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 dgarretson

Frogman, on P-76 I found that the stylus guard pulls out the stylus if the guard is upside down. I recall reading somewhere that output is around 1.25mV.
Lew, I got mine from Norm as referenced toward the bottom of this URL.

http://www.antivibrationmagic.ca/index.php?page=about
I recently found a P-76 and need to get around to adapting it to a standard headshell. Has anybody done other than the (plastic?) adaptor sold by LPgear? I am considering the alternative of gluing a hardwood or alum spacer to the top of the cartridge, and lightly soldering gold-plated copper pins over top the tiny stock pins designed for P-mount. But I'm not sure whether the cartridge would like the heat. Another option for the pins would be conductive epoxy.

Jim, are you using 100K loading with P-76?
I have yet to get my old MM cartridges up and running, but it will be fascinating if the cartridge turns out to be the least significant variable in the equation of a modern analog system. In recent years cartridges have seen more price inflation than all things in stereo except perhaps cables. It may be about time for a reevaluation, but is anybody here as yet really prepared to part with their high-end MCs?
Hi Raul, To move forward with MM collecting I will fabricate a wand for my linear arm with a standard straight removeable headshell into a Technics receptacle. As I have no experience with removeable headshells, can you offer any specific recommendations? For example, there is a wide range from $30 alum Ortofon, to $47 LPgear Zupreme with azimuth adjustment, to various exotics with carbon fiber & hardwood out to $350. Doubtless some of these more expensive models have highest quality pins, leads, and clips, but in general is it worth fussing on the point of headshell composition?
The above NOS Astatic MF-100 is now in good hands! Any thoughts on the sound of this one? I'm waiting on delivery of a P-mount for the P-76, and will compare both of these MM to a Soundsmith-retipped Helikon and AQ7000Fe5 MC. This should be fun, as the output of the two MC cartridges is high enough to employ one MM phono stage for all four cartridges, with a switch to toggle between 100K and 47K.
Hi Raul, yes I should be able to switch between 100K and std. 47K loading, or 47K in parallel with 100R. The MM phono stage is a much modded SS ARC PH-2. I can also run the MC cartridges through an Atma-Sphere MP-1 modded similar to lewm.
After running in the P-76 for about 10 hours(1.2g, level VTA), my initial impressions are similar to the above posters. Salient characteristic of P-76 is immersion in swing, color, and embodiment like no MC I've heard. It has dimensionality, top-to-bottom extension, frequency balance, airy treble, convincing realism. Its visceral strengths over-compensate for occasional mistracking on sharp transients. At times other than demanding transients it is highly resolving. There is a set-and-forget quality about MM that makes MC seem fussbudget.
Lew, In my case it's a Trans-fi linear air arm. I wonder if one aspect of success with P-76 may be synergy of this arm with a high-compliance light tracker.
Axel, if you are ever of a mind to tamper with ML phono boards, it is a small matter to remove SMD resistors and replace with superior-sounding small-footprint radial-lead resistors such as TX2575. Then you can load down 100K to whatever you need for MC.
I apologize if this info may be somewhere above, but does anyone have the full spec on Astatic MF-100?

Thanks, Dave
I must add after a few more hrs of development that MF-100 has fantastic bass extension and warmth.
Hi Lharasim, perhaps the higher compliance of MF-100 is good with a linear air bearing arm. I agree P-76 handles the presence region really well-- voice & brass are very organic. 10 of those will get you through the night!
Based on above comments, after breaking in MF-100 I will remount P-76 and try a wider range of adjustments. So far I have been perhaps too casual with adjustments(around 1.2g; level VTA on P-76 and slight downward tilting arm on MF-100). MF-100 is definitely giving more detail & accuracy of timbre. I would agree that its "energy level" is lower-- but there is also a greater sense of relaxation and calmer background.

Lharasim, the Trans-fi Terminator is quite special and very far from "very wrong." There are design features on this arm unlike others: short 4.5cm arm with low operating pressure/low vibration.
This B&O is rather pricey, but does anybody know what model it is and whether it is desireable?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250452011510&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
I recently picked up Empire 888E and 999XE/X-- both candidates for stylus replacement. Can anyone confirm that the 0.2 mil. x 0.7 mil. Nude Bi-Radial Ellipticals at Bluz Bros(Adelcom) are good choices? There is some confusion as to the provenance of so-called Empire Scientific (elsewhere called Audio Empire) replacement stylii. For example, are the cheaper ones at garage-a-records the same as Bluz Bros?

http://www.adelcom.net/EmpireStylus1.htm

http://www.garage-a-records.com/products.php?cat=18

BTW, has anybody compared 888 to 999 models?
On a prosaic note, does anybody know where to acquire the 1/2" mounting clip that works with an Empire 999 SE/X cartridge body?

