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 26 responses by dlcockrum

Hey Timeltel and Halcro,

You won't believe this, but i just bought a Thorens TD-166 MKII table cheap on ebay just to get the TP63 armwand off of the tonearm as a second wand for my TD-147 and it came with a Signet TK-7LCa cartridge!

I did a quick setup check on the TD-166 MkII and decided to give it a spin tonight. This cartridge sounds awesome. The stylus appears to be in good shape - sure sounds like it. :)

For my TD-147, I am using a NOS ADC XLM II Improved cartridge on one of the Thorens armwands and was planning to mount a vintage Stanton 681EEE-S (stereohedron stylus) on this new one, but I think that the TK-7LCa may blow them both away.

I saw where a used TK-7LCa just sold on ebay a couple of weeks ago for quite a bit more than I paid for the TD-166 MKII with the cartridge and including shipping.

This was a great surprise after the crappy week I had at work.

Could you provide a recommendation on VTF and VTA for the the TK-7LCa?

Thanks,
Dave
Thanks Henry for the recommendations on VTF and VTA. I will experiment with it and report back on what worked best.

One strange issue with switching the TP63 armwands between the Thorens TD166 MKII with the TK-7LCa and the TD-147 with the ADC XLM II Improved:

1) Both tables have the same model TP16 MkIII tonearm with the detachable TP63 armwand

2) When the armwand with TK-7CLa is installed in the TD166-MKII, it is dead quiet and has no noise or hum. Same for the TD-147 with the wand using the ADC XLM II Improved, dead quiet and no noise or hum.

3) But, when I install the wand with the TK-7CLa on the TD-147 (and adjust for VTF), I get hum, feedback, and a popping through the speakers when I touch the metal tonearm lift on the headshell.

Are you aware of a particular sensitivity to hum/feedback/ESD on the TK-7CLa? If so, any suggestions for remedies?

Thanks,
Dave
I just placed my Signet TK-7LCA (with the original stylus) back in service. Wow, what a cartridge!! Even on my modest Thorens TD-147 with TP16 MkIII arm (7.5g eff. mass), this thing has detail, clarity, imaging, air and space that is far beyond what I get from my other carts (and well beyond what I thought was possible with this table/arm).

However, I am having one issue that I was hoping that you gurus could help me resolve: lots of surface noise. Much more than with the other cartridges in my small stable (ADC XLM II Improved, Sonus Blue Gold, Stanton 681EEE-S). With the TK-7LCa, I hear small pops and crackles almost constantly and often a bit of "swishing" noise during quiet passages. The surface noise is well separated from the music, seeming to come directly from both speakers while the sonic soundstage is well behind the speaker plane.

The table/arm are in tip top condition. I recently went through it, cleaning, polishing, and reoiling the bearing, and adjusting the suspension bounce/level, adjusted the tonearm bearing, the belt tension, etc. Listened to it for about 20 hours with the XLM following the tuneup and all was working flawlessy before deciding to try the Signet.

I aligned the TK-7LCa using the Thorens Baerwald Arc Protractor from Vinyl Engine - this one works great on my table, at least with my other cartridges. I started at 1.25 grams VTF and settled on 1 gram after extended listening. VTA is set a hair, and I mean just a hair, "ass up".

Most of my LPs are Mint- and I clean them all with a VPI 16.5 using the Walker Audio Active Enzyme 4 Step system. I really don't think the LPs are the issue as most are nearly dead quiet with the XLM.

Can you guys give me some idea what typically is the root cause of excessive surface noise and maybe some tips on how to reduce/eliminate it with the TK-7LCa?

Much appreciated,
Dave
Gracious thanks to Halcro, Jmowbray, and Raul for your responses re: surface noise with my TK-7LCa. I was hoping to hear from Timeltel too ;)

Halco - I got this cartridge as a "free surprise" when I purchased an inexpensive Thorens TD-166 MkII from an Ebay seller primarily for an extra tonearm wand for my TD-147, so I have no idea how many hours are on it. The cantilever is dead straight and the stylus looks good (post cleaning) under 50X magnification. Since it sounds really fantastic IMHO, I believe that the stylus is in pretty good condition.

When I looked at the stylus under 50X this afternoon, the tip was indeed caked with debris. I used a Magic Eraser to clean per your recommendation. It worked. The tip looks very clean and shiney now. Yet, while the cleaning did help, I still have the elevated surface noise, but to a lesser extent.

