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.
rauliruegas

Showing 50 responses by griffithds

Hi Tom,
"www.phonocartridgeretipping.com/index.html"

I have just received a LOMC cartridge that has been repaired (suspension refreshed), by this retipper. He goes by the name of Andy and I can conferm that he does excellent work. My Blue Oasis (cartridge be Sao Winn of Winn strain-gauge fame), had become rather bright sounding. I suspected hardining of the damper. The following quote is from the reply I received from Andy
" I presume you will need it's
damper and coil readjustment, -- (here, coil means the thin wire holding cantilever,
so that cantilever stays straight with flexible movement, your Benz Micro repaired
in Germany had this problem).

Presuming diamond tip is still in good condition,
the repair cost is $100 + 10 (return shipping)."

The repair turned out to be just as he had suspected, and the cost was as the estimated.
Excellent work and the cartridge sounds exactly as I remember it when it was performing at 100%. Turn around time was 22 days to my mailbox. He is only a couple of hundred miles from where I live so he will become my go to retipper. Funny how alot of these retippers have a watch/clock repair backround. Highly recommended!
Regards,
Don
Halcro,

When the moderators say "intruder", are they refering to a virus/trojan, spam, or something on that line?
Regards,
Don
In shore,

I wonder if when you mount the cartridge into the suspect headshell, you are (unknowingly), twisting the cartridge body and making some kind of ground effect inside of the cartridge body? Have you tried the cartridge in some other headshell?
Regards,
Don
In-Shore,

Something esle you just might check.
I have just discovered one of my arm wands has a loose wire at the junction of the female clip/pin location. I discovered it doing just what you had described. Reinstalling a arm wand with a known working cartridge that was previously attached, only of find out that one chanel was dead. Mine was the blue wire (left ground), from the arm wand. Did a continuity test (of the arm wires), and discovered it. Gently twisted and pushed it back into the clip and all is now fine.
Regards,
Don
To all,

Great buy on what is a rebranded Ortofon Digitrac OM 20.

Ebay number=== 271116407270

Regards,
Don
Hi Dgob,

I have 2 of the 420's. One never taken out of the box. Did he say what was revamped? I would asume a cantilever/stylus change but to what. Would I just ask for Dgob's conversion?
Regards,
Don
My dear Balkan friend,

I for one also have a "exit strategy". The problem is I am finding it quite difficult to control the "just one more desire". I must admit, it is a capitalist consumption curse. My cartridge resell will be a complete failure as far as selling for profit is concerned. Loss control is where I am at now. I'm at a point where every M/M cartridge I do a cantilever/stylus change on, will only raises that cartridge up to the level of several other cartridges I already have at best. Just "burning money" is an old saying that comes to mind. Yes, I do have a spare 420 that I could offer to Axel for the "Dgob transformation". Do I really need another also ran? But then I ask myself, what if the cartridge (in its new configuration), actually raises the bar? Lets find out just what Axel did to the Acutex 420. Then, well, lets see how strong my "exit strategy" really is.
Deepest Regards Comrade
Don
Hi Dgob,
Would never have thought to look in the Glanz thread to read about the 420. Thanks,
Regards,
Don
Raul,

Are you still running your phono stage at 100K?
The Pickering XVS 5000 was a CD4 Quad cartridge. Pickering probably use the top (cherry picked), stylus to extent the fequency responce flat out to 50K for CD4 playback. The Stanton 981s only needed a stylus that would play flat out to 20K. You got yourself the best of the best as far as stylus profile. Simply as that!
Regards,
Don
Hi Lewm,

"where does the XVS5000 fit in the scheme of the 4500 and 7500 cartridges? Was it a special model specifically for 4-channel LPs?"

Your statement is a somewhat loaded question. I conceder this cartridge line (the XSV), "a special" line of cartridges. The 2nd part of your question can be answered this way. There was no cartridge manufactured "just" for Quad. They would all play and was designed to play standard 2 cannel stereo but in addition would play the extended frequency 4 channel tracks.
I believe there was only one additional XSV above your 4500 and it was the 5000. Your 7500 IIRC is a XLZ. The XSV line started at 3000 and went up as the stylus profiles improved. The 5000 being the best. There is a guy by the name of Richard Steinfeld (ex Stanton employee), who has written a handbook titled "The Handbook for Stanton and Pickering Phonograph Cartridges and Styli who can be contacted at rsteinbook@sonic.net
The handbook is full of information about the history of the 2 cartridge manufacturers and all the various cartridges and styli that was provided to the public during the Golden Years of analog. Amazing read if you are a Stanton/Pickering fan which I certainly am one of! Highly recommend you get yourself a copy.
Regards,
Don
Raul,