Thanks,

Dave
Since in any case I need to find an NOS stylus for my 999XE/X, do you think the 2000 is the better of the two cartridges?
A question to anyone with an Empire 999-type cartridge body. I have not yet found an NOS Empire 1/2" mounting clip, so I am going to fabricate an aluminum or hardwood 1/2" adaptor to be glued directly to the cartridge body. (In addition to solving my problem, this will likely offer improved resonance control relative to a spring clip.) Can you confirm that the correct rake angle for the cartridge body is with the cartridge pins exactly parallel to the headshell?

Thanks,

Dave
Hi Raul, This is the first time I've tried AVM on a cartridge, and will repeat henceforth with Empire 999X/EX, P-76, and perhaps Helikon. So far I've heard big improvement applying the stuff to silicon monolithics, clock PCB, electrolytics, and small circuit traces in CDP. In fact there is no application where I have not heard improvement. It can be scratched off if necessary.

http://www.antivibrationmagic.ca/index.php
Lew, Regrettably it's only about 1-1.5oz. This is enough for a thorough treatment inside CDP plus some. As rediculous as this seems, the benefit is worth the price.
Raul, The 888E improved further after several days of curing time and a second application of paint. I can now say only good things about this cartridge. In view of your prior observation that the simple shells in many of these old MM/MM cartridges do not appear to impede their performance, the experiment with AVM suggests to me that they may stand to benefit greatly from treatment to enhance such prosaic materials.
Hi Raul, when you were experimenting with high load values for MM/MI, did you find that any of the cartridges preferred loading >100K? Reason is I am constructing a circuit to provide continuously variable loading and need to select a value for the upper limit of the range.

With precise & continuously variable loading on the fly, perhaps the performance gap between respective MM/MI cartridges can be narrowed. The method used will be a variable optocoupler resistor in parallel with a high-value fixed resistor.
To points above regarding set-up of Azden YM-P50VL, with my example I found correct azimuth required slightly canted cartridge body. Other MM/MI that I've tried seem less sensitive to azimuth adjustment. This cartridge is more resolving than most and rewards exacting set-up.
Livemusic, your description of Stanton dove tails with my experience of Empire 888E. My Astatic MF-100 and Andante P-76 have better control over bass and low midrange, and thus better separation and a more open soundstage. But the warm ones like Empire and Stanton impress insofar as their exaggerated LF does not drag down HF detail. For me their particular strength is the unexpected combination of warm embodiment with HF detail. They are not "perfect" engines, but are seductive and possibly even the more so for having forgivable sins. As a generalization, is it possible that MC sins less often but unforgivably so?

While perpetuating cliches with respect to the MC vs. MM debate, I am with Lewm in rejecting the stereotypical views of SS phono. The modded SS ARC PH-2 that I'm using for MM/MI has none of the thinness or grain commonly attributed to SS, and is actually a bit warmer than my modded Atma MP-1 tube phono section. Medium output MC and MM both sound great through SS PH-2 into tubes downstream.
This weekend I turned up a circuit that allows continuously variable cartridge loading using Silonex light dependent resistors(LDR). In my balanced phono stage, the LDR works in parallel with Caddock TF020 high-value fixed resistors. In a single-ended phono stage, an LDR could entirely replace a 47K load resistor. The LDR circuit could optionally be built externally and placed in series with interconnects.

The range is adjustable from 35R-250K via a control circuit comprised of coarse and fine potentiometers in conjunction with a 5V Burson Superregulator. The control circuit works outside the signal path to govern LED brightness and set resistance value of the photo-resistive element in audio signal path. The signal path is straight from PCB through soldered-in LDR. There are no switch points or wires or carbon pots in signal path to degrade sound.

My initial interest was to evaluate the sound of Silonex LDRs relative to other top resistors. The topic has been explored in a DIY forum thread in the context of the Lightspeed passive attenuator. But of course one wants to hear this for oneself.

