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
Do I remember correctly, the AT24 has a finer stylus/less tip mass than the AT22 & 23?

Yes, but also most probably some other body difference, which AT usually doing to finally voice their cartridges.
Dear Siniy123: IMHO you are right on the 24/25 and 22/23 differences.

There are some differences on specs and in other areas: while the frequency response in the 24/25 is 15 to 25khz in the 22/23 is 15 to 23khz; on channel balance/separation things are: 0.5db/35 db for the 24/25 and 0.75/30 db for the 22/23 even on tracking force range are different: 0.8-1.6grs for the 24/25 against 0.9-1.7grs for the 22/23.

Yes seems to me as you posted that there exist refinements on each model stylus and internaly too: the 24/25 stylus replacement price was 150.00 against only 100.00 for the 22/23 stylus replacement.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Well, this is a very good " surprise " to me: a source of original AT-24 cartridge ( not stylus replacement. ):

http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=4160

I can't believe it!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Very strange - they are claiming shibata tip?

I believe the ATN25 is an eliptical?

The (supposedly) ATN25 I have is definitely an eliptical (a very beautiful solid diamond naked eliptical - confirmed under the microscope)

I do have some ADC Magnesium shells - so I think the TK9E will have to shift...

To be seen what it does to the sound (maybe nothing given it is a servo damped arm...)

bye for now

David
Hi Dlaloum, I am pretty sure the ATN 25 stylus is a real original. As you see it came in the original AT box I sent with it. I was certain the ATN 25 is an eliptical, according to what I have read on the net. The diamond on the AT 25 looks smaller than the AT 23 which I have. I had a balance issue with the AT 23 stylus when used with that TK9E body because it was defective, a weak magnet maybe.

A story of why I no longer had the original (less than 50 hours) TK9E stylus. I bought that AT 23 stylus from Bluz Broz because I thought (as they listed it) it was a TK10MLIII stylus so an upgrade for the TK9 body. The lier at Bluz Broz said it was a top quality shibata stylus on ths genuine (yea right) Signet TK10MLIII stylus. I complained about the balance issue I had and I was told to send the whole cartridge back with the original TK9 stylus installed and the new "fake" Tk10MLIII stylus with it so he could "test" it. Over a month later, he said the (fake) stylus is fine according to his "test". I receieved the cartridge with same defective fake TK10MLIII needle and my like new TK9E was in the fake TK10MLIII box not secured and trashed, completely missing the end of the cantilever and diamond, looked like it was cut off and no where to be found in the box.

I called and complained and the guy said it was UPS fault and he will file a claim to get me a new stylus. Over a year and never heard a peep from the Bluz BroZ a-hole.

Anyway, I hope you like the TK9/AT25.Sounded good to me even though I couldn't try different headshells then, and didn't try different loading, so you may have even better results.
Sorry to learn of your terrible experience with Bluz Broz. They also are less than honest about the provenance of their Acutex styli. It seems it would be fair to say openly that none of us should do business with them in future. I wonder whether they know that to misrepresent items for sale via mail order can be prosecuted as "mail fraud"? I am not a lawyer; a lawyer told me this. You might want to remind them of this fact when seeking compensation for your trashed cartridge. Obviously, if it had been properly secured and packed there is virtually nothing that UPS could have done to damage it.
As far as I can tell the AT-22 through 25 all had nude .2 x .7 elliptical on beryllium cantilevers, except the 23. The tip on the AT-23 is described as a .12mm prism elliptical on a beryllium cantilever. The Signet TK 9E and Ea had elliptical on a beryllium cantilever. The TK 9LCa had a nude line contact on a beryllium cantilever.

The ML designation is micro line not shibata. In cases of fraud such as this, cancel your credit card charge. Do thus before sending anything back. There's nothing the merchant can do. It becomes a game of who has the money.
Regards,
Dear friends: that Bluz Broz/Adelcom has a long dishonest history that was point out here two-three times but due that the thread is to long Travbrow unfortunately was unaware about but after his deal.

Yes, the 24/25 comes with elliptical stylus. One characteristic that tell us on this AT cartridge series if the stylus replacement is original or not ( something that in the Signet similar line has not. ) is that in the stylus hold metal body comes engraved the model number, example: 22/23 or 24/25. IMHO if this number does not comes in the stylus replacement then we could think is an after market one.

In theory this stylus replacement source has original AT replacements for either 22/23 or 24/25 at good prices:

http://www.stereoneedles.com/Merchant/audio-technica.html

the only caution before buy it is to ask for that mentioned engrave stylus number model.

In the other side I agree with Fleib, the top Signet are not Shibata type but Micro Linear.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
I own several replacement ATN24/25 styli in original AT package. On the "24" or "25" is not stamped on the mounting block. I have the stylus, which is probably the one my AT24 was sold with - it has "24" stamped.