I own both the 981s. The LZS and the HZS. I also own the Stanton Epoch II LZ8S. It's also a contender. I only have 1 D98s styli. It came mounted on the NOS LZS. I bought a D3500E styli (XSV) and mounted "it" on the HZS. I must admit, I have never tried the D98s styli on the HZS. Your findings have got me thinking.
Your calibrated numbers compared to the published numbers are kind of surprising. I need to look at mine.
After hearing the 981s, and owning a 881s many years ago, I do agree with you. No comparison between the two. Not even close.
Regards,
Don
To All,

Before anyone misunderstands, the TL4S that Tom (timeltel), and I have been talking about is a M/M type stylus. That means 880/881s and above line of cartridges. Anything below, XV15, 680/681 are M/I. THEY ARE NOT INERCHANGABLE!
I would hate to have someone with a 681EEES buy a TL4S, on our recommendation, only to discover it doesn't work!
Regards,
Don
To those interested,
An old thread pertaining to Stanton/Pickering. Alot of useful information for the uninformed. For others, well, a refresher.

http://forums.audioreview.com/analog-room/stanton-881s-stylus-replacement-new-cartridge-28162.html

Regards,
Don
Timeltel and fellow Stanton/Pickering friends,

Hi Tom. As usual, your post are an absolute encyclopedia of information. I had to reread twice to absorb everything you provided. Your gift is much appreciated.

"The TL4S is a P-mount design, styli should be compatible with your Stanton carts."

My "resources" confirm you are correct. I hope someone in need of a replacement styli picks one up and enlightens the rest of us. Could be that non-available Stantering replacement stylus we have all been looking for!
Take care my friend,
Don
Lewm,

I have in both of my posts to you, forgot to mention how lucky I feel you are in owning a XSV7500. You are living in rarified air territory with that one.

Regards,
Don
Dear Acman3,

"Or do I tell my daughter at college to get a job and buy both?"

You have answered your own question!
Lewm,

I have the BAT VK10Se with all the latest upgrades. That includes the latest Lundahl SUT's. The BAT gives me from 44db up to 78db's of gain, more than enough for the 981's. With that said, I must admit I prefer the LZS over the HZS. Is there something that I could put my finger on to state why? No, there's not except this. I have set up both the LZS and the HZS on Graham arm wands and dialed it them in with the Mint LP device. The arm wand with the HZS gets cartridges rotated on it (removing the HZS). The wand with the LZS remains set up. I refuse to remove it from its wand. Subconsciously I think my brain is telling me something. Res. set at 47K, and cap. set at 100 plus the low cap. cables. I wish I could define what I like about one over the other, but frankly speaking, I could live easily for the rest of my life with either of them in my system. If you have heard the AT180/170 OCC, or the Signet TK10 MKII, you will have an ideal of what a 981s sounds like. Just a little more refined. Hard to imagine that considering the level of performance the mentioned comparison cartridges are at but believe it.
Raul has hinted at but not come right out and said that the 981s is M/C like in its performance. I agree with him in that "hint" if you are only talking about what M/C's do right.

Regards,
Don
Raul,

I did see the "315 flat nose" listing but because I already have a "312 flat nose" on its way to Axel for upgrades, I passed. You did get quite a deal on it as far as price! What do you intend doing with the "315"? Perhaps also sending it off to Axel.
Regards,
Don
Hi Lewm,

" Apparently you have not been reading my posts all these months,"

Not true! I read all posts. There is far to much information/knowledge available on this forum that everyone can learn from. BTW I had to look up the "perspicacious". Thank you for the compliment, I'm humbled.
You do BTW, own a "whole" XSV7500, you just don't know. The body/generator you are using on the "4500" is the same (exactly), as that which is used on the "7500". I do believe that if you marry the two together, and compare it with your 981s, you will prefer the "7500" because of the cherry picked comments I mentioned in a earlier thread. I gave up on looking for the "7500". There's just none available. You have a hell of a stash of "gems".
As far as "liking" distortions, all equipment are full of distortions. Manufacturers can not even built two pieces of equipment that measures "exactly" the same. This is due to tolerances,(+/-) in every component part that is in every piece of equipment. More parts, more combinations of tolerance variances.
Regards,
Don
Travbow,

Your cartridge may not be at the Post Office. Perhaps the tracking hasn't been updated. I've lost count of how many items showed held up in Flordia, or New York etc. yet got delivered to me that very afternoon hear in Boise Idaho. Just the fact that your item "IS" in Axels hometown should be conforting. It could have been lost somewhere in transit.
Regards,
Don
Timeltel,

Hi Tom. Your imput ref. (the Pickering DTL-4S), got me looking around. I picked one up at Turntables.com for list $184. Cashed in $70 worth of gift certificates and so the total paid was $114. 5/7 days shipping so I'll post my findings next week. Just under the 12/22 deadline!
Regards,
Don
Lewm,

