How does one mourn the needless and mindless destruction of a not-even-broken-in stylus for the Empire D4000iii? Good thing I didn't like it that much, but I did want to try it out on my newly acquired epa 100 mkii tonearm before rendering final judgment. Alas, not meant to be.
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.
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.
Showing 50 responses by banquo363
Not for the fainthearted, inebriated or twitchy--or, heaven forbid, any of those in combination. The cart had a muddy bottom end that drove me crazy, and it was deficient in dynamics. I would switch between Empire and the Azden or the AT 20SS and the differences especially in dynamics were like night and day. The Azden has what you might call over-exuberant or 'colored' bass but it could be tamed by playing with the VTA; I haven't had the 20SS for long but it is fantastic straight up. Both just as alive sounding as the Empire was dead. For that matter, right now I'm listening to Stan Getz/Astrud Gilberto with a Denon 103, and even though it's giving me a slight headache due to its bright in-your-face sound, at least it's fun. The Empire was never fun for me. To be clear/fair though the problems I had with the Empire might be due to several different causes, none of which impugn the cart. It might be a bad match with the tonearm I'm currently using. That's why I was saving final judgment until I mounted my epa 100. It could be break-in period--I had only about 25 hours or less on it. Worst of all, it could be I had a 'fake' stylus (even though I bought it as genuine NOS). It looks exactly like the others that are judged authentic, but evidently Empire had some unscrupulous practices in their day, so who knows. This last reason is why I'm not keen on replacing the stylus even though there's a shop in the Netherlands that purports to carry the 'cross my heart, hope to die' authentic stylus. ...Now if it had been my Azden stylus, I wouldn't even be out of bed, let alone typing, the self-loathing would have been too great to overcome. |
Frogman: nice description of the two carts. I don't have the audio vocabulary or conceptual sophistication to articulate what I'm hearing. But some of how you described the Azden is how I would describe the Empire. Particularly the bit about sameness of tonal color. Also, rhythmically, the Azden for me is virtually unbeatable. Perhaps that stems from the bass qualities you describe. I listened to Billy Idol's 'Eyes without a Face' with the Azden and that song's bass line, which I've heard a million times, never sounded so alive and compelling. But I hardly ever listen to rock nowadays, so my assessment is not based on that preference. Mahler's 9th: same judgment. Getz/Gilberto: same judgment. Coltrane at the Village Vanguard: same judgment. That said, I'm certainly not debating with anyone who believes it's first rate; I just couldn't get it to work in my set up. And if you are right about the Empire's extreme sensitivity to geometry, then that might also explain what I heard as well: I don't spend an inordinate amount of time on geometry. Although I did fidget with the Empire more than I usually do. I tried all manner of SRA's and VTF's, but to no avail. To be clear: I've made caveats to my assessment of the Empire and it shouldn't be taken as my final one, especially since my current set up is only temporary. Raul has said it would be a great match with the epa100 and that might motivate me to buy a new stylus. We'll see. Which gets to my answer to Lewm: as you might recall, my sp10 is in purgatory and so I'm borrowing a Sony 2251 (which is a direct drive Sony brought out to compete with the sp10--or so I've read). No one really knows what tonearm came with that table but even if it were known, I'm not sure whether the tonearm that's on there now is the original. If it were mine, I would try harder to find out, but as things are I have no real incentive. |
Yes, Lew, it's definitely a Sony tonearm. The vintage knob has pictures of both the 2250 and 2251 and the arm on the 2250 is the one I have, even though I have a 2251. I suspect you're right and the arm was too heavy with the Empire. I played around with different headshells for a bit but basically gave up because life is too short and that cart is not trivial to mount due to its very thin sheet metal. I had to source super short screws so I could mount it on my AT headshell, and I discovered how worthwhile that was. No way it's as good as the sp10, IMO, but John Nantais asserts in this thread that the 2250 "slaughters" the sp10 when appropriately plinthed. So what do I know. Of course, the one I have is not plinthed in the Nantais way, and my sp10 doesn't even have a plinth! http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1157059532&openfrom&601&4#601 |