Cantilever, diamond cross-section and cut are visually identical on them, both stamped and not stamped.

I think that AT eliminated the stamping in later production runs of ATN24/25.

The AT22/23 replacement stylus in original AT package doesn't have the stamp either. But visual inspections reveals bigger diamond cross-section, as stated in AT specification.

I ordered AT24 replacement stylus from German source. Once received I will report how it compares to the originals.

Regarding Signet TK10MLII and III - unless somebody shows me the proof (ad, packaging, manual) I think that II and III version were purely invented by BluesBroz.
Dear Acman3/Stltrains: How things goes with that Nagatron 9600? do you think been woth it?

I'm very pleased with especialy its " natural energy " that in some ways mimic live music the bass cartridge overall presentation is a very good characteristic too: seems to me very well balanced cartridge performer with very good layering resolution if not a " forgetable " cartridge when listening it, I think that with more playback time it will improve in this regards.
Anyway a good performer and for 99.00 just " non-sense " bargain.

I'm not sure but I would like to try it in a way nearest to its original status ( boron catilever and linear contact stylus. ), maybe I will send it in the near future to VdH to " mimic " the original design. This is only by curiosity because as is right now I like it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Siniy123: Let me understand: even that you already own " several replacements " you ordered an additional, can I ask you why?
In the other side: do you already tested ( bis a bis ) the stamped ones against the non-stamped? performs the same?

Btw, which one is that german source you stated?, thank you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hello Raul, The Nagatron is a top performer to my ears. It seemed to take a while for the bass to equal the mids and highs, but over the last 10 hours it has gotten much better. A clear look into the performance on all styles of music so far. I can even understand Mike Stripes mumbling.LOL. Very good layering and soundstage. I agree with you on its mimicking of live music which is one of the things I most enjoy.

Keep in mind I am listening at 47k not 100k. I seem to be able to tell a good cartridges strengths and weaknesses pretty consistently with those at 100k but it is not apples to apples.

I would have to really think long and hard about changing a cartridge of this caliber. If I had more than one, or they came up more often I would probably do it. However, boron cantilever with a line contact stylus. Mmmm.

Thanks,
Danny
Hello Ct1057(Chris), What did you think about the At7v ? Did you survive the first 10 hours? To me it is much better with the At155lc stylus, but that adds a lot to the overall cost.

Danny
Travbrow - I was by no means making any negative comments.... the cartridge is superb, as is that stylus.
I was making comments about the confusion out on the web with regards to what type of tip the ATn25 should have...

The cartridge is a corker - really fabulous sound.

Lewm - I calculated compliance by working backwards...
1) Calculate "real" effective mass of the arm by weighing the CW, Headshell, cartridge and fixings, as well as naked armtube at horizontal. - Then use the appropriate formulae (Luckydog made it easy for me by building his spreadsheet available at: www.luckydog.demon.co.uk/images/EMC.xls - I did do something similar in my own spreadsheet, but LD's effort was much slicker!) - and calculate the Total Effective Mass
2) Record the low frequency sweep from HFN Test record, and run it through an FFT RTA to identify and plot the peak response - peak was found to be 5.9Hz
3) Use the 5.9Hz + Tonearm mass in the relevant formulae to reverse calculate the (vertical) compliance.

I also noted that the damping on the JVC servo arm when enabled reduced the resonant peak from +4db to +1db - I could potentially increase the damping but I left it at that... a 3db improvement is not to be sneezed at!
I will measure again when I experiment with headshells...

Given the level of sound I am getting from it, this is one that I would definitely look to retip in a future where the eliptical is worn out.... This baby deserves nothing but the best.

I will post more comments on its performance and comparisons in the near future - I have been doing some initial comparisons with my Shure 1000e-N97xE-SAS and the Shure is by no means shamed - in fact it shows its strength particularly with tonal presentation of the lower midrange - details for the Shure are mid stage, where for the TK9 they are front stage - the TK9 is "sweeter" with better seperation - both in terms of stereo effect/soundstage and space, but also in terms of identifying individual notes and harmonics in a mix - also the decay of notes seems more authentic.
But with woodies, everything from Oboe/Clarinet, Double Bass to Piano - the lower midrange wood tones come through better on the Shure.... is the Shure accentuating them unrealistically? - Is the TK9 unrealistically depressing that frequency range? - Hard to tell, but the Piano in one piece sounded like a different piano... on the TK9e it sounded more "Japanese" (Yamaha) and on the Shure it sounded more "European".
On critical listening I think the Shure was not tracking at its best and I may have to readjust it - perhaps also try it without the damping brush in use (it is theoretically redundant in any case given the arm damping)

Bye for now

David
Hi Siniy123, Although I no longer have proof, I owned a Signet TK 10MLII in the '80s. I'm quite sure it was a MKII, although I can't tell you what the difference was from the original. Often changes like this are minor. For example, the difference between a AT-440ML OCC and a 440-MLa is the magnet strength. The OCC has slightly higher output. All other specs are identical.
Regards,
Hi Folks,

another update on my 1000e/SAS vs TK9E/ATN25 comparison...

