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 50 responses by axelwahl

Downunder,
you can do a simple test. Turn up the volume, arm is in the arm rest, until you can clearly hear the buzz from either one, or both channels).
Now slightly loosen the mounting screws and lightly move the cart to and fro. If I'm correct you will hear the buzz changing, or completely subsiding. Now you re-tighten the screws again (the nuts will turn a bit again) and the buzz will probably come back (as it would do during re-alignment of the cart). This will tell you it's the mounting bolt(s) shorting the cart's screen to ground. From there you will know what to do and how to prevent it (I guess :-), there is more then one way to fix this.
Axel
Dear Raul,
having looked at your posted stylus replacement link I see "replaces also 1000Z/EX-ERD" --- any idea if the -ERD is a different cart / body / performance to the 1000Z/EX?
I agree with Raul on the 1000ZE/X VTA to be VERY high, in fact more so than for the M20FL super.

I just comfirmed this, and it is my best sounding cart with this setting. This Empire sound pretty nice with lower VTA --- but REALLY comes into its own with the much higher setting.

Thank you for bringing my attention this Raul.
Greetings,
Axel
Well, in all fairness I think we are picking the pickings on the top of the MM/MI lot --- aren't we.

Some of these slightly greater (or lesser) likings are ALSO dependant on one's listening "tastes", as the difference between M20FL and 1000ZE/X is pretty minimal.
In fact the M20FL super sounded slightly more open compared to a "level-arm" 1000ZE/X.
So now the latter has a light edge with a little bit smoother treble presentation - for who can and will hear it...
Yet both of these sound more "natural" in my system then the best MCs I heard in my system. If you like it more "over-detailed" the MC is your pick for sure. "Chacun a son gout..."
OK, gentlemen let's have some comic relieve -- and let me call MY new love for this week coming.
I just replaced the 1000ZE/X with a Shure Type III VN35MR stylus (sounding better the SAS stylus in my rig).

I had NOT tried (dared to, MC conditioned?) to run this one with 4 - 5 mm pivot up and now I do. Well --- Raul, maybe you'd have to give this one another look at.

I all fairness, the last time I listened to it I ran my Pass X350.5 not in DC-coupled mode, and now I do (just 4 jumpers inside) as my ML 326S has little enough DC offset.

So, for now if the 1000ZE/X is a ~8 point? Then this stupid old Shure V15 III is clearly on number up in my rig.

It may help Downunder to get some relaxation for his cardiac system, as in fact (in my system) that Shure now sounds even better then my MP-50.
Now go figure :-)
Cheers,
Axel
Downunder,
here I have a "theory" about this weekly best cart happenings.
If you ever read Robert M. Pirsig "Zen and the Art..." and "Lila" you will have come across his MOQ stuff (the books are all about it actually).
He would say it is "Dynamic Quality" (the leading edge of perception) of a newly fitted cart that grabs your attention... until -
after about a week's worth of listening or so, it becomes "absorbed" into what he calls "Static Quality" (our reasoning, figuring it all out, etc.) and so it slowly starts to loose some of its "magic".

In his example he mentions music, some very nice tune, that initially grabs you, yet eventually become just that: a nice tune -- doesn't grab you any more as such, hm.
Axel
PS: MOQ = Metaphysics of Quality, Google it if you wish :-)
Dear Raul: Axel's is clearly the small one (shorter & thinner), by comparison only the Shure V15 III with VN35MR has the same small diameter alu tube, tho' a bit longer +/- 1/3.
The treble of this cart begs the theory that a longer cantilever produces less dynamics --- NOT SO. The much longer (tapered) cantilever in e.g. AT140LC confirms this also. (Maybe a case of resonances?)

BTW thickness (related to moving mass?) seems more of an indicator about lesser dynamic ability as I have noticed. The thicker the "mellower"?
Greetings,
Axel
PS: The Shure using my cable capacitance ~ 120pF only and 47k input impedance, 1g VTF and >4mm pivot up.
Pryso,
you are right the "theory" applies to everything we perceive and judge by our senses, includes women else there'd be no girly of the month in mags either.
Keeps things from getting boring, hm.
M20FL super is my pick of next week. Right now it beats all else. (I'm serious, Lewm knows what he's doing!) --- me going in circles?
Enjoy...
Axel
PS: I'm waiting for my M20E stylus to arrive so it may take me to a new COW (cart of week) experience, I'll be back.
Limp Bizkit --- no kidding, eh.
What's the recommended cart for that then I may inquire :-)
Denon 103?
Axel
Downunder,
some respondent i know in Malaysia prefers his Shure V15 III to the 1018, which in his system sounds too "bright" (brittle?).
The Empire 1000ZE/X sounds very much more "refined" (less forward?) the the Shure V15 III. So all being equal (which it never is...) the 1018 aught to sound a bit more bright (brash?) compared to the 1000ZE/X --- but I should think a bit less exiting too.
Let's see if this take will find some support.