Dear Nandric: God, if such there be, would indeed provide me with timely alerts on available MM carts, because s/he is omnibenevolent. Even if it should increase the asking price for any particular person, God, if such there be, wouldn't care, for s/he cares for all equally and not any particular person. In any case, I shouldn't object since, even though I search eBay every day, I'm not omniscient and therefore am ignorant of untold cartridges that would benefit me to possess. Moreover, if S/He, if such there be, should be perusing eBay for self benefit, then who am I to complain since it is, after all, and as atlasiris asserts, “no match for the pleasure of listening to a nice cart.“ Carry on, divinity, carry on. |
Chris is right, I believe. Light is good for the marketplace; mystery helps perpetuate less than rational bidding. In the past 6 months (prices are off the top of my head) I've paid: Empire 4000diii cartridge body: $20 Empire 4000diii NOS stylus: $79 AT 15sa w/20ss stylus: $280 Signet TK5ea cartridge body: $99 AT 155lc stylus: $180 Azden ym p50vl: $270 Azden ym p20e NOS: $25 Shure ml140he cartridge body: $35 Shure ml140he NOS stylus: $99 Incidentally, all purchases were made as a consequence of reading this thread. I love and loathe it at the same time. |
For me, the amount of money I spent on MM in the last 6 months would have been inconceivable a year ago. I would have scoffed at the very idea of it. Things of course have changed. Whether I would have been better of buying 1 killer MC cart is a legitimate question but doesn't really apply in my case because I'm new to the audio game and wanted to try a variety of reasonably decent, viz. Raul recommended, carts just to educate myself. My current end game is not to achieve the best sound because I don't know and cannot currently articulate in a substantive way what that is. But even if I could, it wouldn't be clear what the rational choice is. Take an analogy with restaurants. I know people who save up a long time to be able to dine at the very best restaurants in the world, e.g. el Bulli, French Laundry. On my view, that money is better spent on dining at many second tier but still excellent restaurants. The 'best' is not always the most choiceworthy. Who's correct? I don't know, but it's far from obvious that the latter is wrong. I thought Chris's whole point was to make public current purchasing prices so as to keep people from overpaying or getting ripped off because of ignorance. If someone persists and pays the exorbitant price anyways, well, price matches informed desire and there's nothing really to complain about. |
As if this is not enough you are also teasing me with Hegel. I have read all the 600 pages of his 'Science of logic' but was not able to understand one Paraphrasing an eminent contemporary philosopher, "Hegel is long and life is short: I choose life." Nikola, I have an example of an even greater act of futility: I read nearly 2000 pages (3 volumes) of Hegel's 'Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion' without fully comprehending even 1 page. On the other hand, discussing it made for good fun because one could say just about anything and no one would try to contradict since no one understood enough to construct a cogent counterargument. |
Re my "thoroughbreds": Will someone please buy that friggin' L07D that's for sale on the 'gon? It bothers me that no one will pay that incredible bargain price. I was actually going to email you about that tt Lewm. I believe you have 2 of them (!) and therefore must think highly of them. Is it significantly better than a sp10 mkii? Had I not already just bought a tonearm for my sp10, I would have given buying the L07D serious consideration. That the latter does not really permit other tonearms is a bummer and a deterrent--even if the original tonearm is good. It's actually not listed anymore. Just as well; it'll save me from perusing that listing EVERY DAY. |
on the replacement stylus for empire d3 i am having not much luck locating one that looks like the picture of yours in your review of d3. not giving up yet though. The shop in the Netherlands at the link I posted above has it or at least had it 3 months ago when I was looking for it. I sent them pics to confirm. |
Dear Raul, May I remind you that Socrates was executed for pestering his fellow citizens, constantly urging them that their current point of view requires testing and that upon testing were always found short of the mark. Regardless of culture, it's fairly clear that few like to be told that they live in a cave amongst shadows, unable to witness the Good, the True and the Beautiful. I'm not saying I agree with any particular judgment of yours (although, truth be told, your advice has helped me immensely) but am only remarking on an attitude, the desire to educate, and the typical reaction it receives, namely, disdain. |
Griffithds: Stereoneedles has the at155lc stylus for significantly less than the price you state, so buy there instead if you go that direction. I bought mine from them. Also, the p-mount adapter I bought on ebay was a very mediocre solution to the problem I had with my Azden. I eventually bought a lower model azden just so I could have an original adapter. BTW: if you're looking to buy the ym p50vl, there's a NOS on audiogon right now. Good opportunity. |