When trying to compare the same tracks I listened to in the morning, but now in the evening, and through headphones - the differences are almost gone.

The (or rather... my) speakers are clearly more revealing than my headphones/headphone amp.

And both cartridges are sufficiently good and sufficiently similar (both were set up with custom cartridge loading... for optimum frequency response flatness through the midrange and low highs - sacrificing high extension on the Shure, and suffering high boost on the TK9.... typical of both families)
The differences in the highs were audible through the speakers, and are effectively inaudible through the HP's.

The HP's I tried were my old Revox 3100 (Beyer DT880), Koss Pro4x, and Audio Technica ATHAD700....
A good sign for the two respective cartridges, a bad sign for my HP rig....
Any suggestions from the fraternity as to what HP's I should consider in my search for something as revealing as my speakers. (Stax is a bit too expensive at present...)

It means I can (currently) basically do critical listening only in the mornings - when I have the room to myself.

Putting the speakers on ends up with the other half putting her hands over her ears saying too loud, too loud. Her preferred volume is elevator music :-( .

bye for now

David

bye for now

David
Fleib,
I do believe you about mk II, but AT wasn't using this nomenclature till 90s-00s. This Signet might be an exception.

Raul,
I ordered additional stylus fo my AT24 because I love it so much and William Thakker sells it now quite reasonable.

My original stamped ATN24 is less than perfect (it was bent and then straightened up by previous seller, therefore it resembles slight snake shape). I never tested it for playback. Visually styli look the same. Diamond shank cross section could be easily compared with 20x handheld magnification. For example I see that on my Denon DL-S1 the diamond cross-section is smaller than AT24, Highphonic MC-R5 is even smaller then Denon.
Hi Danny – I did not want to be premature with my findings with the at7v. I think I tamed this “Bronkin” Billy”. My initial impressions were as yours – singers closer to u, big bass, nice midrange – treble a little too much at times.
I “think” I made the mistake of starting around 1.5-6 vtf and going down from there instead of going up. So used to lower vtfs with these MM’s. After about 25 hours – I was a little frustrated but I am stubborn and lazy about changing cartridges. So I pulled out the manual which I couldn’t read – Japanese.

So I googled it and found 1.75 ++++

I set it at 1.8 and did everything just balance out. But it wasn't over. The treble would still come in stronger on certain listening sessions. It took another 10 or so hrs before it stayed consistent.

So in my opinion set it with a higher vtf to break that suspension in then start lowering if at all.

I don’t have 50+ MM’s like some of you, and I like to keep the cartridge on there for a while to really get used to them. Pretty sure it would not take so long with the higher vtf to start. It is a good option for those not wanting to buy an older NOS cartridge and at $130 why not? Henry good call on it – and like you said “ receiving a brand new box and cartridge “priceless”.

Have you tried it at the higher VTF's yet Danny ?

It is not plug and play like the Empire. How good is the At7V going to get – ?? – It is nice now – But I think it needs more hours and will get better/smoother.
YMMV

Cheers Chris
Dear Siniy123: This is the information I have on the Signet TK series top models:

TK9Ea appears in 1978 and continue on catalog till 1985 where the TK9LCa appears in 1981 and gone along the 9Ea.

In 1983 appear the new top of the line: TK10ML with at least two main different characteristics over the 9LCa: boron cantilever and Micro Line stylus shape against Line Contact in the 9LCa.

In 1985 appear the TK10ML SeriesII ( Signet name it in that way instead MK2. This is the one I own. ) with refinements on the stylus shape, its price in those years was 450.00. This model gones in 1989 and left its place to IMHO a lesser performers: the AM series.

I agree with you: no TK10ML Series III.

Btw, Signet had what seems to me two TK P-mount models too: TK6Ep and the TK8LCp.

In the other side Signet/AT build their statement MM cartridge, this came in 1980-81 and was the TK100LC ( ruby cantilever. ) with an " statement " price too: $ 1,200.00!!!
In that time the higher price for any cartridge were $ 1,000.00 for the LOMC Koetsu and Dynavector 100D.

Siniy123, I can't be sure but that " 24 " 99.00 Euros stylus replacement seems to me a " good " after market one. Forget for a moment about the non-stamped 24 and just compare its price with other same stylus sources price and more important against other AT prices that are higher even for lesser AT cartridges. Certainly I can be wrong but my " instint " say: Raul be carefully.