My pick of the week changed (for today?) and is the AT-440ML which might be closer to the 1018? --- Let's see for how long I can take the added "exitement" of the more detailed presentation compared to the M20FL super.
Axel
PS: AT-440ML now also with ~4mm pivot up.
OK, M20E super stylus fitted to existing M20FL super body.
Sounds a tad more natural right through the audio band than the FL one, so I agree with Raul on that.

Is it a 2 point difference between the E and the ZE/X? I would not hear it this way in my system --- but I'll be back if it will change :-)
Axel
OK, M20E super will have to stay as it looks like right now, wow!
It is better then my MP-50! (less "mechanical" Raul would agree, I guess) and better than FL AND ZE/X (more "dynamic" Raul would not necessarily agree, I guess).
So Lewm, 99.99 bucks might be worth it, tho' we have rather different systems as we know.
Greetings,
Axel
Lewm,
Raul is absolutely correct in what he states - but of course for MM only!
As far as MCs are concerened it is the other way 'round and follows your argument.

Axel
PS: The clue is the *much* higher impedance of MMs.
Lewm,
you got the Porscheee, and the Merc - it's just a question of the best tyres, hm.
BTW, there is a re-vamp version for 1/2 price for that M20E stylus at LP-Gear.
I got mine in the Ortofon original package (by that german source) and that is $99... I have no idea about that E "after-market" version's quality performance but from the little experience I have this far, I'd go for the real thing.
That "E" is it! as far as I can tell, and as I mentioned it will stay so for some time.
Greetings,
Axel
Well, thanks Timtel, you put it pretty well and with regards to Lewm's question in deed (I hope he can agree by now!)

I also go along with Raul's tonearm/head-shell related experience.
In the SME V this M20E is just the most "balanced", "integrated" cart I heard to date. It has the most beautiful treble resolution heard with cymbals and the like, as well as the best width and depth to boot and in no way less (rather more) then the FL. The bass is also more tight, very similar to the MP-50's.
This creates the listening impression of more dynamics (faster transients) most noticeably by comparison with the ZE/X which sounds somewhat layed-back by comparison.
The "speed" of the "E" is that of the MP-50 yet it sounds less "jumped-up" (MC like) in the treble.
Is it back to boron cantilever behaviour for the MP-50 ?
It be interesting to hear an alu (or beryllium) tube cantilever MC just to see whether this is more then just coincident.
The only such item I know: the Blue Angel Mantis MC, the listening feedbacks seem to point in this direction also.
Greetings,
Axel
Lewm,
1) If you want more "air" = less roll-off, best use higher load with MM/MI. (Any added C tends to do more harm then help).

2) Those "recommended" ~higher C (250pF - 450pF) for MM/MI was *never* meant to "roll it off"!
MM/MI roll-off is already more so then with most MCs. It was to ensure a proper match and thereby get most "air" / treble rather then the opposit! (Older phono gear would provided this mostly by default)

3) I'd thought we talked about the effects on "listening" and not electrical theory... Raul had this in mind, so did Timetel and myself.

4) This does not explain why the "E" sounds more dynamic the "FL" --- yet don't even try theory to exlain it... it just does, with my arm, and pre not to forget please :-)
Axel
Lewm,
Pas du tout! De rien!

Wasn't it a scientific “truth” that: "the exception confirmes the rule"

The other item comes to mind: "It is a sign of higher intellect not to continue with an argument..." O.W.

(How nice to know we so many highly intelligent folks contributing :-)
Greetings,
Axel
Lewm,
yet I guess you just did aspired "higher" anyway, no one seems guilty of prolonging the argument.
"All is for the best in the best of worlds" aye.

