Jelco SA-750D cartridges


I know there are other threads on this subject and there have been some useful suggestions for cartridges that are compatible with the SA-750D. Unfortunately, though, the conversation inevitably gravitates into what cartridges should theoretically work if we just knew the effective mass of the tonearm or that the fluid damping should allow the use of a wide range of cartridges.

Without wading back through the same old theoretical stuff, I would like to hear cartridge recommendations from people who are actually successfully using them, along with whatever tweaks may have been necessary to make them perform well (lighter headshell, etc.). It seems that the most recommended cartridge for this arm is one of the DL-103's, but am not thrilled with idea of a conical stylus. I would, however, consider one of the modified versions of the 103 with a different stylus shape, but I'm leaning away from moving coil.

I'm particularly interested in hearing from anyone using moving iron or moving magnet models that work well with this arm. I like the idea of a user-replaceable stylus, but the Soundsmiths seem pretty interesting, too. Their reasoning for keeping the coil fixed and waving a light piece of iron in there seems like a good idea.

I would like to set an upper limit of $1000, but could push myself a little higher with good reason. By the way, I'm currently using a Heed Quasar preamp, but don't worry about that. That could easily change.

   
minkwelder
I’ve not owned it, but I’ve heard it, and I don’t agree with your assessment at all. I have heard better than that, but even if I hadn’t I’d have zero interest in trawling the internet for weeks, months or years in order to attain a slight incremental improvement.


If you have no interest then it’s another story, people who have no interest in something unique will never be able to compare average cartridges to something special. I bought every AT cartridge from AT-ML150 to AT-ML180 and each one was huge step above. I can’s say the even AT-ML150 OCC is a bad cartridge, but top model AT-ML180 OFC (and OCC) is superior in every aspect of sound.

That’s patently and obviously untrue. The AT-ML180 is exceedingly rare and like most things exceedingly rare it has become exceedingly expensive. Examples of this abound in more or less any product category you can think of.


This is rare indeed, but rarity alone is nothing in audio, most of the rare and unknown cartridges are not expensive, i know this because i always search for them and buy them for my collection (it’s very interesting process). There must be a reputation and most important a sound quality that thrills people to pay over $2k for MM cartridge. I gave you an example of another very expensive cartridge that almost every audiogon member tried to find and buy for serious amount of $$$ (Technics P100 mk4). Also i think most of the audiogon members who collect vintage MM bought those AT-ML180 when it was relatively cheap and when NOS styli were in the shops for some time, the model was discontinued in the 90’s, then NOS turned up for sale for at least 10-15 years. Today it is very rare and much harder to find. But i have mentioned before a friend who discovered a stash of NOT Victor and AT cartridges in Las Palmas in the record store, sealed cartridges in the boxes collected dust on the shelf in the storage for over 30 years in very old recordshop.

You are ignoring the fact that many audiogon members have a lot of rare cartridges, some of them are still unused, and when it’s too much they can sell. Some people lost their interest to MM, some people just need money. You can forget about ebay when you have audiogon and audiomart. Most of the members are retired or close to it, so why do they need so many cartridges ? Always worth to ask. I am searching for rare records the same way, people who collected them for entire life don’t mind to sell since the price is so much higher nowadays, it’s a good profit for them. I bought my rare Garrott p77 this way from another audiogon member for example. 

Anyway, my thought is that Audio-Technics simplified all MM cartridges, they changed cantilevers from hollow pipe to rod, they changed the way the stylus is mounted on the cantilever to this type. More important they changed the shape of replacement plastic inserts, what you can see now in current models is what they invented with old AT20Sla in the 70’s - this shape.

But the insert of the AT-ML170/180 vintage series is completely different - this shape.

Audio-Technica engineers have ensured against unwanted parasitic vibration with an Anti-resonance Ceramic Mounting base only for vintage AT-ML series, not for any new cartridges.

And regarding stylus mounting, i not sure what do you like more: THIS NEW or THAT OLD

Obviously the old has lover moving mass and more realistic reproduction.

And those Beryllyum cantilevers, remember ? Not available anymore for any manufacturer.