I believe that the TK-7LCa is now performing as designed. The remaining surface noise is, as you and Raul point out above, simply the result of the superior resolution of the line contact stylus along with the excellent transcription prowess of this cartridge/stylus. There is no distortion or other artifacts during playback, only a slightly heightened sensitivity to imperfections in the vinyl that is proportional to the improvement in resolution and clarity over my other cartridges. Another example of the old saying, "There's no free ride".

All in all, I will glady suffer with the slightly-heightened surface noise level in order to enjoy the almost unbelievable sound quality and musicality of the TK-7LCa. It just seems to get everything right.

Halco - I am interested to know how your TK-7CLa body with the AT-155LC stylus compares to your original-stylus unit as I need to think about one of these for the future. Please pardon me if you have already posted on this as I may have missed it while reading this 194 page thread.

Thanks again for the great advice.

Happy Listening,
Dave
Hi Lewm,

I use an Ayre K-1xe preamp with the differentially-balanced internal phono section (very similar to the P5xe you previously owned). My tables/tonearms all have the traditional single-ended phono cables with RCA connectors, so I am currently using RCA-to-XLR adapters since the K-1xe only accepts XLR inputs.

About the same time as the discussion started here about balanced phono sections, I started investigating converting my phono leads from single-ended to balanced. I found a reputable custom cable manufacturer that is willing to make a 5-pin DIN to dual XLR cable for me for $100 and I found a wiring schematic for a 5-pin DIN to dual XLR cable on the Ayre website. Their recommendation is a little different than what you say in your post above: "In an XLR,...pin 1 is connected to audio ground." On Ayre's schematic, pin 1 on the XLRs is left unused and cable shielding from all four signal conductors is tied to the separate ground wire from pin 3 of the DIN connector.

Does this make sense to you? Will it still result in the same level of hum/noise rejection as using pin 1 for audio ground?

I appreciate any help you can offer.

Best,
Dave
Nandric/Fleib,

Perhaps this will help clear up the confusion on the 5 DIN to XLR wiring recommended by Ayre:

http://www.ayre.com/acc_phono_schematics.htm#phdin

Dave
Thanks Mike. The Empire has a very balanced and lively sound that I enjoy. I was hoping that it had endured as one of the "standards" among the folks on this thread, but maybe it was just another short-lived favorite.

I also have a TK7-LCa and would like to hear your opinions of its sound quality vs the Grace F9 and the 155/160LC.

Raul, I still would like to get your updated opinion on the 4000D/III please sir ;)

Best,
Dave
Thank you for responding Raul. I did not expect you to go through a full re-evaluation of the 4000D/III and I appreciate your comments that it is still regarded as a "standard/reference MM cartridge".

No sarcasm or offense was intended by my use of the term "short-lived favorite".

Best,
Dave
Has anyone tried a NOS ATN160ML stylus on a Signet TK-7LCa body?

I know that Timeltel and Halco have used the ATN155LC on the TK-7LCa with good results, but I don't recall any posts on the ATN160ML stylus with the TK-7Lca.

Jack at stereoneedles is strongly recommending the ATN160ML over the ATN155LC. I think that I would want to pick the replacement stylus that would sound closest to the original TK-7LCa stylus that I have.

Thanks,
Dave
Thanks Danny. I am actually thinking of buying both while they are available - stock is nearly exhausted.

Dave
Hi Lewm,

If the second link in my post above not work for you, try going to the Audiokarma Turntable forum and search for a thread called "anyone else running vintage Empire carts?". It is still an active thread so you should find it in the first few pages of the thread listings on that forum.

The referenced pic is on page 27 of this thread about halfway down (post #401) by user "crossram" dated 06-05-2013 at 5:51pm.

The headshell/clip/cartridge on the left has the "high loft" clip (correct for the 4000D series carts) and the setup on the right is the "low loft" clip (not sure what cart that clip is designed to work with). You can clearly see the significant difference in angle of the cart body relative to the headshell plane between the two.

There's a ton of good info on the Empires on that thread, perhaps even pics of the different raw clips by themselves somewhere in those pages.

Dave
Lewm,

My experience is that the 4000D cartridges came from Empire with different height clips. Other owners have verified this as well.

I added pics of my 4000D/III with the "correct" high loft clip and also the "incorrect" low loft clip to my Agon "System" page for you to see the difference and compare to the NOS example you have. You can see the differences in the clip height as well as the resulting cartridge and stylus angles from these pics.