Now let's see what master Raul with come up with next for us :-)
A.
Raul,
what you find about the 1080LT sounds exactly like my "Malaysia" source feedback. I had mentioned it before (but got the 1080LT twisted into a 1018..)

Question: Would that make for a similar performance compared to the MP-50? It sure sounds like it.

Axel
Dear Raul,
as to the 1080LT play-in time I have no exact information, other than the person had given it "a good try" comparable with his other tests.
It would support (along the line of common sense) that if a cart is lacking in "realness" / "lifeness" it is a tall order to listen to it for 30-50 hr!
In fact most folks would not find it very rewarding to do so --- it maybe your ears in the end being played in rather then the cart?! :-)
In my experience if a cart doesn't show the "right" sort of synergy in one's system, 30-50 hr (so my experience) usually makes little positive difference -- the basic characteristic is never changed as such.
If it sounds quite nice to start with it may get a bit better after a while yet - if something is lacking it hardly much changes that characteristic, AND in fact it may very well be more a system, then a cart issue.
Note: not every one can be good in every one's sack, aye?
Greetings,
Axel
Dear Raul,
interesting notion glueing in MM/MI styli...
The ONE! you missed in the fixed list is the MP-50 which is screwed in from both sides, hm. I'd be loath to glue it on top of it!
I do recall hearing the Shure V15 III glued-in giving a ~ better result. (Then what to do with that SAS stylus? :-)
In case one has some "doubles" (like yourself) gluing be not too daring I guess.
Like to hear what Lewm will come up with for this one -- "you can't always get what you want, but then some time and if you try... :-)
A.
Hi guys,
have been reading on and on about the bickering and also some, in deed, of more general interest? :-)
With so much other stuff out on the web and I still keep looking into my favoured audio-thread almost daily. Yes, no BS.
Alas due to personal circumstances (quadruple bypass a minor item as it turns out), I had a major mind-reboot. I guess this the main reason I been so *very* quite the last year and a half.
Keep it cooking. A pity I don't seem to see any female contributors other then the very odd sporadic one once a while ago.
It is a boys-toys affair after all, or? No offence to any girl(s) looking into the thread just as I do.
Keep up the good work,
now *Axelle* if you please :-)

PS: Yes, still very much alive and kicking
+++ Why then they [women] decided not participate on audio forums like Agon one?, especially that they have better " ears " ( frequency response range. ) than almost all of us. I think because they are on every day more creative and productive " work/job/subjects " than we are, IMHO the each day time has different priorities for the women than for us. +++
Raul, have hit the nail on the head... again. Thank you. Nicely put.
Yet still do enjoy what you guys are on about. A lot is over most girl's heads [not all!]. So we read, understand some - and not bother much about the rest, typical, yes?
"Toys for boys"? Can only listen to one cart at a time. How many good ones needed in box, 5, 10, 18? Rest is "hunting the mammoth" great fun, um. Glad all having fab time, include some bickering also :-)

Enjoy the MUSIC,
Axelle
Timtel, +++ Vive la différence! +++ hey.

You're one funny and most enjoyable "dude". And thanks for that "chic" complement, um. Seems you know me better then expected, hallo! Long distance intuition? OK we all know Raul's "the man" no surprises here.
Now some of that stuff mentioned like SO catches my fancy! Ouch! Got me just bowled over. Decidedly like SO must haves... Louis Vuitton et al, am drooling.
Mild MM/MI sprinkling on floor? Fine by me for those that done enough collecting by now. Why not?
Nice to have hip comment in between all those grants and gripes, not sure bickering was the right word? Too girly? Sorry.
Thanks for a good laugh and have a lovely day,
Axelle

PS: Keep it up (pun intended) might get bit of gender variation on this all male persuit - never say never :-)
Says Thuchan:
+++ No - there is no sex after marriage. +++
Such a comforting thought (to some of us...?)
And Raul,
Dear Thuchan: +++++ "we should also keep in mind that for three overprized cheap vintages... +++

Oh hell? So just go easy on the diamonds?
I do say that sucks, but then there you go. Can't have it all as we know --- (eventually).
Enjoy the music never the less,
Axelle :-)
Hi Timeltel
you may want to look up: "VTA setting for 'parabolic' and 'elliptical' styli"
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1244713018

Find some more insights and entertainment on the VTA subject.

I measured the VTA on my V15 III again, and it is 1.5mm negative/down with 180g records.

