that test will has lower tracking distortions through playback in any other LPs.
Of course this " sole " parameter can't tell you if you will like it or not that when you add it to other objective and subjective parameters then that tracking distortion test result will have a true meani8ng for you and if could be that that test result has influence in what you are hearing.

The cartridge tracking distortion subject IMHO is very important/critical with quality performance level because if a cartridge has microscopic problems to follow LP grooves then will generate tracking distortions that degrade the final quality performance level.

Cartridge tracking habilities IMHO is one of the main targets in a cartridge design because IMHO we are trying to hear what is in the recording and first than all we can have what's in the recording primarily if the cartridge can track in clean way the LP grooves with the lower tracking distortions that can achieve.

When the cartridge stylus " hit " the LP tracking grooves ( during playback ) we first than all are in " hands " of that tracking cartridge habilities.

We need, first than all, that the stylus stay always in the grooves, this is a subject that not only I posted in the main page on this thread but that I posted several times. TAS on the Montepilot link-review talked exactly on this subject and its importance.

What we heard is a set of parameters where each one of them has influence in the quality performance level: there is a inter-relationship in between.

I said it several times: on my approach what you like it or not is almost non-important. What IMHO is important is that what you/we like is " CORRECT " ( I don't have other word. ) and with out an overall audio items test precise process you can't do it because what you don't be aware you don't know that exist in what you are hearing. The process is a hybrid one: objective/subjective.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I forgot on the Halcro linked cartridge MM/MC subject:

IMHO the top on that Audio Technica line: AT ML-180 OCC is even better than the 170.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Re Halcro's article, last fall I picked up an NOS Stanton 881S MkII, locally. I guess that's another one I need to put on my "must listen to" list. But I doubt it's any better than the 981LZS, which has a permanent spot in my heart. Timeltel, have you any experience with that one?
Lew,
Any idea where to find a replacement stylus for the 981? I have a body which has long been sitting in my drawer but it remains stylus-less. :^(
Dear Nandric,

interesting observation. As I understand it Raul got deaf when experimenting in his laboratory and I got deaf when spending too much money. It seems to me we all got punished not doing the right thing. hmm...

so what I learned is maybe this:

Rule No 1: there is always communication even if two deaf man meet on Audiogon.

Rule No 2: Audiophiles communicate like deaf man cause the only want to convince themselves that they are doing the right thing.

Rule No 3: deaf audiophiles tend to repeat messages they have sent to the world cause the lost control about their communication memory.

Rule No 4: the more audiophiles are engaged in vinyl the quicker they become deaf.

Rule No 5: there is a north / south deviation on deafness rather than east/ west.  The more you are located north on the planet the more you may become a risk patient ( South Africa or Australia could be the safest place). some people say this is due to the higher sound level audiophiles use or are confronted with in the northern world.

Rule No 6: audiophiles who enjoy their hobby in a special room ( labratory, listening room etc.) which may be also seperated from the "real world" will presumably leave the room as a deaf man some day.

Rule No 7: audiophiles engaged in philosophy have a tendency to audiophile deafness cause they believe looking on the topic from a higher perspective in contrary to laboratory workers struggling every day with new test schemes - this way engaged in day to day business.

Rule No 8: cultural implications have no impact on the degree of deafness ( with the exception of the MM field).

Rule No 9: audiophiles do need a communication platform like Audiogon to show themselves they are needed somehow. Please don't forget to give some applause every day rather than critisize deaf people's lifestyle.