My 4000D/III came mounted to a vintage Empire 698 table with the low loft clip (I also purchased a NOS Empire S4000D/III stylus for it at that time). It was nearly impossible to raise the arm's pivot spindle enough to get the proper VTA with the low loft clip. I had to buy a used 2000E/III cartridge to get the correct high loft clip, which solved the VTA issue.

Dave
I am a few months behind this thread's relevant discussions on the Astatic MF 200, but I just lucked up on a NOS MF 200H. It is everything that Raul (and others) say that it is, IMO equaling (or surpassing) my previous favorites, the Signet TK-7LCa, MA 2002e, and VdH MC Two overall, and bettering them all in the bass, being more harmonically full and delivering superior punch and slam down low. I really can't find anything that I don't love about this cartridge, excepting perhaps its moderate sensitivity to LP surface noise, in this way it (and all my others carts) is clearly bettered by my VdH.

I also got the MF 200 review from the Feb 1981 Stereo Review. Interestingly, the MF 200 produced an output of 3.4mv in their testing, much closer to the rated output of the Glanz MFG-71/51/31 series of 3.5mv (are you out there Dgob?) than the Astatic spec rating of 4.2mv.

In testing, they found that tracking was a particular strength of the MF 200: "the MF 200 was able to track the highest levels of every band on both Shure 'Obstacle Course' records (ERA III and ERA IV)".

After expounding on the similarities of the MF 200's sound to that of a good moving coil, they close the review with: "The Astatic MF 200 seems to combine the best of both worlds - the low impedance and excellent high-frequency response of an MC cartridge with the higher output and superior low- and middle-frequency tracking ability of the finest moving-magnet cartridges. "

This is certainly a very special cartridge.

Happy listening,
Dave

Dear Raul,

I was 3 years ago today that you posted your glowing review of the Empire 4000D/III:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ranlg&1275323834&openfrom&1&4#1

At that time, you ranked it as second only to your Technics EPC-P100Mk4 and equal to (yet different than) the Acutex 315III STR.

A few quotes for memory's sake:

"I compare the Empire not only against the Acutex and Technics but against all the 10 ranking cartridges, LOMC and the Lewm beloved Ortofon M20FL Super. All them but the Acutex/Technics performs in a lower quality level especially the 20FL that against the Empire shows its real limitations."

"A cartridge that for its own " rigths " belongs to that 10+ top level/rank in the cartridge quality performance ladder."

I recently acquired a 4000D/III and found a NOS D/III stylus (the "old style" version like the one in your review) and I am blown away by its performance. I was wondering how you feel that the 4000D/III stacks up to your other favorites today, 3 years after your review?

Best,
Dave
Nandric,

Your rant against the United States is unwarranted and unwelcome. All of this because a US merchant refuses to ship a stylus to countries with unstable political situations without ensuring that he will get paid? Get some perspective.

Those of you on this thread that are US citizens and choose to ignore these repeated undeserved insults to your homeland, grow some balls! Or perhaps you truly are a "Comrade"?

Dave
The 4000D bodies are the same between the D/I, DII, DIII. All of the authentic S4000D styli have the same "4 Dimensional" nude diamond tip (Empire's version of the Shibata-type profile) and a long, tapered aluminum cantilever, the difference between the D/I, D/II, and DIII being the compliance of the suspension, with the D/III being the highest compliance, the D/I being the lowest, and the D/II in between. I have NOS examples of the D/III and D/II styli and cannot hear any difference between them using my D/III body.

Things to look for are:

1) Make sure that the stylus is a genuine Empire stylus (the first generation D/I should have a black housing with the embossed "Empire" logo with a painted gold background on the front of the stylus guard. The stylus guard should have gold colored metal arms that pivot the guard to the stylus body.

See the first pic in Rauls' review here to see the correct stylus assembly markings (the D/I stylus housing and guard front will be black instead of white) and also the correct VTA orientation of the stylus/body:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ranlg&1275323834

2) To provide proper VTA with your tonearm in a near-level position, the metal "clip" that attaches the cartridge body to the headshell should be the "high loft" clip. Inexpicably, Empire had three different height clips and seemed to randomly interchange the type of clip they provided with any given cartridge. The lower height clips are not correct for the 4000D styli, causing a far too low VTA position, requiring extremely high tonearm spindle height adjustment to achieve proper VTA (thus the reputation for the 4000D and other Empire's needing highly positive VTA adjustment to "open up in the highs").