Funny, or expected if you wish, the measure comes to pretty level arm on 'normal' vinyl.
It is still so sparkling (with the MR stylus) that I could go more down, B U T using a SME-V arm, it would start to touch the vinyl (at the rear arm end) with 180g records.

This would require fitting a shim, throwing out everything, plus I'm not sure if the sound be affected.

Have you compared the MR to the SAS on your V15 III?

Greetings,
Axel
Hi Raul and All,
I have a question, that might help me to understand some of these MM 'issues'.
The guy that gave that A$R P77 to me (also V15 VN35MR) has replaced it with the relative new Ortofon OM 5E, their most affordable MM if I'm right.
e is convinced that it sounds much better than the former two mentioned.

In your opinion, can that be the case, and that OM 5E would be a further improvement on a P77, or would this indicate that he never got his alignments right?

Regarding the V15 VN35MR it might be easier to explain, since in my set-up it does not sound as coherent than he A&R P77. That V15 VN35MR sound more detailed, but seems to lack the coherent mid to bass of the P77 and sound more somehow a bit etched.

Anyone that can comment on that OM 5E? see under ---
http://www.ortofon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44&Itemid=64

Many thanks,
Axel
Halcro, you ask:
>>> ... did you receive the photos and technical information I sent you on the Garrott P77 by way of Email? <<<
Oh, yes! I did, and send you a reply also... was it lost in the mail?

In fact I'd asked you for a pic from the bottom of your P-77 so as to see the stylus and cantilever more clearly.
Meanwhile I could ascertain that the cantilevers are of the same construction (as in the A&R) -- an 'Aluminium Dual Tube' something I had not come across this far. I've no idea if the stylus shapes are different. The A&R uses originally, styli made by Dr. Ernst Weinz in Idar Oberstein, Germany.
When Dr. Weinz unexpectedly died, A&R were able to source UK made diamond styli from Expert Pickups in the UK.
Any idea where the 'Brothers' sourced theirs?

Thanks again,
Axel
Hi All,
I got another dose of anti-MM yesterday and it brings about my question:
Has the better 'fit/sound/match/etc.' of these MMs to do with the 'inability' of 60dB plus phono-stages to 'truly' resolve the much smaller MC signals, than the one offered by an MM?

The argument is, that most 60dB plus stages use 'inadequate technology' to do MCs 'justice' i.e. using op-amps and even if discrete components --- not good enough also with most all of them MC stages...
The problem (if it is such) is not present using only 40dB step-up stages, all of the 'tricky' 60-78dB step-up stuff is simply eliminated.

So, only some of the VERY TOP MC stages would actually qualify to do 'justice' to carts like 'Titan i', Orpheus, DV drt xv-1s/t, etc. etc.?
Alan Wright's phono-stage seems to qualify I'm told, and it seems way 'under the radar' and is not even mentioned in the: "Stand out phono stages" thread! http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1195322402&openfrom&70&4

With 40dB for MMs we can happily use tubes only also, going higher starts to get VERY EXPENSIVE to do MCs any justice, or?
Hybrid tube stages with almost unobtainable JFETs in the first stage...
Is that why my (and most every one else's) MC stage sux, and why MM is the way to go --- IF you like to listen to music rather then 'over-contrasted' un-real Hi-End MC sound only?
I really can't say, but I can say that my currently running S1000 ZE/X Empire sound CLEARLY better than the Orpheus I listened to... and what about Rauls PC-1 argument that comes to mind?

So is it, that if I do not spend >$10 000 on the phono-stage (you know all the contenders) I better stick with a top MM?
Raul, has one pretty snazzy phono-stage/pre-amp as I know --- who else can shed some light on this argument?

Also, I 'dumped' my previous stage in favour of one integrated into my pre-amp, better power supply, no extra cables, no extra connectors, better screening, etc. etc.
Have I gone the 'wrong way' like --- MM only now?

Not that I'm complaining, but I'd be very interested to hear some expert comments on this one, since I'm getting close to sell off my PW MC when ever I get it back. Lest I have another $10k plus to spend on a 'commensurate' phono-stage, which by DEFFINITION will NOT EVER be able to reside inside my or ANY pre-amp, as I understand it.