In short, a Silonex LDR in parallel with TF020 sounds better than TF020 alone. The LDR sound is resolving, clean and extended at the frequency extremes in the manner of TX2575, with an enveloping yet articulate LF that blends the best attributes of TX2575 and Audio Note tant.

Next week Soundsmith should be returning my Helikon retipped with optimized line contact diamond. This sets the table for me to compare Astatic MF-100 and P-76 to a (possibly improved) MOMC on one phono stage with the flexiblity of precise loading across a wide range.
I spent a half day bedding in a Helikon with Soundsmith's optimized line-contact stylus re-tip on original Lyra boron cantilever. This replaces an Empire 888X-EX with fresh NOS .2 x.7 mil stylus that has been happily singing on Trans-Fi linear air arm for about 200 hrs. With continuously variable optocoupler load resistors it was possible to quickly transition from 75K-85K optimal load for Empire, to 200R for Helikon. The fixed 48db gain of my modded ARC PH-2 phono stage works well both for MM/MI & a MOMC like the .5mV Helikon.

As enjoyable as the 888 has been, there is not a single area in which it equals the Soundsmith Helikon. The Soundsmith OLC tip pulls much more nuance & detail out of the grooves-- evidenced as well by a dredging up of dirt that had been skated over by the Empire elliptical. However, as a relative novice with respect to comparing cartridges, I am struck how much a single weakness may overwhelm one's opinion of a cartridge. The Empire's notable signature is over-warm and slightly undifferentiated LF. The retipped Helikon is particularly authoritative and articulate in LF. Like a good subwoofer the superior bass of this cartridge opens up a large & ambient soundstage with perception of improved separation all through the FR. There are other meaningful differences between these cartriges, but LF is where they really part company.

As the 888 is the most colored of my several MM/MI, it will be interesting to move comparison to Helikon up the line to P-76 and MF-100.
Raul, may I add to your remarks. IMO once the rest of the system "arrives" at a certain level of refinement, it is possible to enjoy a relatively wide range of cartridges without much preoccupation as to which is best. Put another way, top systems seem to be converging on a particular sound. I heard this happening at CES/THE Show in a wide range of contexts from top SET to OTL to PP amps, and top speakers from field coil horn to dynamic. There is just a lot more clarity and linearity in top speakers and amps than just a few years ago. Phono cartridges seem to be a bit different, with varying colorations that don't seem to disturb the senses as much as colorations in other areas of the system.
For anyone who wants to take on a project, here is a post I made today regarding continuously variable cartridge loading using optocouplers. I posted it to AA as photos are more easily added there. I would be glad to share a parts list if desired. The parts costs is around $150. The number of control pots can likely be reduced from six to four.

http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/88/881855.html

Lew, The more so as an MCC1 sold yesterday for $600. Reminds me of an old Don Henley lyric that goes something like, "It was a great little town before guys like me came here and ruined it."
Yikes, The $500+ just paid for an NOS B&0 on ebay has brought many more sellers out of the woodwork.
Raul, thanks for the reference to Nick the Azden dealer. I ordered one today and will take a look at making direct connection between cartridge pins and tonearm clips. However the diameter of the pins on a P-cartridge is smaller than on a 1/2" cartridge, which means crunching down std. clips to obtain a snug fit.
Hi Raul, Now several hours with top NOS Azden casually set up with its stock P-mount adapter at 80K load and level VTA. This is an excellent performance! More "there" there than most recent mount of Astatic MF-100.
Lew, apropos of your point about degradation added by mating connectors, I ordered material to make two straight-shot 4N silver tonearm wires uninterrupted from cartridge pin to phono stage. This will eliminate five mating connections and solder joints in my current set-up. I also have Bulgin gold-over-copper females that mate directly with tiny P-mount pins. So henceforth comparisons between P-mounts and 1/2" cartridges will be made on equal ground.
The Azden really opens up after 15-20 hrs, so don't fret too much about initial set-up.
Lew, FWIW there is no overload problem with Azden through my 48db balanced SS ARC PH-2. ARC rates the unit good for max input of 300mV RMS at 1kHz(1500mV at 10kHz).
Lew, So far I've been experimenting in a narrow range around neutral VTA and like Azden level or slightly negative. There does not seem to be too much difference +/- a few degrees from neutral VTA. Correct azimuth was more important to eliminate a slight brittleness in the mid and upper band and also in focusing LF. I use a mirror and a 15x magnifier.