"When you start to believe that your church is the 'one true way', you will know you have a real church." Science is like that, no? Or certainly some scientists and non-scientists believe it to be the 'one true way'. There is even a name for such a view: scientism. On this very forum, there are those who deny the value of aesthetic perception (not in those words, of course) or pejoratively refer to it as 'subjective' or 'illusory' in the absence of verifiable testing/measurements or a scientific account. As if offering a scientific account somehow magically confers value. Cable discussions, for example, are rife with this tendency. Then there are those who refer to physics just to scare the children on the (often correct) assumption that it will silence the opposition. It often works because who, amongst us scientists and wannabe scientists, dares to oppose the church of physics? What does this have to do with MM carts? Who knows--but someone brought up the idea of religiosity :). |
Dear Raul, T-Bone, Dlaloum: To be clear, T-bone, I certainly am not denying the relevance and importance of science to our hobby. That would be crazy. I marvel everyday at the music I hear from my system (and other’s) and am truly grateful to all the engineers and scientists who make it possible. My point is that there are scientific concerns and questions and then there are aesthetic concerns and questions. In our hobby, the answers to the latter need to take into account the answers to the former. However, there’s no intellectual trajectory such that once all the scientific questions are answered there is no more need to ask the aesthetic ones. Put another way: an assessment of the goodness of the sound expressed by a cartridge is not wholly determined by recourse to science, to its standards and methods. It involves, to name but a few factors, audiophile culture and the history of criticism in the audiophile community. Devotees of the ‘church of physics’ deny all this: investigation into history and culture is but a stopgap and amusing diversion until 'we' physicists/neurobiologists/what have you are done with our work. The distinction between objective and subjective is very difficult to get a handle on. It is a mistake, I think, to believe that just because our hobby is not dictated by objective science (the error of scientism) then that makes the hobby subjective in the pejorative sense (the other error of scientism). By ‘subjective in the pejorative sense’ I mean ‘standardless’ or ‘governed only by personal preference’. This is the sense, Raul, that you are objecting to with your 2+2=4 example. I agree with you wholeheartedly that there are objective standards by which we can evaluate, say, a cartridge’s goodness. I submit however that such standards are not given to us and dictated by science, but rather are built out of the experiences and judgment of the members of the audiophile community. There exist authorities in our hobby and they are not so merely because they know more science. The best equipment makers are not merely good engineers but after all the measurements are taken, they listen and listen well. To be sure, there is a sense of ‘subjective’ that applies to our hobby: an objective and complete account of our hobby must take into account and make reference to psychological subjects, i.e. us. That makes it different from physics, the laws of which don’t make essential reference to us. But to grant this sense of subjectivity is not to force us to accept that 2+2=5. I mean everyone is, in the political sense, free to believe that a 3rd rate cartridge is as good as an AT 20ss or to believe, to vary David’s example, that their child’s fingerpainting is just as good as Guernica. But by the relevant objective standards governing the respective domains, whatever they are or turn out to be, such judgments are mistaken—and that is a fact. This is connected to religiosity via Dostoyevsky (and Nietzsche’s madman) in the following way: if god does not exist then everything is permissible. This means, I take it, that in the absence of a universally applicable standard to support, guide and vindicate our actions and beliefs, there are no standards at all—we can do and believe anything we wish. This is a non-sequitur, both in the case of god and in our case: human beings and audiophiles have managed to govern themselves just fine without god and physicists, respectively, vindicating our judgment. |
Griffithds: How did you accomplish this? I've read about this before and in fact the guy I bought my azden cart from cut off the pins from the p-mount adapter and said he attached his leads through the hole and directly onto the cartridge pins. For the life of me, I couldn't get any leads I had to make it through the holes. Are you just crimping them on the very short length of cartridge pin that sticks out beyond the hole in the adapter? If so, you are getting a sufficiently tight connection this way? To get them to go tightly around the thin cartridge pins, there's no going back for the leads since the ends are now unusable for any other cart (too small). Right? Or is there some other way I'm not imagining? |