Greetings,
Axel
PS: To hell with all that misleading review MC stuff if the above said holds any truth. Eish!
Hi Timeltel,
so you still do like your type III, I can't blame you :-)

I still haven’t received my SAS and now having 'discovered' this –negative- VTA bit with my VN35MR.

I guess I should have known all the time, but as I stated in another thread on VTA, in the late 70s early 80s when I had the exact same cart no one ever seemed to talk about VTA.
I think it was then, that most folks used conical and elliptical styli at best ---- Micro Ridge, Shiabata, Fine-Line wow! Who had that?

Well *I* had this MR, but didn't know even what VTA was if I recall, and so with most every one else (in my part of the world).

And so we learn, but I like to ask you if that SAS can still do MORE than the MR?
It is pretty hard for me to imagine actually --- I did read the reports on the SAS, but recall I decided to go for it when that 'wrong' VTA made that MR cart sound just too harsh.

Now it sounds like you described it with that SAS stylus, how’s that?

Greetings,
Axel
PS: Best cart in my system for my ears this far... and it's an MM!
Timeltel,
>>> Regarding the V15VxMR, the cartridge seemed so designed for a specific voice, I had difficulty pinpointing VTA <<<

In my case it needs to be negative (down arm) VTA/SRA from my normal spacer ~ (1/2") 12.7mm to ~ 8,7mm = 4mm delta, and equal to about 2.5mm negative.
Without this, that V15 III VN35MR sounds very aggressive in the treble.
Due to my SME V arm's down limitation it is as low as I can go thereby I a have no difficulty in 'pinpointing' VTA in this scenario... :-)

I was **hoping** that SAS could do with some negative VTA.

Please keep us posted on your further findings.
Thanks,
Axel
Dear Raul:
have you found using a spacer can work between cart and head shell? Or will it mess with the cart/arm match i.e. not a recommended fix for very low arm positions required?

>>> capacitance/impedance/VTA <<<
Only VTA will be able to 'tame' treble as I understand. Capacitance and/or increased impedance will cause treble to increase, even if only above the audio band, but not recommended as I understand.

Regards and enjoy,
Axel
Raul,
y.s.:
>>> you are using those VTA spacers. <<<
Hard-wood block spacer, ONLY to set up the V arm, I.E. a measurement spacer between arm-rest and bottom of the arm-base, 9.8mm to be exact. I then just pull it out from under the arm after the arm height is adjusted. I hope this clears up this misunderstanding.

As to 100k ---- that M20FL has jolly good HF extension at 47k, and very little if any less then the best MC I heard in my system, but 'some' MC could have a bit more 'magic' from HF, maybe?
I have ~ 100pF from arm cables to phono-boards and having increased only by very little, it does only bad things to the sound (more etched).
Knowing the 100k is just a more benign form of raising HF extension/performance, and I would have to mess with surface mount devices, I guess it is fine, or better then putting 50k in the signal path to reach 97k.
More R in the signal path?
I know first hand what resitors can do to the sound! So far ONLY NOS Tantalum Shinko non-magnetic was ~ acceptable.
Note also! Some spec. says that 20k! load should be used with M20FL super!!!? How about that?
Hm,
Hi,
I am currently using one of my 'old' MMs, the Empire 1000ZE/X. (Still awaiting my Windfeld replacement back from Ortofon).

That said, I'm still curious what any of the currently available Ortofon MMs sound like when comparing with some of those much older MMs. Development of MMs, at least in theory, should not have stopped, or in deed gone backwards --- or has it?

Or is it that any 'good' MM will simply cost now as well many times the price of most of those discussed in the thread ~ >2k$?

We are also now seeing top MMs with mostly boron cantilevers and Shiabata stylus rather then Elliptical styli and alu-tube cantilever...
It this actually an 'improvement', or simply going with the current trend of what is used on MCs?

Some say, that a case can be made for alu-tube type cantilevers in terms of resonance behaviour when compared to that little hard stick of boron. When beryllium, also titanium was still used it was also a tube, yes?

Any thoughts on these questions?
Thanks,
Axel
Howdy All,
Frogman you do have come up with the same explanation I did (and posted in various threads), but here comes the 'problem': I like to overcome it by using an SUT with my 0.3mV Windfeld.

Raul is no friend of SUTs in general, neither in particular, we know each other's take, agree to differ and have some 'bliss'.