Fleib, which your source where you read that the 23a has a different stylus tip than the 22?. I understand that the 22 and 23a are extrictly similar cartridges with the only difference that the 23a is an integrated headshell design, same for the 24 that's similar to the 25. Thank you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dlaloum: Yes, hearing Shure's/Stanton's/Pikering's with out damping brush makes IMHO/experiences a difference for the better.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul,
I'll report about about my ATN24 from William Thakker. the fact that the AT24 stylus is elliptical on albeit fine diamond may be prompted his suppliers to not charge too much for it.

Anyway, are you started to be influenced by the price tag? there is another well known source from Holland that sells it for 147 EUR. They only take wire transfer and I never bought anything from them. They have NOS AT24 and AT25 complete cartridges.
the magazine ad I have raves about AT25 and AT24 and lists them for $300 and $250 respectively. this is circa 1979.
Hi Raul, I remember from the old days that those Signets had beryllium cantilevers. The information about the prism stylus was from the cartridge database. I've found their info to be pretty accurate in the past. I have no personal recollection of these styli. To tell if a stylus is genuine, see if it's a nude square shank on a beryllium cantilever. Beryllium usually looks different from tapered aluminum. It usually looks like a very thin non-tapered shaft. Replacement styli are usually not nude square shank diamonds.

Ct0517, The AT7V is the lowest compliance cart being produced by AT, next to the AT-95. Cu is 7 @ 100Hz. Recommended VTF is 2g +/- .25g.
www.lpgear.com/product/AT7V.html

Regards,
Dear Siniy123: Yes, I appreciate your report on that 24 replacement. Btw, the Netherlands source is a trusty one I deal with them a couple of times cash way. I already posted this link on the complete 24 cartridge.

Yes, that were its prices.

Btw, great performer this AT-24. I'm just listening again and will report in the few days to comes.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul/Siniy123, I have a Signet TK10ml I bought with a bad stylus a while back. Just got it out to check which series I owned. It seems to be the earlier series from Rauls description. I too will be interested in the Thakker stylus.

How the heck do you get the old stylus out?

Thanks,
Danny
Hello Chris, I do not think I went above 1.7 and that was early on during break in. I was wanting to hear what the AT7v stylus could do and at the same time wanting to hear the excellent At155lc on the At7v's body. I may not have given the At7v enough time for break in, and best setup. I will do that at a latter date as I am currently listening to the Nagatron. The At7v is well worth the money and as you said may get much better.

I am definitely going to get a tonearm with a removable headshell. If I break the tonearm wire one more time during cartridge changing I am going to have to replace the wiring.

Danny
Dear Acman3: With a lot of care, well you only need a very small screwdriver to release that tiny screw and then pull the stylus plate out.

My advise is to wait Siniy123 Thakker stylus experience but if I was you then I will go with out doubt for this one ( is the nearest to original TK10ML. ):

http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=3322

in theory this is an original Signet stylus replacement: you have to ask to confirm it.

Other very good move could be to send your cartridge to VdH to fix it or here:
http://www.schallplattennadeln.de/

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
A trick I learned from Timeltel for recalcitrant suspension/cantilevers, is to leave the cartridge on the record overnight (stationary) at a high VTF (2-3Gm depending on cartridge).
This technique I have successfully used on a number of cartridges, the AT-7V amongst them.
Cheers
Henry
Dear friends: Now that many of you put on the " table " the AT-24, TK10ML and 20SS I'm " running " a whole test/comparison between all the top of the line AT/Signet cartridges I own. I don't know how many days I will take ( I started yesterday. ) but when I complete it I will report on my findings. No, no fives, sevens or the like lesser performers only the best on that AT/S lines.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Raul, Would you please tip me off with your findings prior to your posting here................
In_shore: A " weird "/unique request. If you can please email me to explain why before, appreciated.

Normaly I never discuss any of my posts before post it with any one other than my " conscience ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
My dear Raul, It seams what is to be found good / great here jumps in price out there, that's all.
Dear In_shore: I don't think that could happen because almost all the top of the line AT models already " raved/rated " alond the thread by different persons.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: Good opportunity at good price:

http://cgi.ebay.com/B-O-BANG-OLUFSEN-MMC2-HIGH-QUALITY-PHONO-CARTRIDGE-/150634257343?_trksid=p5197.m7&_trkparms=algo%3DLVI%26itu%3DUCI%26otn%3D3%26po%3DLVI%26ps%3D63%26clkid%3D1456060574279456295#ht_1485wt_1031

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear friends: If in any way this post could help to put some " light " on the manufacturers cartridge " reasons " to have several models in its cartridge lines then good if not: well you will know which my take on that subject:

+++++++ IMHO any market for almost any product has some kind of " distribution condition " where the different customers are or belong.