Thank you Griffithds! Done. I tried your xacto knife idea and while I couldn't cut off the square (that plastic is very hard), I thinned it out enough to make drilling the 4 holes an easy proposition. I've listened to only one side of a record after the surgery (it was late) but I got a much more natural and relaxed sound than I've ever gotten with this cart. It's giving the AT 20ss a serious run for its money. |
Acman3: neither. I was just an unaffiliated messenger. Seemed like something who reads this thread would want, so I passed on the info. Evidently someone wanted it badly. I am not a cart collector and I have many more than I can use as it is, e.g. I've barely listened to a NOS Shure ml140he that I found 6 months ago. And yet I keep reading this thread with interest. ??? |
Dear Nandric: The English owner's manual for the P8 'system' asserts 'complete interchangeability'. VE also has the German version of the manual, so if you could read it and tell us whether the German has the same phrase, that would be helpful. If it does, then going from your own experience with the non-interchangeability of the x8e with the P 8es cart, the manual is mistaken in its claim of completeness. However, we know from Timeltel that the x8s stylus fits the P8e cartridge. So, there is some interchangeability. |
dear Lewm: I like my audio technica headshells (ls 12, mg 10, and some other 9 gram one I don't know the model for). They all seem to work just fine with my MM carts. I take the finger lifts off. Be careful with picking these as some have azimuth and overhang adjustment and some don't. The adjustment is useful but some, e.g. Henry, believe it is a compromise in rigidity. There's a ms9 (9.5g) on ebay right now if you're interested (no affiliation). That seller seems to have a never ending supply of vintage headshells, although I've never seen a ms9 before. |
with those AT MG series headshells, as you note, there seems to be no capacity for fine adjustment of overhang, because one is forced to use one of several discrete pairs of threaded inserts to mount the cartridge. I had been wondering whether they compensated for this obvious (and for me, deal-killer) shortcomings by allowing for some fore and aft movement at the rear of the headshell, where it grips the cylindrical mount for the tonearm. Apparently not. What were they thinking? That's when a tonearm pod comes in handy. :) As I mentioned, there are AT headshells (aluminum block, I believe, with damping rubber (?) integrated into the top of the shell) that allow for the kind of adjustment you describe. The ls12 is one such kind, as is the ms9 I referenced above. They are equally, if not more, beautiful. |
Dear Nandric: Perhaps you'll appreciate the following. I had a personal rule that had prohibited me from acquiring another cartridge, and it 'worked' for a year or so. The night before though, I went to sleep after having read the TAS's review of the AT 150mlx. I must have dreamt about cartridges all night long because when I awoke, I had a running fever to buy a cartridge. That fever, in conjunction with the general one induced by this thread, caused me to hyperventilate and violate my principle when I saw the mf200. From this we can conclude 2 things. As a general rule of thumb, don't go to sleep after reading a glowing audio review. Secondly, passion is motivationally stronger than principle and the only reason my principle 'worked' for a year is because the fever wasn't strong enough. As a corollary, we can't be trusted to act on rules of our own devise. Kant must have been wrong then to make that the foundation of morality. The cartridge I got is not exactly a mf200 but rather a hybrid. If Mike is right (thanks, Mike), then the value is not quite the same. If the cart doesn't measure up, then the search is on for a mf200 body. |
Dear Griffithds, The same thing happened to me on a shipped Empire 4000d3. The guy put the cart loose in a small coffee tin with a bunch of styrofoam. He didn't put the stylus guard up and surprise, surprise the entire cantilever was sheared off. Luckily, I had a NOS stylus and the cartridge body was usuable, so I asked for a partial refund, which he gave without question. Now, your case is open and shut, I think, as far a Paypal is concerned. He sent you delicate electronic equipment in a laughably poor package and it arrived broken and unusable. No way was it Fedex's responsibility, so that only leaves the seller. So what you can do is tell the seller that unless he refunds the amount of money Axel will charge to fix the cart, you will ask Paypal to refund the entire amount that you gave him (you'll have to return both carts). Your case is complicated since presumably you want to keep the Astatic and the Empire stylus, and plus the extortionist $70 shipping might not be refunded. He seems open to help pay for the repair. Now all you have to do is leverage Paypal to get him to pay for the entire amount. Obviously, ask for payment once you get the quote and before you ship it off to Axel. |
