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

Showing 20 responses by lewm

 Someone please tell me what it is about ceramic that would make you think it is an exceptionally good material for making cantilevers. Halcro, you are an engineer. Do you have any notions about this? Or perhaps you don’t agree with the premise.  For that matter, what is it about a beryllium that makes it better than boron or aluminum.? Etc., etc. These would be interesting things to talk about. For my part I will continue to choose my favorite cartridges based on how they sound, not what they are made of or what is the shape of their stylus.  I am more thinking that the nature of the transducing system is a major factor in determining what I like and like less. In particular I am liking moving iron and induced magnet types over both moving magnet and moving coil types. Does anyone else feel that way?   I find it kind of sad to see this discussion turned into an ad hominem attack of some of us upon others of us. There is no need for that.
Halcro, If there were deficiencies in the FR tonearm vs the Dynavector, would they be audible via a Youtube quality recording of playback?  I am dubious.  However, I share your rejection of Raul's constantly repeated criticism of the FR tonearms.  Like you, I hear no problems at all related to lack of damping.  And in fact I think they ARE damped, at the bearing, which is packed with some sort of greasy lubricant.  Furthermore, the counter-weight is decoupled from the arm wand, another form of damping.  And finally, the B60 base adds mass, improving energy dissipation.I have my FR64S on a Victor TT101 sitting right next to my very tweaked Lenco with a Dynavector DV505, so I have had many opportunities to compare the two tonearms, albeit the 505 is not quite a 507 MkII.  Each has strengths relative to the other.
For every phono stage I have ever examined, the "re-work" requires de-soldering the 47K resistors and then soldering 100K resistors in their place.  That does require removing the top of the chassis for access. Gold Note understandably wants to discourage DIY by incompetents, I guess.  Any good tech could do it in 30 minutes.
 Dimitri, thank you for your input. You undoubtedly have a greater understanding of the physics than any of the rest of us. However, you need to be aware that there is no common agreement about what is the proper outcome of using damping or not using it, making things rigid or making them flex, etc. Furthermore every cartridge will have a slightly different characteristic of itS own that demands slightly different modes and levels of damping or lack of damping to bring out its best SQ. And finally there is no consensus among audiophiles about what is the best of anything. (Just read the last ten posts on this thread.) So you can see that the situation in audio is much more complex than in designing aerospace devices, where you are probably very sure of your desired end point.
I've related this story many times, but here goes....
I bought a tonearm (from a seller in NYC) and paid via Paypal using my credit card.  The tonearm was in bad shape and missing parts.  The seller was evasive, to put it as nicely as possible.  I contacted Paypal, and they claimed there was nothing they could do about it.  Referred me to VISA.  Fortunately, VISA did help.  I don't assume Paypal will rush to my side if I have a problem with a seller.  I guess others have had better experiences being "protected" by Paypal.

I bought a cartridge from Raul several years ago and had no problems with the product or the person.  I would think that if he were habitually cheating people, this forum would be replete with negative stories posted by people who were hornswaggled, which it is not.  Even Halcro and Chakster do not seem to be claiming outright that they were ever cheated. Raul is much too prominent here to get away with cheating on deals.  I have no idea why he apparently asked others to deal outside of Paypal; he must have had his reasons.
When I first used Paypal, and I noted they want users to link Paypal accounts to personal checking accounts, I actually opened a special checking account at my bank for linking to Paypal.  I keep very little money in that account, because I saw right away the danger that a hacker could access my personal checking account through Paypal.  (I generally keep very large sums in my regular personal account; it is a bad habit.)  So if you were hacked in that way, Raul, you have my sympathy.

One comment on your eBay experience:  It is axiomatic that eBay never sends emails asking users to "confirm" their ID.  When you see that, it's always an email that should be deleted.  At least, that's the way I treat such emails.
Raul, it often takes longer to receive goods from Canada than from Russia, China, or japan, here in the northeast US. And nearly every time there’s a hangup with customs, either theirs or ours. For that reason I don’t do business with Parts Connexion.

chakster, from where I sit, you and raul have one thing in common; neither of you is happy when someone else doesn’t love what you love.
What I like about Clearthink is that he always gives 3 choices of nouns, gerunds, or participles.
Chak, With regard to your last email about Paypal requirements, I guess you are correct that one is not compelled to attach a checking account to the Paypal account. (It’s been quite a while, so I don’t remember for sure, but I have no reason to doubt you.) However, for one like me who rarely uses Paypal except when making an eBay purchase, where they practically force you into using Paypal, or when even more rarely selling something on Audiogon or elsewhere, I like to drain my Paypal account in between purchases. Why should I let them have my money to play with for months or years in between my tapping the account? So I drain it into my special checking account for Paypal only.