On statistics there is a " subject " name it " distribution normal curve " ( or something like this. I don't now if that is the used therminology. I'm a roockie on the statitics subject. ) where over a " poblation " ( in our case: audio customers. ) they have a very specific " distribution " over that curve ( and due to some factros/parameters under " test "/research. ) and normally the main overall " customers " are around the midle of that curve, maybe 80% of them with 10% at each extremes ( all this is only an example. ).

Normally too product manufacturers want it to take the more from that 80% of customers on that specific market because is where there are the higher customer number on the whole " poblation ".

Normally this market is an " average " one on characteristics against both 10% extreme markets. Is in this average part of the curve where mediocrity belongs ( mediocrity means average means middle. It is not an insult but a fact. ).

Well for a manufacturer could success in this market normally too exist many factors but two very important is to be competitive on quality and with competitive or lower price than the market asked.

In this average market the customers are not too discriminating on product quality, they looks for similar characteristics at the best price and maybe warranty.

The vintage cartridge MM/MI market performs almost in the same way where the hardest/fierce market with the competition was that 80% average market.

The customers in this average market were: average knowledge/skills customers with average needs and average audio systems.

So what a cartridge manufacturer want to do it in this market, what product level design must put on the market to compete and take the customers attention? IMHO an average product whith the best quality that permit the market product price range. It can't compete ( in this market ) if the price is higher than competition, price is almost the name of the game in this average 80% of the market.

So the cartridges from different manufacturers that were/are in this specific " average " market are average cartridge quality performers designed with a very specific price on mind to take as more customers they can.

This price is the limitation that determine the cartridges average quality performance against " cost no object " same manufacturer cartridge designs.

I'm not saying that these average cartridges sound bad no because if sounded bad then belongs to that 10% of low quality market it sound good but nothing more than that. The customers in this average market are not asking for more and the manufacturer can't gives any more for that price.

Then there is that 10% top quality market where belongs customers with higher needs where customers have: higher knowledge level, skills, better and higher resolution audio systems, experience, better discerning level, better knowledge on music and audio subjects, with specific targets to improve and grow-up, better, better, better and better.....customer characteristics.

Here the cartridge manufacturer has different targets with his cartridge designs, examples in no order: to tell the competition its real capacity level they have, use top " technology " and cartridge build materials through several in deep tests for quality performance, execution design and quality control made it not only " by hand " but step by step ( time consuming for say the least. ), specific an estrictly cartridge voicing and cartridge comparisons with and against own manufacturer lesser cartridge designs and top cartridges competition, put in the market his statement cartridge " sample " where for a customer be " proud " to been an owner of that kind of product, " hand select " hand calibrated " models, etc, etc.

The customers in this 10% top quality market ask for nothing less than the best and " higher ".


All cartridge manufacturers have different price/quality level models to fulfill different kind of customer markets that has different level of quality needs.

We can take from those vintage designs, examples: Astatic top of the line is the MF-100 with a price according to that top level and below it comes a lot lower prices cartridges MF-200, 300 and 400. If we take ADC we have the top Astrion ( top price/quality ) and below the lesser and lower price QLM or XLM models. Sonus top Dimension Five model was surrounded for its little brothers as the Gold Blue or the Silver ones. Shure V15 was and is surrounded for a lot of lesser average and poor cartridge models, similar to Stanton or Empire or Ortofon or Denon that made it a more specific market share/division. Audio Technica 20SS or 180ML-OCC or AT-24 or AT-155LC or AT-ML 160 are surrounded for a lot of lesser cartridges as the 12S or 13-14S or 22 or 140LC or the sevens. Signet is no exeption the TK10ML Series two is surrounded for a big group of lesser models as the 3s-5s-7s and the like. Technics 100CMK4 is surrounded for 270s, 550s, 205s, etc, etc. AKG P100LE comes along the P7s,P8s,)24s and the like.
For whatever direction we move the eyes we see the same " behavior ".

Now, could we think that all those cartridge manufacturers are so stupid to left/leave that under almost any circumstances his " average or poor " cartridge models could not only been very close/near, even or outperform their " statement " cartridge designs? that the 270 could beats the 100CMK4, that the MF-300 outperform the MF-100 or that the 3s/5s//s/9/22/14SA/95 outperforms the TK10s or 20SSs or 24S or that the Shure 97Xe performs better than the 140HE or Ultra 500, or the OM5 in the Ortofon line beats the OM40, or the DL-103 beats the DL-1000A, etc, etc, etc?

IMHO certainly not, they are not so stupid. They are pro-manufacturers where we are amateur-audiophiles.