Rule No 10: if you are owning more than 50 MM carts you have a better chance not becoming deaf. While you are engaged in the decision process which cart you may use or prepare for usage you spend a lot of time with the object itself rather than listening to music...

best & fun only - Thuchan
Dear Thuchan, And I thought that I am a lawyer. No wonder
the Germans have the best and the most modern legislation
in the whole world. Thy are obviously born with legislative
talents. But I need first to correct my statement that I was not impressed with your 'old stuff'. There are two reasons for that. First because you stated to have never noticed my inclination to tease the Germans. The second was your own conviction that you don' care what other think about your gear. Well I don't believe that any of
both statements is actualy true. On the other hand it is true that nobody can or should comment on components which he has never heard or has no idea about them. I deed thought to add 'smile' in parenthesis after your 'old stuff' but then the teasing intention will be lost. So herewith my apology to your 'old stuff'. I also promise never ever to say anything about your 'stuff' that can be
seen or experienced as 'negative'. Otherwise I fear some
more corrective rules regarding correct behaviour. However
as a critical reader I need to mention that by all those rules about 'deafness' you overlooked that we usualy communicate in our forum in writing. Shout at some peculiar persom may be of some help even while we know that nobody will hear us.

With German greetings,
Dear T, I bought the 980LZS (not 981; that was a mistype) from eBay in what appeared to be well-used condition. I therefore concluded before listening to it that the stylus must be worn or near to worn out. Right then, I could have bought an NOS D98S stylus for near $300 from a business in the Netherlands, thanks to Raul letting me know about it. I balked at the price, and within one week someone else bought it out from under me. The dealer had none left. Then I started listening to the 980, and it sounded just fine after some initial teething problems. The stylus assembly is a rather loose fit to the cartridge body, so I use a tiny elastic band to bind them together more firmly and probably to damp some resonances (an added benefit of the elastic band IMO). I am told that this loose fit is a typical problem with Stantons and can be rectified by tricky surgery. In any case, since then I have become quite happy with the stylus I've got, and I have never seen another true NOS D98S stylus for sale anywhere. Recently I was able to buy an NOS Pickering D7500S stylus, which I am told will work as well as the D98S on the 980. In Japan, you might have better luck.

Nandric and Thuchan, You guys might enjoy this "scientist joke":

The scientist wants to investigate the frog.
He has trained the frog to jump upon the command "Jump!".
Now he cuts off one front leg and gives the command to jump, and the frog jumps.
Next, he cuts off the other front let and gives the command to jump, and the frog jumps.
He then cuts off one of the hind legs and gives the command to jump.
The frog makes a real effort and is able to manage a facsimile of a jump.
Finally, he cuts off the one remaining leg and gives the command to jump.
The frog remains motionless.
From this, the scientist concludes that if you cut off all four legs of the frog, it becomes deaf.

This happens in science and is often a type of problem with our thinking in audio world.
Lew,
Mine is actually a 981 HZS with a D98S II stylus (with broken cantilever). I wouldn't mind finding a 981 LZS.
Dear T_bone: IMHO the best you can do is to send it to VDH for a re-tip or to that German guy that I linked for B&O cartridge re-tipping.
No I don't think that through a good re-tip could lose its " magic ".

I prefer the H against the L but both are really good and I think a little better than the selected 100.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Nandric: I think there is no communication " problem " but a attitude issue that can be fixed.

I will answer the Thuchan post, the one that deserve it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Lew& T_bone, I, the moron, sold my 981 LZS(NOS) for $250 because I have read somewhere that 981 HZS is much better.
As Lew mentioned the Pickering D 7500 should fit the 981
model. I have seen both kinds on the German ebay. As soon
I see one again I will inform you T_bone.
Lew, if this frog had got some hearing aid would he jump?

Regards,
Thucan @ 06-13-11,

Just to ensure that I am not listed amongst those "audiophiles engaged in philosophy", I will clarify my contributions.

I have argued that the search for 'a truth' behind what we can call 'good' or (both discriminately and subsumingly) 'better' regarding any hifi component is a question of "vindicating our judgements".

In this endeavour, I have argued that methodological consideration of substantiating any such judgement is greatly enhanced by the critique of judgement power that was produced by Immanuel Kant. Others, such as Nandric, have offered views that I believe to fall well short of the problematic established therein and have opted for more convenient views.

This is not because I am engaging in philosophy to browbeat anyone into accepting my criteria of cartridge/hifi component evaluations. It is more a case of my pointing to the real complexity and historical web of scientific and philosophical reflection that points to the real difficulties (aporias) that we ALL face in substantiating any such evaluations.