At least in regards to eBay purchases, I was told last year (by someone who sells on eBay every day) that an open Paypal dispute results in automatic safe harbor of funds transferred. Funds are released only after adjudication. If that holds true of non eBay purchases such as yours, then that's to your advantage. If you used a credit card to fund payment, then you can always involve them. |
Peter Bogdanovich once interviewed Orson Welles and asked a question about his great, and greatly ignored, film "Chimes at Midnight". IIRC, Bogdanovich pointed out an anomalous artifact occurring at the corner of the screen in one of the scenes and wondered about Welles' intention in 'framing' the scene that way. Welles just laughed and remarked that if the audience is concentrating on the corner of the screen while watching his movies then all is lost. Mutatis mutandis, one could argue the same about a cartridges' ability to highlight recording artifacts, such as those that Montepilot nicely described. Whether that capacity is a virtue depends on one's targets (a term I borrow from Raul). If one's aim is to excavate and highlight each and every thing that's in the grooves, then MC presumably has the advantage. However, IMO, that kind of detail retrieval distracts and detracts from the larger picture and from the overall musical coherence. I've never left a concert (the target of live music) remarking on the number of breaths a singer took between phrases, let alone on the sound her parting lips make. Same can be said about that other alleged audiophile virtue: the pinpoint soundstage. I just don't take those things to be an important, let alone essential, part of the musical experience. Montepilot disagrees, I take it, since he argues that such detail leads to a more involving musical experience (which we all want). I've never heard a cartridge do both, but since I've never heard the Allnic (or for that matter, any top flight MC in my system) I'm in no way denying the possibility. But to me it's like watching the corner of a movie screen and saying that that's where the director's artistic ambition resides. A question: is there a sub $3k MM only phonostage that meets the requirements that this design has? What should I be looking at/for? LCR equalization? Loading options? Dual mono? MM only since I have no intention to try the MC route. |
As I understand him, Lharasim is not denying that 3d images of a stage can be rendered by an audio system/component. He denies that this capacity is a virtue, that is, makes the audio system a good one. It is not a virtue, the argument goes, because the purpose of an audio system is to reproduce as close as possible live music. And live music doesn't have such spatial cues and no standard of evaluation measures live music by that (that's the point of conductor example). So, there are two different claims: one regarding the chief aim of audio reproduction (and its attendant virtues) and the second one regarding the existence and importance of spatial information at live events. In my opinion, spatial information at live events is given primarily visually. At a live event, the sonic field is so dense that the ability to say, based on aural cues alone, that the flute is two meters left of the oboe is severely limited (at best). And it is of no importance whatsoever that we able to make those judgments--for live music. I take this to more or less uncontroversial. Now it is undeniable that some audiophiles tend to evaluate their system's prowess in part on how well it stages, e.g. "I put in a new power cord and the stage got 10 feet wide and a mile deep--brilliant!" However, if the chief aim of audio reproduction is realism (to use a bad word) or faithfulness to live music, then it seems puzzling (or if you're Lharasim, deeply annoying and contradictory) to want and care about such things. I'm of two minds on this. While I believe that live music is and should be the standard, I rather enjoy and sometimes even evaluate the quality of a new component by its ability to render spatial information. As I type, I'm listening to Mahler's 6th (early Bernstein) using the AT 20ss cart and it renders spatial dimensions quite well (cowbells (!) left; tympani back center; woodwinds front center; etc..--but I know full well from experience that there is no way from an audience seat that the same symphony would be rendered in that way. Perhaps there's no contradiction here, since just as with other art forms (e.g., painting) we've abandoned realism as the sole standard, we should think of audio reproduction as following a similar path. (Although I don't know of any manufacturers who would embrace 'artificial' as an apt description of their product's sound.) If there can be different basic functions, then we can have room for different audio virtues (to use an example from above: hyper detailing and the ability to distinctly hear grains of rice falling) that facilitate the performance of them. |