In the other side we have to think that the difference in price between the average market cartridge models against its top of the line brother surpass 100%-300%. Could you think that that high difference in price between different cartridge models quality performance comes " by free " with out offer nothing else ( on quality performance. ) to the customers other than a high price?, again: IMHO certainly not.
There are several reasons why a top of the line cartridge has a way better quality performance level and higher price than the down-steps in the cartridge line: different motor design ( even if we think or see it as similar. ), different build material quality ( that in a down model we " read " that has an aluminum cantilever and the top of the line ( example ) has an aluminum cantilever does not means are the same aluminum " class "/same shape. Its different. ), different stylus and stylus shape and even if we could think that because on both cartridge specs we read: nude elliptical 0.2 x 0.7mil, both have the same stylus we are wrong because the top of the line comes with a better polished level and grain oriented or anything else, different cartridge body, different suspension quality level, different internal electric characteristics, different coil wire and even how is wired, different cartridge voicing care, different, different.....different and here is where the price goes in favor of better cartridge quality performance.

Almost all " average " cartridge models share the " WOW factor " characteristic. This characteristic is a must on that market because the customers there need to be impressed " immediatly " if they did not then goes to the next brand. The cartridges in this average market are: " alive, punchy, powerful, higher output, easy to set-up, mid bass/lower midrange oriented, on the bright side on HF range, etc, etc., the customers here are not asking for high quality performance at both frequency extremes or very low distortions elsewhere. They ask for a decent sound/noise and an easy cartridge set-up.
The almost " plug&play " P-mount cartridge designs were developed for this specific market.

That WOW factor we can aware when we listen to these " average cartridges " and change to listen the top of the line:
if we are hearing the Sonus Gold Blue and suddenly change to the top Dimension 5 the sound change from " alive " to an almost " dull " and maybe non-emotional one even ( with the same cartridges output level. ) we " feel " that the SPL goes down by 1db or the like but the same happen when we go from the sevens to the 24 or TK10ML Series II or from the MMC3-4 to the MMC2-1. This happen in almost any cartridge line when we go from an average higher cartridge distortion performance to a lower distortion top cartridge performance.
Even with this kind of cartridge experience if we give the time to our ears/brain to switch to that top cartridge better quality performance then things goes on " the right place " puting each cartridge performance exactly where belongs.

The point here is not what we like it but what is wrong and what is right or better and why.

How can we know to which " market " each one of us belongs? where in the Learning Audio Curve are we seated?, because almost all of us think that we are at the top or very near the top, that we don't have to learn almost nothing and that's why we found out great high price audio systems brand names that performs " terrible " because even that all of us could think that that audio system is at the top its owner knowledge/skills levels belongs to " average ".
The other side is common too where a top and high knowledge/skills level person owns an " average " system that puts limitations for him can be aware of many audio system performance subjects as different kind of distortions.

In one example the person has the level to be aware of distortion differences but his system limitations can't shows it, in the other example even than the system has the resolution the person has not the training/experience to be aware of those same audio items distortions or other audio subjects.
To own and drive a Ferrari does not convert us in a Vettel, Alonso or Hamilton pilot's level in the same way that Hamilton driving a Honda Civic can't win a Formula One car-race.

I was speaking on specific about cartridges and distortion subjects but we can think in other audio items and other audio subjects too and the overall behavior is almost the same.

Several times these examples could explain people differences on opinion on the same subject related with quality performance level test/comparisons.

We can't think that because we can't hear in our system what other persons can ( and that is for example: a better quality performance or in other case a wrong /poor quality performance. ) in their systems then they are wrong ( when the one is wrong is him that can't hear it. ) or it can't be possible that happen that way.

I posted several time that money always help to improve an audio system but the main and most important and critical subject about is IMHO each one REAL knowlege/ignorance level we have, where are really seated on that Learning Audio Curve and no less important is to have a wide very wide open mind willing to LEARN from everywhere and from any one.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
An addition to the previous comment about Signet p-mounts

I have the TK6Ep and the TK4Ep - these are identical looking bodies from the AT102 family.
They can host their original styli or any of the styli from the AT102 or AT120 families (including AT152/155/150)

I have not seen the TK8LCp

The TK4Ep measures 521/522mH and 687/676ohm
The TK6Ep measures 565/567mH and 791/797ohm

as comparison from the same family

AT Realistic RX1500 507/515mH 630/632ohm
AT SLT96 522/521mH and 673/671ohm (really nice this one)
AT99sx 524/531mH and 660/559ohm
AT142LP 571/568mH and 781/780ohm

The SLT96 and AT99sx appear to be the same as the TK4Ep, the realistic is close enough to potentially be the same as well (allowing for production variation)

The AT142LP seems the same as the TK6Ep

My testing of all these using a common ATN440MLa stylus seems to indicate identical performance - using variable cartridge loading to adjust Frequency Response to match very closely before comparing.