Now I have received my NEW (replacement) Windfeld back from Ortofon after 3 months wait and SOME exercise in patience and then some.

I have replaced my Empire S1000ZE/X MM with the Windfeld MC and am listening right now.

Frogman, your point about transient speed and resolution is right-on as well -------- of course MUSIC is not ONLY about speed and detail. It is where those good MMs score, plain and simple.

Right now I have to go against my urge to take that Windfeld out again and put back the Empire ---- in all fairness I will TRY not do that, as I have to give that 'poor' 4k$ MC cart at least a chance of a couple of hours playing in, yes.

The point however is: how these MMs beat the socks of these 'transient & resolution master MCs' and I am playing it with an SUT! (which aught to slow it some). Without SUT, I would have a hard time to listen for 20 - 30 hours of transient-speed and high resolution detail, with a shortfall of MUSIC. It sort of pisses me off actually.

A very well regarded phono & pre-amp designer (Allen Wright) once mentioned how EVERY ELECTRON counts when you want top performance from a LOMC and I believe he knows what he is talking about.

This, Frogman, gets back to your phono-pre take and the very low voltages the phono-pre has to work with when running LOMC. In the case of MMs there is no counting of electrons indicated by having 10 to 20 times more output voltage.

I'll see for how long I'll go with the Windfeld, though right now it sounds just too 'mechanical' and lacking the liquidity and musical flow of the Empire.

I'll be back with more some time later.
Cheers,
Axel
Hi all,
yes, lots of things seem to play into it. For my setup, it's all SS, it ALWAYS just seems to sound more 'complete' when I run MM or MI.

It is a weird thing, that MC seems to have 'everything' more in terms of transient-speed and -resolution- of sorts, maybe 'false' resolution?
But at the same time there is something 'missing' with MCs and I think it has to do with lack of 'harmonic completeness'.
Rationally all seems to be there, but emotionally, subjectively, it sounds too perked up and slightly bleach in my SS system, highlighted/exaggerated and yet somehow ‘empty’ at the same time, actually just NOT the way real music sounds.

I guess if I had all tubes it might easily be very different.
Incidentally I use the exact same phono-pre gain for both MC and MM (60dB) but change the input gain of my ML pre-amp instead (+ or - 18dB), if I use MC without SUT.

The trouble with all this guess work --- only the ear can notice the difference. Currently available measuring technique is not able to help pin it down, it's too subtle for measurement.
Axel
Hi,
a quick report back on SAS stylus for V15 III cart. It is *hyper* resolved, but I can not go enough down with my SME V arm to get at least to 'level arm' position. (last band is lifting the arm out of the groove)

So far the V15 III with SAS is the only cart that can track my most difficult LP band see comment: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1245595534&openflup&65&4#65

Therefore currently I'm back with Windfeld and XF-1 tranny, (without any resistive loading) whilst awaiting an SME V arm shim as to obtain more VTA travel.
Cheers,
Well Lewm,
since I find the exact same words for it all as Raul did, (of course I do not manufacture any Hi-end equipment as such) you may add a pair of Burmester 961 to your enquiry, if we’d stick with speakers.
Following add the X350.5 Pass and ML326S preamp.

I think I'm repeating myself, but what you are getting at is what I mentioned a few time before: -the apparently favourable match between SS gear and MM-.
EVERYTHING that Raul experiences is my listening experience too, to the dot and pretty uncanny that is.

MCs are great (the good ones!) but MM do just more for the music, that simple and that controversial?
It may have something to do with what some call: "completeness of the harmonic train".

Greetings,
Axel
Hi Lewm and All,
>>> He [Axel] has been absent from this thread for a while.<<<

Not really, McKillRoy is watching you :-)
I just don't feel like adding non-relevant info to an already very long thread.

>>> I think Axel also likes the M20FL, but I don't know what he has compared it to.<<<

Firstly, the "FL" stands for "Fine Line". This cart has been originally designed for Quadro playback and as such it has no problem to track a 40kHz Quadro groove information, therefore it has RANGE.
I go along with some earlier comment that it is ever so slightly on the "gentler" side of dynamics. YMMV

I'm currently comparing it with a Shure V15 III with original VN35MR (MR = Micro Ridge) stylus.
The Shure is a bit "faster" yet doesn't have the delicacy of the M20FL in the treble.