Having said that, I feel as you do when buying from strangers.  Paypal makes you feel better about sending money to someone you don't know to pay for something you've never seen.  That's the genius of PP.  Their other genius is knowing that most people will let money sit in their Paypal accounts, for Paypal to play with. That probably adds up to massive amounts of financial leverage.
Chak, Not for a minute would I challenge your or Harold's knowledge about the Glanz and Astatic cartridges; I have never owned any sample of either brand.  But I do have two comments:  (1) I have said this before, so sorry for sounding like "a broken record", but you have two independent observations; first, a cartridge has a boron cantilever (or beryllium or you name it) and second, you like that cartridge over another very similar cartridge of the same brand and/or type that has an alu cantilever.  You cannot from these two bits of information alone conclude that boron is always better than aluminum.  Second, the fact that boron "transmits sound" faster than aluminum (if that is so) would have nothing to do with its possible superiority as a cantilever material; the job of the cantilever is to faithfully transmit the motion of the stylus tip, not "sound" from the grooves.  (I know you know this, but think about it.)
 Raul, last night I was Internet surfing in order to acquire some technical information about my Acutex cartridges. In the course of that search, I came upon posts from you to this thread written in 2010. In those posts, you evaluated the Acutex LPM 315 STR3 cartridge. For that period of time you ranked it superior  to your favorite  Technics cartridge, and to nearly every other cartridge you had been recently fond of, including the Empire 4000 D3. This makes me feel very good, because I have been maintaining the excellence of the top of the line LPM 320 STR 3, consistently for the past few years.  Your choice of language in praise of the 315 was almost indistinguishable from what you are saying now about the 4000 D3 and a few other cartridges, even close to your praise of the ADC 26. There’s nothing wrong with that in my opinion. Everyone is entitled to change his mind. Especially over the course of 9 years.
I think Dimitry hit the nail on the head.  We are splitting hairs based on structural elements, testing, etc, and drawing profound conclusions from our own listening tests, but we can never know how cartridge A really compared to cartridge B when both were new and of recent manufacture. 

That said, what ARE the differences between a 4000D3 Gold and a 4000D3?  I remember back when the 4000D3 was a cartridge of the month, and I bought an NOS 4000D3 Gold, only to be advised via these pages that it was inferior to the plain Jane 4000D3.  (Who knew?  I thought Gold surely had to be as good or better than not-Gold.) Ergo, it still sits in its box. Can anyone put a finger on why the Gold version is lacking and what it is lacking?

As regards the Acutex LPM315 that Raul tested and loved for a while, I have been a champion of the LPM320 for several years here.  Note that the 320 was said by Acutex to be superior to the 315 in many ways, including trackability, frequency response, channel separation, etc.  (These are "induced magnet" designs with titanium cantilever and exotic stylus, making them a bit sexy.) I also own an NOS M320, the box-shaped predecessor to the LPM320.  Raul once said the M is superior to the LPM, but I cannot recall a review or details.
Raul, As regards your post of 04/06 at 1:02 PM, what am I wrong about? It is my opinion that the LPM320 is a great cartridge based on many hours of listening and comparing it to 4-5 other highly regarded MM/MI cartridges and several other very expensive LOMC cartridges; I certainly cannot be "wrong" for having an opinion. Is that what you’re talking about? If not, please enlighten me about my grievous error.

You did once write that you thought the M320 or perhaps the M315 was better sounding than the respective LPM version. Why is it so terrible for me to bring it up? Why do you take a friendly interchange as a challenge to your integrity and judgement, nearly always?

And where did I suggest, let alone actually say, that any opinion you render here or anywhere else is a product of your imagination? In that regard, you must have me mixed up with someone else. I think you owe me an apology.
Without a doubt, “Audio” magazine was a gem among all hobbyist publications. I only wish I had saved all the issues. Every time I re-read an article, I am reminded of important points. The Gordon Holt era issues of S’phile are also worthy, although not quite up to the level of Audio. 
While we are praising vintage MI cartridges, let me put in a word for the B&O MMC1. I was lucky to find an NOS sample several years ago and then I was lucky that Raul convinced me to listen to it, rather than selling it. Along with the Acutex 320s (both versions), these are my favorites. The MMC1 is good enough that Peter Ledermann based his business on repairing them initially and then on recreating the design.
I own an MM20CL, too, but condition is questionable as I purchased it “pre-owned”.
It is interesting what you say about the soundSmith moving iron cartridges. Because of my happiness with the MMC1, I have considered stepping up to purchase a soundSmith cartridge, probably The Voice or a higher price version. If you, or anyone else, have heard any of those latter and have any thing to say about how they compare to the MMC1, that would be of interest.I have actually wondered how and in what way the high priced SoundSmith cartridges could be superior to the MMC1. I know PL particularly likes the Sussuro.
Tomic, I don't think Mijostyn has ever heard the MMC1, so his testimony regarding the Voice would not address the comparison between the two. More likely, Raul has heard examples of both.


theo, I think the premier B&O cartridges predate the existence of SoundSmith as a business entity, even though I have no doubt that PL himself was familiar with the early MMCs, when they were current production.  But I don't think he was designing or building cartridges back then.

Raul and colleague Jose are back in limited production of a redesigned phonolinepreamp, the 3180. Right now Raul may have the only unit, because they may still be finalizing the design. If it’s better than my 3160, then it must be fantastic, because the 3160 already is so excellent.