Raoul - I am not totally convinced about the argument with regards to differing cartridge "generators" at differing pricepoints / quality levels.

My own testing/listening to the p-mounts mentioned here, and also adding a AT440Mla and AT150ea cartridge body to the mix (still using the same stylus) - seemed to indicate the same.

There are perhaps very subtle variations caused by changing the vibrational behaviour of the tonearm due to differing materials used and therefore differing damping/transmission of vibration. But these can equally be generated simply by exchanging headshells and are not indicative of the quality of the individual cartridge.

Higher priced cartridges seem to have much better channel balance on average - but not necessarily...
My AT150ea measures 346/370mH and 485/490ohm - that is quite an imbalance in % terms, where the economy SLT96 has 522/521mH and 673/671ohm.

How different would an AT14Sa fitted with a ATn20ss be from an AT20ss? - My guess is not at all.
(I have not yet tried comparing my AT20 and my AT14 both with a common ATN14 stylus... and perhaps include the TK7 as well)

The other key to this comparison, is careful measurement of the frequency respons, and adjustment of the cartridge loading of the cartridges to be compared so that the F/R matches very closely (within +/-0.1db).

I strongly believe that much of the "differences" are to do with cartridge loading - and that the choices the manufacturers made in searching for that punchy main market sound with WOW factor - were based on what the average person could be expected to have in terms of cartridge loading: 220pf at the phono stage, + 250pf of cable/tonearm capacitance and 47k resistive loading...
But the cartridges have much greater potential when fitted with the better styli, and with the cartridge loading adjusted for optimum results.

For those willing to invest the time and effort (and research and learning) to custom load their cartridges, there are real bargains to be had out there.

And the p-mounts are in no way inferior to their 1/2" mount cousins.

bye for now

David
they are not so stupid. They are pro-manufacturers where we are amateur-audiophiles.
Dear Raul,
It seems to me that you have found the 'fool-proof' way to buy cartridges, speakers, amplifiers, arms, turntables and even records?
Simply purchase the most expensive items available because these 'pro-manufacturers' are never wrong. They are so far above us lowly mere 'amateur-audiophiles' that we should be grateful for their expert 'ranking system' which makes our lives so easy?
And of course, because they are so 'expert' and 'not stupid'......they have obviously listened to all their competitors' products so that their pricing strategy falls into a 'universal' ranking hierarchy which allows us 'amateur-audiophiles' to simply pay the higher prices for the guaranteed better products?

As for your pronouncements that a 'better' cartridge can sound 'worse' because the audio system into which it's inserted "can't shows it" because of "his system limitations" .........this is a favourite claim by some incompetent reviewers attempting to explain the apparent shortcomings of some new expensive item under review.
It is a 'furphy'....unable to be substatiated under any objective criteria and is simply an expose of a poor product IMHO.
Every single new component of value which I have inserted into my system, has revealed benefits and sonic advantages.
Those items which haven't, are simply not of value to my system and despite the fact that theoretically they should be superior to a similar cheaper item, there is no possible rationale to keeping them in my system and changing all the other items till I perhaps find a combination that 'works'?
Regards, Raul: Nice post and there is much value in what you've written, but if I may?

First, please substitute the term "Average" for "Mediocre". The term has gained a derogatory meaning lately, starting in France sometime in the 16th century. Refering to Aristotles' Rule of the Golden Means as the Rule of the Golden Mediocrity just doesn't have the same connotations.

Second: TOTL is not always best. The Ford Edsel automobile is an example that comes immediately to mind. All the bells and whistles but after just a few years most were busted/rusted heaps of scrap metal and not even Juan Manuel "El Chueco" Fangio could have made a winner of that one.

Even though one can generally expect to get what one pays for there are those items that "punch above their weight". Neither were TOTL but both the Shure ML 140HE and Acutex LPM 315-111STR are overachievers and examples of the group which by your definition are thereby mediocre ("a top of the line cartridge has a way better quality performance level and higher price than the down-steps in the cartridge line"). That, my well intentioned friend, is the danger inherent in makeing blanket statements.

For some, it's finding these unrecognised treasures that stimulates all the experimentation and discussion. All, as you urge, with the goal of refining appreciation through experience. This is a good thing.

No intention to pick your post to peices. I like the flavor of your Koolaide but choose not to drink it all.

Hi, David. When you find the opportunity to compare the AT14 w/the AT20, please post.

Peace,
Dear Timeltel: The 140 was at the top of Shure models on performance and price along the Ultra 500 and V15 V and the Acutex 315 was more on the top than on the down size models in Acutec line again in performance and price.