Lewm: I certainly had no such polemical intentions! If, however, you believe all audio reproduction aims at artifice then why do you (seem to) find it insulting to say that you are after an "artificially pleasing result"? As I noted, I'm ambivalent about the whole matter: I want realism (believability, as Halcro put it) but I sometimes value the pleasing result as well. To stay on point with this thread: I'll say that the Astatic mf200 is clearly my most pleasing cartridge; so pleasing that I really couldn't care less if someone told me that live music doesn't sound like that. Regarding 3-d, I don't have a thesis. I was assuming it uncontroversial that (1) spatial cues are given primarily visually at live events and that (2) such cues are not used as criteria for evaluating musical quality. Of course, no one is denying that live music occurs in three dimensional space and therefore there are physical implications. At a live event, if I shut my eyes and concentrated, I could (probably) pin point the placement of instruments (kind of like trying to hear a conversation across a noisy room by deliberately blocking out extraneous sounds). But why would I want to do that? At any rate, I am obviously mistaken to believe both to be uncontroversially true since you deny (1) and perhaps (2). Next time I visit my sister-in-law in Virginia, I'll be sure to check out the Bohemian Caverns and see what you mean. |
Frogman: very helpful posts. I find myself in agreement with your premises but don't quite understand how they go towards showing that, as you put it, "There is no question that there is a great deal of it [3-d] in live music; far more than in even the best recordings. Live music also has a great deal of very precise pin-point imaging." Your great analogy seems to establish the opposite--that when a curry, for example, is correctly made no particular component stands out and calls attention to itself, that is, can be easily pinpointed. I suspect there's an equivocation here on the terms '3-d' and 'pinpoint imaging'. If I follow you, the pin-point imaging found in multi-miked recordings are a consequence of an absence of low level information, specifically, harmonic information. This omission makes the recording and subsequent playback poor because it doesn't accurately represent live music. It would seem to follow that the presence of this harmonic richness (in live music) would obstruct the capacity to identify with pin-point precision the relative location of instruments playing in unison (no one denies, by the way, that one can identify the location of solos or gross spatial differences like 'being in front of me' vs 'being behind me'). So, if there's a sense in which "live music also has a great deal of very precise pin-point imaging" it must be a different sense of pin-point imaging. What is that sense? You seem to be using '3-d' to refer to sonic richness and texture; I was and am using it merely to refer to relative spatial location. In your sense, I take it no one would deny that there's 3-d in live music. Above when I referred to the 'sonic density' (what you better describe as harmonic richness) of live music, I took that to be a reason to believe that the imaging of live events is primarily visual and at any rate different from what audiophiles seem to want from their system. I didn't think of it in terms of an absence of information, as you argue. If you're right, then a 'properly' miked recording played back on a highly resolving system would give one less pin point imaging and be more like live music. But isn't that what Laharism was saying when he acerbically wrote: "there is NO 3d sound like audiophiles portray and I agree that there is some location of where a group or an instruments location is but nothing like how audiophiles portray like to point out pinpoint and 3d imaging its audiophile BS." |
Dover: my long post probably reads like an obscure passage out of Duns Scotus, but the bit about multimiking was my interpretation of Frogman's view and not an expression of my own view. Moreover, on this interpretation, multimiking can lead to unnatural staging (pin-point but not in a good way) and so in that sense is not like live music. That is, it is the same as your view. Incidentally, I somewhat agree with your assessment of recordings that have the violin solo shooting its way to the forefront and then receding: the Bernstein Mahler recording I referenced has a fair bit of that. It's definitely unnatural and undesirable in the overall presentation of a symphony, but I sometimes rather like it because it renders palpable the sound of the bow sliding across the strings. That can be exciting if one is occasionally after 'audiophile sound effects'. |