I have also checked this Shure with the SAS replacement stylus, this "corrects" the slightly more grainy treble of the original VN35MR, alas is no match in the bass performance of the original MR stylus.

That SAS stylus is also somewhat shorter (a Boron cantilever inserted into the alu tube). This makes the cart ride very, very low, meaning that a rather low ending mounting bolt would touch a thick-ish label when at the end of record. In my system the original VN35MR is my preferred stylus compared to the SAS one.

Greetings,
Axel
Hi Lewm,
>>> slightly on the "gentler" side of dynamics,<<< ain't exactly "SLOW" as you read it. I can't recall having said that s~l~o~w . . .

I also think *your* description sounds fine by me.
My rig:
SME 10, SME V, and SS phono-boards in a ML-326S, using silver hybrid SME phono cable (vdH, ~70pF capacitance.

I agree 100% with what you call "bloom", and it may well be that within this "cloud of beauty" some of what I called: slightly on the "gentler" side of dynamics, resides.

Compare it to the Shure V15III, VN35MR, that cart clearly has "attack"! and there ain't such a thing as "attacking bloom" either, at least it be a new one for me :-)

So as the earlier commentator posted, the M20FL is of great delicate detail, high resolution, but all in all on the more gentle side, which I can hear as well.
In fact, it is mostly the kind of tuning that Ortofon seems to go in for when looking back over a number of their carts that I listened to.

It will be interesting to hear by you, if you consider a M20FL to be a cart with "great attack" (i.e. very high transient speed). If so, then can a cart like the Shure be too fast? No! not possible I say, but it would well be the case of harmonics, which was also mentioned by the previous poster, and I can go fine by that too.

It would mean that the Shure have more odd order harmonics which makes it sound "faster" but also more brash.

Greetings,
Axel
Lewm,
it may be of interest that *ALL* M20FL super characteristics you mentioned are exactly as I find them:
- bigger image
- more "real" or more pleasing piano tone
- makes known good LPs sound fantastic
- more vivid

Note: >>> cannot fault the calmer and very accurate presentation of the MC7500, <<<

I personally fault the Windfeld for being colder and less involving. So much so, that some records sound just plain boring, though very resolved.
Playing the same LP with the M20FL brings the apparently "dead" record to life, so they can go back into my "handy", close by, collection and not one floor up in a shelve.
Greetings,
Siniy123,
Beryllium has the best "inner damping" (very low density i.e. very light and stiff) of known metals or metalloids (like boron) in use for e.g. dome tweeter caps as mentioned.

So, yes it is superior even to diamond in these applications. But why bother?! It is not being used anymore for cantilever applications due to it's highly poisonous dust. In fact the next best damped material is Alu in form of single tubes or even double tubes as e.g. used in the P-77.

My point again, a boron-stick has a less "real" sound and it is more of late (20-25 years?) that all went for this "glare-y" presentations and then we call it “resolution”!
Sooner or later this will be overcome I'm quite sure.
In fact it is not only piano that sounds more real with the M20FL, also percussions, drum skins of tympani etc., and all string instruments are noticeably sounding more natural.
These plain boron-sticks (and MC construction?) just sounds like some over-exposed copy by comparison.
This would be the case *with any* resolving reasonably un-coloured back-end, as Raul tried to explain. Tubes will just wash over all the added odd harmonics by their own even order harmonics preference, thus creating some more balance I guess.
Greetings,
Lewm,
y.s.: "Have you guys heard the A90?"

Frankly *WHY SHOULD I BOTHER*, true it may sound better then their until then best of breed (Windfeld), and now this A90 with only 400 made --- welcome to that marketing spiel!

If I listen to the M20FL (to stay with this right now), we are so stretching getting not even the same sound experience from this > 10x the money cart... That really begs the question --- big time! (At least for me, and as always YMMV :-)

The MP-50 I ordered has that hybrid construction (as have the SAS replacement styli for the V15) Boron-stick inserted into an Alu-tube-end. Even there I actually find the original VN35MR (all alu) cantilever clearly more close to "natural" sounding. All this maybe of course pure coincident, but having heard Lyras, Axia, Orpheus, etc. yet more coincidents? (And NOT only in my system!)
The SA cart maker Angel Blue Mantis also had decided to stay away from boron, hm --- now he may have changed as business may require such to be offered. His alu cantilever carts had A LOT of rave reviews (they are all MCs, aye). Now go figure.