Anyway, if we take both cartridges as an exceptions well " an exception confirm the rule " and don't forget that nothing is perfect an anywhere we could find " errors ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Dlaloum: Very learning posts you posted. I'm followinig with interest: keep doing well!

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Hi Raul,

I believe the Shure range at the time had in order from Top of the line down:

Ultra500 (optimised V15V)
Ultra400 (Oprimised ML140 with MR stylus)
V15VMR
Ultra300 (optimised ML140)
ML140
ML120

And there is some debate about the rankings at the top of that listing - with some believing that the Ultra400 outperformed the Ultra500 and V15VMR.

The Ultra400/300/ML140/120 were designed to have the same level of performance as the V15V series but at a lower manufacturing price. - Possibly using manufacturing methods that had not been available when the V15V was designed some 10+ years earlier. The styli/cantilevers used the same technology I believe, it was only the bodies that differed in manufacturing methods.

The end result was apparently very successful - and the ML140/120 designer did post on that topic on one of the forums.... he believes he matched and in some ways surpassed the V15V series with his design.

I have an Ultra300/400 body wending its way to me at the moment - and also an original V15VHRP with good stylus.
Once I get an Ultra400 stylus from LPGear, I will be able to compare these two as well. (another "round tuit" project)

bye for now

David
Dear Dlaloum: Well, I owned the 500 and the V15VMR both good performers. Now I own the 140 and I like it a lot. Do you heard own or owned the 140HE?, if you have opportunity give a listen it.

Btw, could you share your audio system on " charge " ?, thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Timeltel: Please don't take my post " word by word ", it was only an overall example how things goes on in a market.

Btw, that 80% average market went divided by manufacturers on more small/sub-sets markets that owns unique needs and obviously that had a little differences in between and that's why in those time cartridge manufacturers not only have a wide range of models to cope theis market but even different models in different cartridge lines, examples:

Acutex had 13 models for that big average market and 1-2 for the remaining 10% top market, ADC has 15 models, Audio Technica 22 models, Empire 20 models, Ortofon 24 models, Pickering/Stanton 48 models, Shure 32 models, Signet 10 models, etc, etc.
All these models to cope the whole average market with its sub-set of different average level needs.

Btw, accoprding to Richard ( author of the Stanton Handbook. ) this cartridge manufacturer had 130+ different cartridge stylus on his line/model designs.

IMHO the MM/MI cartridge manufacturers " works " very hard to take the biger market share they can on that 80% average market. 95% of their designs were designed for that specific market needs.

I know that other persons have different opinions or different experiences, good.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards, Henry: -Furphy? I had to look that one up. New word in the vocabulary, will be sure to use it the next time bumfuzzlement is called for!

Raul: I appreciate the body of your post, which if I understand correctly bears a relationship to former Sec. Def. D. Rumsfeld's infamous "unknown unknowns" speech in that there are events which need to be observed before they can be objectively defined.

Looking forward to your comparison of the TOTL AT family carts.

Peace,
Dear Henry,
Nice word, "furphy". But I think you defined it incorrectly, even though it is of Australian origin. The on-line dictionaries all define it as "an unsubstantiated rumor". You defined it as follows: " 'furphy'....unable to be substatiated under any objective criteria". There is a difference between "unsubstantiated" and "unable to be substantiated". More of a furphy is the idea that all direct-drive turntables sound best with no plinth. (Could not resist; fun intended.)

That's the scuttlebutt, and I'm stickin' to it.
On the Shure lineage,

I had a dear friend who was wholly familiar with the entire range (meaning he owned and lived with...). He swore blind that the Ultra 500 out performed everything else that they ever produced.

I never found his opinion to have been too far off the mark. For what that's worth.
Dear Timeltel: Well this was only a " stop " on that " boring AT " comparison " but things are " walking " I almost finish.

Regards and enjoy the music,
raul.
Greetings Lew and Professor,
I'm tickled that you like 'furphy'........I agree that its a bonza word especially here downunder.
It always intrigues me when I read an audio review (mostly on cartridges, phono stages or pre-amps), where the Reviewer concludes that this component is so good and revealing, that it makes half your records sound bad!!?
Don't buy this component they often warn, if you don't want to hear the weak links of your system?
Say what??!!
This component is SOOOO good....that it's bad?!
Do these people think we are morons or is the world of audio circulating in a parallel universe where up is down and right is wrong?
This is similar to the claim by Raul that a cartridge can sound so good (Wow) in our multiple systems.......but is really only 'average' because our systems have 'distortions'?
Yet other cartridges which some of us find disappointing in our systems, are so good that they only sound bad because of these same unspecified 'distortions' in our systems?
Huh?!
Up is down.....right is wrong.
A true furphy recognised as such by the official Australian Furphy Registration Board :-)