IMO the best load is 70-80K. However my viewpoint on higher loading has become more chameleon-like since implementing continuously variable loading mod in phono stage and demoing same to several dozen members of the local audio society. Playing Astatic MF-100 some good ears at the meet preferred much lower loading on the order of 30K. Personally I am with Raul in preferring higher loading. After the meet one member who travels internationally mentioned that the preference for lower loading and rolled-off HF is an American audiophile thing. He maintains that in Japan the common preference in audio salons leans toward wide-open extended HF. I am in this latter camp-- which may owe as well to HF attenuation of my middle-aged listening organs.
Lew, neutral as in arm parallel with platter.

When setting azimuth with a mirror I am not referencing to the cartridge body. I use enough magnification to sight a straight line through the diamond and its mirror image. Admittedly it takes a bit of fussing to get the correct line of sight. There are several receding images of the cantilever visible in the depth of mirror. Alligning these images confirms square line of sight. It is helpful to have a linear tonearm with the cartridge facing directly forward... Radio Shack sells a compact magnifier with three lens that can be used individually or combined.
Could you explain that further? I had assumed that cross-talk that varies with physical azimuth adjustment was solely a function of misallignment of stylus angle w/r to grooves.
Thanks, got it. It was also helpful to read V. Khomenko's old AA post (which you participated in) and the second URL below (which in a footnote expresses skepticism about the test method using 1kHz tones.)

http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/7/74644.html

http://www.durand-tonearms.com/index.php?p=1_9_Azimuth-talk.
Question to holders of Empire 1000: is the body receptacle for the cantilever barrel square or round? My 999 body takes a square cantilever, I have seen a photo of a 1000 body with a square receptacle, yet the NOS replacement stylus that I purchased has a round barrel.
This was the most interesting post I found on my journey to XSV-3000.

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=19899

This is authored by the ex-Stanton exec, who also mentions that the XUV-2500 with 2500Q stylus were inferior first-generation quad offers. For XVS-3000, I ended up going for the D3000S Stereohedron stylus rather than 4500Q Quadrahedron stylus based on comments that the longer fine-line Q version probably sounded no better than the later S fine-line version, and might also increase record wear. There is much praise out there for the 4500Q stylus, and also for the Stanton D81S stylus(which may be the same as D3000S.)

That's all that I ever want to know about it.
Dear Jim,

From your post it looks like I need to find a 1000Z/EX body to fit what is evidently my spare 236 round-sheathed stylus with "wisker-thin" cantilever. One finds 1000 bodies with the square sheath of my 999X/EX body like the following body with a square sheath:

http://cgi.ebay.com/EMPIRE-1000-SE-X-STEREO-CARTRIDGE-EXCEPTIONAL-NO-NEEDLE_W0QQitemZ290422552900QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Electronics_R2?hash=item439e887944

Tonight I am running in the 999X/EX with a (possibly NOS) square-sheathed cantilever from Bluz Broz box marked S999XE/X...(whew!) At first listen this 999 is very convincing, with a bit more presence though not quite the precision of the previously mounted top Azden.
Lew, the twists & turns of analog set-up never cease to vex & amaze. After a year of feeling pretty smart about shortening the length of my linear air arm to 2", I only recently grasped that the extreme VTA setting optimal for cartridges like Empire requires a significant readjustment of arm length to restore correct zenith.

The Empire 999 is breaking in nicely and definitely wants at least 100K loading to open up HF. LF is much more precise than Empire 888.
BTW perhaps owing to the spring steel clip mount, the Empire body is quite microphonic and reactive to taps to the headshell. After break-in is finished this one will get the AVM paint treatment.
Lew, I preferred Azden around 1.2gm, level to slightly negative VTA, and 70-80K loading.
Lew, yes VTA with the tail of arm wand just slightly down in back on Trans-Fi. While the wand's pivot point is just 2" from the stylus, the 4" of wand protruding behind the pivot is the reference point for sighting purposes. Thinking about VTA with this arm is not too different than for a conventional pivot arm, except that the shorter wand has a wider range of adjustment.
Montepilot, I was able to acquire a spare Empire clip mount from Adam at Bluz Broz when I ordered a stylus. The clip has a three-point mounting that mates to a horizontal dimple along the upper front edge of the cartridge, and into crescents in the plastic on opposing sides at rear of body.