Hopefully someone on this thread bought the mf 300 stylus I saw on ebay last night ($45!) and is now gone. I didn't think about the possibility of sending to Axel as Raul suggests. Dear Nandric: I have no friends except my cartridges and I fear some would die of envy if I put the Astatic on a pedestal; so, I refrain from conducting the experiment you outline. Dear Jim: I'll probably be getting some Ikeda silver leads soon and I'll let you know the results. Right now I'm using copper litz. BTW, I used mine with the stylus guard off. Be careful! I nearly took the cantilever right off when trying to remove the guard. |
Dear Raul, Yes, I've owned the Astatic for about 3 months now but I used it for only a month--because it was too good. Let me explain. When I get a new cart I usually spend a week or so dialing it in, and because I've been well advised by this thread I've enjoyed every cart I've tried. So far the AT 20ss has been the standard by which I compare others. After dialing in the Astatic I couldn't believe my ears, it was too good to be true. I don't have the descriptive vocabulary to accurately convey what I heard, let alone try to explain it, but suffice it to say that I liked what I heard--a lot. So much so that I put back some other carts to reassure myself of the accuracy of my memory. When I verified this, I got protective of my new jewel and it never went back on the arm. I'm now like Nandric with his unused prized FR 64s arm. I'm only half joking. Three characteristics stand out most of all for me: tracking, tone and timing (I'm not sure of the term here). I have a great recording of Janacek's second String Quartet that I often use to 'test' new carts. There is a lot of 'screeching and wailing' near the end that taxes a cart's ability to stay in the groove. The Astatic is the first cart to play through it without distortion all the while conveying in full detail the drama of the musical climax. The instruments retain their tone throughout these difficult passages. The 20ss can play without any obvious distortion as well but also without the fullness and presence of the Astatic. Another track I often use is Aretha's Bridge over Troubled Waters, Live at the Fillmore where she is virtually screaming in her inimitable way through certain phrases. Again, the 20ss can track it without obvious distortion but the Astatic does it while revealing (or not concealing) the character of her voice and showing nuances in the phrasing. I can listen to such passages without tensing up. Regarding timing, it is difficult for me to describe this elusive property and I'm not even sure I have the right term. Jazz ensembles are playing together seemingly for the first time in my system. Each succession of notes emerges as one would expect and hope, with the right impact and at the right time. It's like what the Greeks said about Athena, that she sprang forth from her father's head fully armored and ready to go. I don't know if that makes any sense but the Astatic keeps time as if it was live music, my other carts seeming a touch slow, less cohesive and dull by comparison. At any rate, to be sure the Astatic will go back on the arm once I get my new table (I'm following Halcro's lead). And there it will stay until I run it into the ground. I guess I'm not like Nandric after all. I'm running it on my epa 100 mk2 arm at 1.74g VTF, just a hair tail up. It likes my lighter 9gr headshell better than my 12g one. It's relatively easy to set up, unlike the 20ss which, after a year, I'm still fiddling with. |
I used blu-tac on mine at first but then decided to super glue it for the ultimate commitment. It sounded very different. I'm uncomfortable with making any causal claim as, amongst other things, I also took off the stylus guard after gluing. As I cannot undo my commitment, there was no re-testing possible. As I have since let go of the cart, perhaps the new owner who now has 2 420's can let us know whether there's a real difference--unless, of course, he glued the first one as well. |
Can he conclude something about the locomotive with the help of an iron horse? Is this a test? Can't the 'primitive' conclude, if the analogy is useful, that the locomotive can move, that it can be used to transport, that it can harm me if I get in its way, etc.... He has advanced his understanding without the need to experience the iron horse first hand. Similarly, suppose the goodness/badness of the Orsonic is traceable to its unique physical form (as opposed to, say, its metallurgical makeup); couldn't one draw a reasonable conclusion about another headshell that shared that form? Not all reasoning is deductive, as of course you know Nandric. But that makes all the more curious your vendetta against inductive arguments and ones by analogy. |
If one is still in 'the game', the cost of a precept 220 + 550 stylus can hardly be beat. I considered it last week when, like Lew, I searched around after the burning bush made his pronouncement on the 440. But then I looked at all my other neglected cartridges and thought better of it. Unless one has Raul's ambition and energy, I figure it's best enjoy vicariously from the sidelines. |