MM to MC back to MM

In reply to Ctm I was running a Denon 103 on a Lenco idler and changed directly over to the Ortofon VMS 20 without any other system changes.My initial comparison and impressions were as close and consistent as you may be for now.I believe the Ortofon to be a more controlled cartridge than the Denon.The Denon's conical tip could not disguise the lack of definition in the lower frequencies due I think to the fuzziness inherent in MC's.I was also running a Linn Asak(Vital stylus) on another table at this time.This is the Supex SDX 1000 in Linn clothing a pretty good MC and worth over $2000 today if I had it retipped.Anyway as you can see I got my fill of the MC sound.In both cartridges I found there to be a lower-end fuzziness which would not resolve properly(not for want of trying,TWL mod etc.)and really the higher-end seemed tizzy in both MC's.What I have done now is to take a Linn K18 Mk11 MM cartridge and remove the little allan-key frontspiece.This enables it to become once again the souped-up AT-95 it is.I have found an Audio-Technica conical stylus that fits and added a blob of Blu-Tac. This cartridge also really reproduces the info on the record accurately to my ears.Rory Gallagher sounding like he really did live! That's amazing!

Dear Jsman: I already try several MM/MC cartridges and for the moment I stay with both. Both cartridge type has its own advantages we can't have a perfect cartridge design like all in the life we must to make the best trade-offs for our own music sound reproduction priorities.

My advise to you is to go for either ( or both, they are too inexpensive. ) MM Empire cartridges: EDR.9 and 750 LTD, you can find it here:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/VINTAGE-EMPIRE-HIGH-END-PHONO-CARTRIDGE-EDR9-NOS_W0QQitemZ200103799557QQihZ010QQcategoryZ3283QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/VINTAGE-EMPIRE-HIGH-END-PHONO-CARTRIDGE-750-LTD-NOS_W0QQitemZ200105207796QQihZ010QQcategoryZ64620QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem

Here it is what an Agon guy posted about ( he owned the same AT cartridge that you own ):
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1173550723&openflup&28&4#28

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Ctm: +++++ " It may still be possible to compare a MM and a MC cartridge, but only if one has a phonostage with identical mm and mc performance at any fixed overall [system] listening level. I am not an engineer, so those who have more technical know-how please chime in. Does such a phonostage exist? If so what tests does one perform to determine how similar or different a MM phonostage is from one designed for a MC without using a cartridge? " +++++

This subject is of paramount importance to really know exactly the quality performance of any MM/MC cartridge comparison.

The first " method " is to compare both phono stage specifications: RIAA accuracy, frequency range, signal to noise ratio, distortion level, crosstalk, slew rate, etc, etc.

Second to know the designer skillfull/know-how and targets on his design.

Third, when you hearing through both MM and MC stages.

+++++ " Does such a phonostage exist? " +++++

Absolutely, the Essential 3150 where both totally independent phono stages were designed to each one ( MM or MC ) phono stage needs, this means that both stages are not identical in its design and parts but have identical quality performance.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Jsman,
What is your phono stage? Unless you've got a phono stage that can bring out the best in a low-ish output cart like the Dynavector VPI model, I'd recommend staying with an MM (for now). The AT440ML is a pretty darn good cart. Why not just stick with that one? If you want the cart mounted by VPI, the Grado Sonata is an excellent choice.

Surely this discussion has been posted before. Sorry for not searching the archives first.

Sure it's been discussed before. A couple years or so back, those of us that dared speak the virtues of some MM carts were derided as flaky lunatics without ears who were simply nostalgia buffs but hardly "audiophiles"

Scoutmaster (with unipivot) + poor tracker MC = disaster.

Ok guys here is the situation. I am about to buy a scoutmaster and want to order it with a cartridge. I have never heard a MC cartridge before, so I thought here is my chance. Now with that said I was looking at the Dyna 20X-H 1.0mv it is suppose to be a very good match for this arm and table. Right now I have a mid-fi Luxman TT with a AT 440MLa MM cartridge, What I am realy trying to find out is am I going to loose any bass with the MC. Or should I get the scoutmaster with a MM, if so which one? I listen to mostly classic rock and jazz.

Ok guys here is the situation. I am about to buy a scoutmaster and want to order it with a cartridge. I have never heard a MC cartridge before, so I thought here is my chance. Now with that said I was looking at the Dyna 20X-H 1.0mv it is suppose to be a very good match for this arm and table. Right now I have a mid-fi Luxman TT with a AT 440MLa MM cartridge, What I am realy trying to find out is am I going to loose any bass with the MC. Or should I get the scoutmaster with a MM, if so which one?

Ctm_cra...Regarding the use of different phono preamps...I have a Tandberg preamp that has two completely separate phono stages in it which you choose using the input selector switch. The two phono stages are, except for a few resistors that set gain, identical circuits. Even the transistors are the same. I don't know if other phono preamps are designed this way, but it would answer your concern when doing a MC/MM comparison.

When I first installed the Ortifon I liked what I heard. Looking for something beyond a subjective opinion, I noted that the words of certain vocal recordings, which I had never been able to make out, became clear.

With the option of CDs phono performance became less important to me, and besides, I made other more effective upgrades to the overall system, including, by the way, a better MM cartridge.

04-30-07: Stefanl
I posted a while back ... how I replaced a Denon 103 MC with an Ortofon VMS 20 Mk11 E MI and how I thought the Ortofon was better. Because when I dialed in the anti-skate it actually made the music right unlike the Denon where I was always looking for compromises or using no anti-skate at all.I found using a conical tip improved things still further.....