Sorry to bring up a subject that I still maintain is done little to no service by willy-nilly dragging caricatures of it into the current discourse. I will of course attempt to be true to this view and avoid such acts of violence in the future.
Dear Raul, I think that to 'fix attitude issue' of somebody
else Gaucho Marx may be of some help. He stated: ''if you
don't like my principles I have other''.

Regards,
Dear Nandric,

you are definitely the better lawyer than me and maybe you also stick more to rules than me although I met lawyers in my real life who do not! You are also better in finding arguments when you need a solution on the "old stuff topic".

What I meant when stating I don`t care about others do like my stuff or not is that it is obviously without any relevance for my listening enjoyment when I get to know opinions - positive or negative - about the system or some parts of the system. It matters to my relation to the person and if I regard him as serious talking and discussing with him (in the future). I enjoy exchanging ideas and opinions and I go after recommendations if I assess them as valuable.

You know I have my own "model of the world" or let`s say a certain philosophical way also dealing with independence from other people`s ideas, whether they are referring to religious, political or any other related topics. In this understanding I really don`t care when e.g. you don`t like my old stuff or not. Why did I answer your post? I thought it was a statement being made to help you not dealing with this matter, nothing else. And this is a pitty!

I cannot accept your excuse because I cannot deal with excuses :-) Anyway whenever you have the chance to dig into a vintage adventure pls. do it. And if I can be of help give me a sign. I promise not to implement more than the "10 rules of Thuchan". I understood from Raul`s short comment that he is already working with them... :-) Lewm`s illustration is nice! You put the finger in the wound, so why are we communicating in writings? ...

best & fun only - Thuchan
Dear Thuchan, Yes I am informed about your 'model of the world'. You told me this yourself and assuming that you are not a funny man as some Balkanes I thought that American pragamatism ( Dewey, Mead, Quine, etc) should
'cover' your life philosophy. But I obviously forget our
own European tradition. Hume and Benthan and you are free to choose among different names for this phylosophy: hedonism, egocentric or narcissistic. As far as I understand this philosophy you don't need anyone else except you yourself. What do you need us for then?

German regards,
Dear Nandric,

this is helpful for me. Of course you are questioning my motivation. But may I return the question when stating: maybe the need is the same: I need companions in mind -looks not so bad...

and this means not necessarily myself doubled or trippled. No, different people with many interests - maybe not at all audio oriented but of course yes!
I know this is no simple answer but you may get along...

best & fun only - Thuchan
Dear Lew, You are a scientist and are supposed to care only
about the truth and nothing else but 'the truth' ( aka the 'objective kind'). I am alas not familiar with Kierkegard but think to know that Sartre was an Hegelian.
He spend some time in Germany to study German philosophy.
Do you need more warnings? Besides he was never accepted by
the French communist party as a member. Probable because he
was regarded as a 'class enemy' (aka ' the proletarian class'). I don't really belive that you want to be seen as a 'class enemy'.

Regards,

Regards,
Regards all: The best thing about standards, there's so many of them.

Flashed all their experience with care
Flashed all splitting the philosophers' hair
Laying before all their thoughts with care
Speaking audio truths where
others only wondered
Plauged by Hegel's intermnable pen stroke
Disdainful of the ancients, of Kant they spoke
Of tubes and proven vintage
and where cascoded blundered
Measurment or implementation
They charged forth and back
You must fix said each
What the other had sundered.

Five verses remain, need fresh material ;-).

Peace,
Dear Professor, This is the first poem in English that I
was able to read and , oh wonder, understand. If your prose was as 'penetrable' ...

With pupil regards,
Regards, Nandric: An improvement on "Charge of the Light Brigade", Tennyson was such a hack :). Working now on how to incorporate the "theirs not to reason why" line. With a little more refinement, hopefully the finished work will be viewed as truely perspirational.

Peace,