But when you will read on the boxes of my NOS AT-ML180 you will see two different versions, one with Boron cantilever and another with Beryllium cantilever.

And our simpikins5 (another fan of vintage AT, but different model) reported last year:

" There was a thread on Audiogon quite a while ago in which a former engineer from Audio Technica was participating. He wrote a rather in depth post as to why Beryllium was the go to material for cantilevers and the panic that ensued at AT when the EPA came down with the order that it no longer be used due to the dangerous toxic dust released when machining the material. He stated that the engineering department underwent a lot of R&D to find a suitable replacement material and Boron was what they determined would be closest, however it was still a compromise. Apparently Beryllium allows for the largest frequency excursion without distortion and also permits better channel separation and signal to noise ratios."

Quotes from the Audiogon contributors:

"Today I received all the pieces of Audio Technica AT-ML170 LC-OFC. Body from Japan and NOS original stylus from elsewhere in USA. For first hour at 1.5g or so it is best tracker I’ve ever had, really clings. Will continue further run-in and evaluation. Thanks Raul!" - Siniy123

"Buying a used AT-ML170 was the best analog move I’ve ever done. Second best, buying a used DV 10xGoldL. Two reference carts that will blow away carts costing $$$$$ more." - Kiko65

"The 103Fl with the Paratrace stylus is my top MC. Better than my $3500 Benz Micro Ruby 3. Where it falls a little short, is when it gets compared with MM/MI’s like my Signet TK10ML MK2, TK7CLa/155LC Sonus Dimension 5 or the AT ML170". - Don

"In my experience that AT ML-170 OCC is one of the must to have cartridges (MC or MM) along the 180 OCC." - Raul

"I also owned a AT ML-170 at one time this was one of the best ones I ever heard,near the Signet TK10.Anyway,just my take on these models." - Travbrow

"The AT 170 ML is fantastic at letting me hear, study, and analyze the tone of a particular instrumentalist on a recording; I can’t think of any MC that I have owned let me do that to the same degree." -Frogman




** P.S. Personally i think it’s an oustanding vintage MM cartridges, definitely in my top-5 list. It’s important to understand in details the construction of this model, because devil is in details.





The reason I'm not interested is simply that its so very easy to buy a cartridge with equal or better sound at a lesser cost than "your" vintage Audio-Technicas.  An AT33PTG/II for example.

If I was a collector or a an obsessive fan of vintage MMs it would of course be different, but I'm neither of those.


UPDATE:

I ended up buying an AT VM 740ML. I only have about 30 hours on it so far and I can't quit smiling. It is better than I thought it could be and works better in my system than the Denon DL-110.

I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a great MM cartridge.
The reason I’m not interested is simply that its so very easy to buy a cartridge with equal or better sound at a lesser cost than "your" vintage Audio-Technicas. An AT33PTG/II for example.


They are not equal and can’t be equal because you’re comparing MM and MC. I owned various AT LOMC cartridges and they were good, but not equal and not better than AT-ML170 and AT-ML180. Also you ignoring the fact that you can see with a microscope and actually can hear too, but since you never owned those top AT MM i have nothing to say. I think to compare what is better you will have to buy at least 30 different cartridges and you need time to compare them in your own system on matched tonearms. If you think each new cartridge is better than old one you are very naive, i guess i already gave an example of the NOS tubes that are almost always better than any new tubes with a few exceptions from very specific brands. Claiming that next new model is always better is 100% marketing strategy to sell more, making them cheaper is another marketing trick, but it has nothing to do with the quality unfortunately. Vinyl is not the main media today like it was before. 

If I was a collector or a an obsessive fan of vintage MMs it would of course be different, but I’m neither of those.

I’ve been able to find and buy at least 4 mint or NOS samples of AT-ML170 and AT-ML180 with sealed NOS styli for them.

I am surprised that people 20 year older than me on this forum never owned some of the best cartridges that was so easy to buy (and much cheaper than today) in the 80’s. This fact makes me think that some people are not interested in High-End cartridges and know nothing about it. The lack of experience indicate it very well. Luckily we’re another category of people too, but most of them simply stop posting on audiogon, probably because it is became extremely boring (maybe i’m wrong).