Yeah, but the Denon 103 MC also has a conical tip.

Stefanl - I found the thread you referred to:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1157059532&openusid&Stefanl&4&5&st350

However, you did not detail your complete analog setup when you were listening to the Denon MC and any changes you made when you went to the Ortofon MM.

You did indicate that you used a silver cable for the Denon and a VDH IC for the Ortofon, suggesting that at least three new variables were changed (transducer, phonostage or transformer, and IC) when you went from the MM to the MC cartridge. How can you possibly conclude that what you heard is due primarily to the differences in the performances of the cartridges alone?

Well I can.I posted a while back in the Lenco thread,about how I replaced a Denon 103 MC with an Ortofon VMS 20 Mk11 E MI and how I thought the Ortofon was better. Because when I dialled in the anti-skate it actually made the music right unlike the Denon where I was always looking for compromises or using no anti-skate at all.I found using a conical tip improved things still further.A guy on VA called Jeff Medwin says he won't let an art-stylus in his house.Why? there is 3 times the distortion from elliticals or shibata types.We have got lost!

Jsman - Do a search in this forum and you will find you do not have to spend $700 to experience terrific LP playback from some of the very best MM cartridges.

Happy listening!

Surely this discussion has been posted before. Sorry for not searching the archives first.

As obvious as it may seem, few discussions address the inherent dilemma one faces when comparing a MM to a MC cartridge. Regardless of any design and/or spec advantages one has over the other, evaluations of different types of cartridges (MM vs. MC) yield results that are difficult to call absolute or definitive. The need to switch to a different phonostage is the culprit. Consequently, you are unable to conclude that what you are hearing is due only to the differences between the cartridges.

Certainly a single phonostage can be used. However, most (if not all) conventional methods of overcoming this dilemma introduce additional variables. For MM phonostages, one can use a step up transformer or a prepreamp after the MC cartridge. On the other hand one can use a passive "attenuator" device after MM cartridges to reduce the output before feeding the signal to a MC phonostage.

It may still be possible to compare a MM and a MC cartridge, but only if one has a phonostage with identical mm and mc performance at any fixed overall [system] listening level. I am not an engineer, so those who have more technical know-how please chime in. Does such a phonostage exist? If so what tests does one perform to determine how similar or different a MM phonostage is from one designed for a MC without using a cartridge?

If this dilemma cannot be addressed, we have no choice but to treat MM and MC cartridges separate/independent from one another. I have my handful of MM cartridges that I cannot do without and for any given sonic parameter/criteria I can rank them. I can do the same for the superb MC transducers that I own. However, I cannot say if my favorite MM is better or not quite as good as my favorite MC, because the introduction of other components means that such an evaluation is not an apples-for-apples comparison.

As for as the MM's go, give me a few names in the $700 range also MI.

Most MCs are so bad at tracking it's not funny. There was one MC I really wanted to hear before eventually deciding whether my Ortofon X-5 high output MC should be retipped. That was the Dynavector 20. After reading the TNT review, however, it was obvious it's not a good cartridge:

Tracking ability did show some cause for concern though. Playing Marleys 'Exodus' album the heavy dubbed bass transients caught the stylus out occasionally, as did Bruce Springstein's 'Dancing in the Dark', producing a crack! as mistracking set in. Using the HFN+RR test record the Dynavector struggled to track the 16 dbl 300hz test and showed hints of mistracking at 14 dbl, something the V15 sailed through. That said the problem only raised it's head on a few very tricky records though perhaps Reggae fans might find the V15 a better bet.

Come on, before that tip encounters grooves where it will jump a much larger quantity will show mistracking!

I'll stick mainly to MM/MI units. Moving irons, though, have a midrange bloom that's highly appealing. Them Grado and Stanton cartridges are real smooth sounding.

***

i've been there and back many times, but there are some incredible mm's that have kept me there for a few years now.

I have gone back to MM because I have decided that not only MM's are better for now,but(wait for it) so are conical styli.Firstly as part of an exchange with the ex-reviewer Martin Colloms he mentioned the fact that MC's pass a lot of high frequency artefacts that MM's filter out naturally. I noticed that with the Ortofon VMS 20 a spherical tip replacement stylus sounded better than the original elliptical.Then at VA I found this relating to an old Fulton Musical Industries cartridge.
"Fulton elected to use a spherical tip because they believe that both elliptical and Shibata shape styli are subject to forces that twist them as they pass over modulated groove walls. Further, this twisting motion of the stylus is transmitted down the cantilever and is reproduced as distortion by the phono cartridge. There is much less extraneous torquing of the cantilever by its stylus with a conical tip. At 5kHz Fulton engineers have measured three times the distortion with elliptical and Shibata styli than with a conical. Accordingly, the tendency of an elliptical or Shibata stylus to twist or torque indicates that the nuances of music are lost and, at the same time, distortion in the critical 2 to 9 kHz frequency range is added. A conical tip apparently sidesteps this problem." I also think Moving-Iron can be superior to both MM and MC.The Ortofon is a MI.

Once upon a time I had an Ortofon MC, and then I had several Signet cartridges. Every time I needed a stylus replacement I found out that my model was no longer supported, but they would make me this real good deal on a new one that only cost, (before discount) 50 percent more than my cartridge. It took three times, but I finally realized the game they were playing. So I bought a Shure V15mr, and lived happily ever after.

Even though many MM cartridges do not exhibit the typical rising high-frequency curve of many MC cartridges (and so sound [generally] more naturally balanced), I can't go back to MM, because I find that good MC cartridges seem to offer greater speed and dynamics, which I favor.