J.Carr (Lyra) may be able to shine some light into this “can of worms”, but he is conspicuously absent from this MM/MI thread, hm.
Greetings,
Hi,
something came up for me after listening, comparing, and the reading what J. Carr had to say about his new cart --making better "distinctions".
You may look it up on this thread: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1258844370 it is about his new MC cart, but an interesting insight into sonic distinctions.
He is explaining about most carts "homogenising" details and I have to agree with him.
Since the MP-50 is closer in presentation to my Windfeld I did a quick cross-check between those two and the MP-50 clearly makes much better "distinctions".
This is what Lewm is also talking about when reviewing the M20FL, yet those two carts have a rather different presentation as mentioned earlier.

At that level the more "distinctions" a cart can produce, the more life-like the reproduction, where I completly agree with J. Carr.
Greetings,
Axel
>>> Garrott P77 is back in production <<<
Anyone ready to go for a test, comparing e.g. to M20FL and MP-50?!
Tell me it betters those two and I'll be VERY tempted in deed :-)
(or are we getting a bit reckless here?)
Timtel,
y.s.: >>> Axel, when next you align for your M20FL, strap on your V15/SAS without lowering the VTA.<<<

If I understand you right, you are saying the M20FL needs quite some heel- / bearing-up / VTA. In deed, it is what I found myself to be the case, more substantial then *any* of my other carts. (Not sure about my A&R P-77 though)

I'm not on the same page with you concerning the SAS35 for the V15-III. I think the original VN35MR sounds better by comparison. Also I do not like the changed geometry i.e. a much shorter cantilever then the original!
I find the bass performance of the SAS not to be up to the VN35MR (original), the treble is slightly more refinde though.
This *may* be set-up related, and is why I'm sharing my findings.
Axel
Dear Raul,
I read this refresh with some interest. I had a Dorian re-tip with Jan Allaerts (ex-apprentice to vdH… long ago). So looking at the cost is something else. In this case Euro 900.00, THAT is "where dog lays buried" (German saying). Not sure if you can give some $$$ idea here, but if the refresh is more than the new item (as was the case with that Dorian) I would not recommend it given my own experience. It was good but not THAT good, aye.
Greetings,
Axel
Downunder,
>> ... Ortofon M20FL Super - arse slightly up, got that.<<
Well, if you'd ask me it's quite A LOT up! In fact (measured at the arm post) about 5mm, and that certainly is more then "slightly" in my book.
That cart is ~ 2.5mm less in height then most others. So having the arm about level with say a ~18mm height cart, I'd leave it right there for a start. The M20FL will now be "dipping" nose down, creating a relative large tail-up position.
Also looks OK, if you check the stylus (SRA) position.
With out "substantial" tail-up the cart sounds pretty sat-on, at least in my rig, where I usually use "lightly" tail up with just about every other of my carts.
Let us know what your findings are, it'd be ineresting to know.
Thanks,
Axel
Now after all this M20FL.... talk, and Raul's cursory mention that the Ortofon A90 is not going to change his opinion about the MM/MI's by comparison, I wonder if anything at all will transpire of Mike Levine’s intended testing of these MI's (M20FL & MP-50) in his rigs.
As far as I go, I had another couple of days with my Windfeld in various settings and must say I'm happily back with my M20FL and MP-50.
I'm posting this here rather, then incur the wroth of these A90 lovers since they do not really like to hear of anyone that has not purchased and listened to one A90, hm.
Go figure... (don't talk about Ferrari if you ain't got one, right so)
Axel
Is anyone actually reading the Pioneer statement provided by Timetel?
It is the different resonance behaviour between MM/MI and MC that causes this different behaviour. There are multitudes of graphs on the web to document this.

To consider the C's behaviour with out considering the cartridge construction is strange for me to behold...

I have added C of between 100 - 300pF and the result was a grainy kind of INCREASED treble.
BTW, this size of C does practically NOTHING to an MC, only some 10nF (~ > 100x) will start to show up. IF an SUT is used it's a different matter again, but we are not talking about that right now.

So the cleanest way to increase MM/MI treble is by increasing input impedance (e.g. Raul's 100k), the increased C does ~THE SAME, yet unless some "silvered mica" caps are used, it will sound clearly more grainy.
Seems to me we now do have two schools of hearing...
Axel