See post #401 on this link for a great picture contrasting the difference in clips (see post 401):

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=468129&highlight=Empire+4000&page=27

The "high loft" clip is on the left and the "low loft" on the right. Notice the corresponding difference in the angle of the stylus and body.

Dave
Hi Pryso,

What you have there is a Genuine Empire 4000D/III Gold. Every detail you list supports this, without exception. The Gold was one a few "late" Empires to have the solid-block mount instead the spring clip. No confusion over the correct cartridge-to-headshell angle with that one!

The white all-plastic stylus body and guard with "EMPIRE" (with the "P" backwards) is also correct for the Gold. I bought one of these styli NOS in addition to the original NOS metal-arm D/III stylus, so I have both to compare. While both styli have the TOTL tapered lightweight aluminum cantilever and "4 Dimensional" (Shibata-ish) diamond, my "original" (early) stylus is mounted to the cantilever totally nude, while my all-plastic pull "late" version stylus has a Diasa tip mount (the tip is bonded to a sapphire (?) substrate which is then attached to the cantilever. Although the nude mount is generally more highly regarded, I prefer the sound of my Diasa tip stylus. To my ears, the latter has better upper-treble extension when mounted in my early 4000D/III body. Go figure.

Throughout my research, I have found nothing to indicate the cartridge body of the Gold version is any different than the earlier 4000D/III body, other than the markings and, of course, the replacement of the clip with the solid mount. If you want to check yours for sure, use a DCR meter to measure it: R should be around 450 ohms and impedance around 220 mH. These values may vary somewhat between samples, but should be + or - 10% of those given.

You should give your D/III Gold a listen. I think it is a very fine sounding cartridge, among the best MMs that I have heard.

Dave
Hi boofer,

I have a copy of that comparison and agree that each of these is a fine cartridge, favoring the Micro Acoustics myself. I find it to be the fastest-sounding non-MC cartridge I have yet heard, excepting MA’s upper-line models. Very dynamic and exciting sounding with no objectionable artifacts that I can discern.

The MAs get noticeably better as you move up the line from the elliptical-stylus equipped 2002-e, with increasingly thinner and lower-mass beryllium cantilevers and progressively-better line contact styli in the "System II" models. Starting with the 3002 System II, the bodies are exceptionally lightweight and resonant-resistant, employing carbon fiber and iridium platinum in the body construction. They also have an easy-to-use "vari-weight" system built into the body cavity to optimally match the mass of the cartridge with a wide variety of tonearms.

MA electrets are said to be (and are IME) completely insensitive to cable/preamp capacitance and phono stage input resistance due to the built-in "passive matching network" that converts the output to a 4k ohm resistive source.

These cartridges were extremely high-tech for the day and perhaps even by today’s standards. MA’s demise was reputed to be due to financial reasons and independent of their ground-breaking sonic performance. I am surprised that they have not achieved more of a cult-following among vinyl lovers today.

Best to you boofer,
Dave

Hi boofer,

Very nice selection of cartridges you have.

I too have an assortment of vintage tables, an Empire 698 (captive to the Empire 4000D/III), a Luxman PD121 DD with the last version of the Infinity Black Widow CF tonearm (currently fitted with Signet TK-7LCa), and a Thorens TD-147, fitted with the MA 3002 System II. I enjoy them all in rotation in my vintage system. I have three extra arm wands for the Thorens, making it easy to swap between cartridges when the urge strikes.

My experience is that the better-sounding LOMCs are expensive and much more demanding of tonearms, tables, loading, isolation, etc.

Continue to enjoy your MMs and your MA electret. They are special.

Best to you boofer,
Dave

Van Der Graaf Generator - "Childlike Faith In Childhood’s End"

Ring. Ring. Hello?... Depression Hotline?
Hey geoch,

When trapped in the dark, look to the light, lest the darkness become a vortex.

It is nice to see you back. There is some of the best humor on the forums right here, mostly laced with extreme intellect. Just have to look at it that way and chuckle. An example of the light.

Hang in there brother.

Best to you geoch,
Dave
+1 on the TK-7LCa. I find it easy to believe that cartridge kicked all others to the curb, halcro. I still like to hear my 4000D/III and last-gen Micro Acoustics 3002 carts, but the TK-7LCa is king of my non-MC collection as well.

Dave 
A great honor and relief to hear from you after such a long absence timeltel.

Hope you are doing well my friend.

Dave
Thanks Raul. I will always be grateful for the great thread you started and for all that I learned from those here because of it.

Dave
Hi nandric,

I assure you that there are MANY in the USA that feel just as you do.

Dave