I have seen the "1's", the "2's" and the "3's" for sale on ebay but never have I seen a "4". I own a 981LZS and a 981HZS. I thought this DTL-4S just might be a nice addition to go with either of the 981 bodies. I have been for many years a Stanton/Pickering fan. Had a 881S back in the "70s". Turntable was a Philips GA312. There was/is a lot more for that cartridge to give than what that table was able to provide. Great T/T though. I still have it and do use it ocasionally. Current cartridge on it is a Empire 2000E with a LPGear 4000DIII stylus.
Regards
Don
Travbow,

"If I would of known the extra trouble us damn foreigners cause I would not have bothered sending it"

Give Andy just outside of Seatle a try.
"Phonocartridgeretipping.com"
He did and excellent job rebuilting a M/C cartridge for me with a turnaround time of only 21 days. Highly recommended by quite a few people on several forums!
Regards,
Don
Good Morning Tom,

I have sent an email to PickeringUK asking them about that very question. I have bought several stylus's from Turntableneedle.com and know them to be a very reputable supplier. I am confident that what I'm about to receive from them will actually be an original Pickering styli. I'm wondering if when Pickering/Stanton moved from New York to Florida, if they started replacing the "Sterohedron" with a "line contact"? It would have been a lot easier to obtain. I'm reminded of the fact that their move to Florida was a cost cutting move. One more point to conceder. There is no mention of a line contact stylus in Richard Steinfelds handbook. His publication follows Stanton/Pickering cartridge/styli manufacturing during the "Golden age of analog". This would be up to but not after the Florida move. I am not doubting PickeringUK statements about selling original Pickering styli. But I'm beginning to think that a lot of what's being sold by PickeringUK was manufactured after the Florida move. When Stanton/Pickering went "disco".
Regards,
Don
Tom,

Just received a reply from Turntableneedles.com. It was a confirmed NOS Stereohedron styli. Still waiting for PickeringUKs reply.

Regards,
Don
Tom and all interested.
The folowing is my question and the reply from PickeringUK.

__________________________________________________
Reply:
Stereohedron is Pickering's name for their line contact tips.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: griffithds@jaws.bz
To: eSales@PickeringUK.com
Subject: Stylus question
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012

Good Morning,

You have a DTL-4S for sale stated as a line contact. I have a original Pickering DTL-4S that is a Stereohedron. Is the difference between the two styli a matter of mine is from New York plant and yours is from the Flordia plant? If there is some other reason (unnown to me), for the two styli profiles, both being a DTL-4S. Thank you for your reply in advance.
Regards,
Don Griffith
____________________________________________________

First time I have ever heard of a Stereohedron refered to as another name for line contact! Shibata, yes, but line contact?
Correction:
Statement I made on 12/10/12

"Before anyone misunderstands, the TL4S that Tom (timeltel), and I have been talking about is a M/M type stylus. That means 880/881s and above line of cartridges. Anything below, XV15, 680/681 are M/I.
I would hate to have someone with a 681EEES buy a TL4S, on our recommendation, only to discover it doesn't work!"

The TL4S is NOT a M/M. It is a M/I. It will NOT work on the 880/881 and above. Anything below that line of cartridges, the XV15, 680/681 is acceptable.
Just the opposite of what I stated. My deepest apppolgies to all for my mistake!
I received the TL4S today and mounted it on a HLZ body. Dead quite. Nothing. That's when I started to compare my notes with Richards "Stanton/Pickering handbook" and discovered my notes were not correct.
I then mounted my XV-15/750E, verified that everything was working, then swapped styli. The TL4S just creamed the much regarded 750E. More authoritive bass, greater dynamics overall with cleaner and more extended highs. This was with "0" hours of break-in.
The best Stanton/Pickering M/I that I own is the Stanton L747S (D74S stylus). Stanton only had one M/I above it and that was the L847S (D84S stylus).
I have mounted the TL4S on the L747S body. No contest there either. Easily bettered the highly thought of D74S which BTW is also a Sterohedron styli. I now have just over 7 hours on the L747S/TL4S and have to state, this is one hell of a stylus.
My posts have been taking 12+ hours to appear on this thread so by the time you read this, I will have compared it to Stanton's top cartridges, the 981 LZS and the HZS. This stylus is definitely a winner.
Regards,
Don
Raul,

Do you know how to correct data on the Vinyl Engine Cartridge Database? It states all Pickering TL-(x) cartridges are M/M. Lets not allow history to repeat itself!
Regards,
Don
Raul,

Over the last few years, I have been following various forums discussing the Stanton/Pickering cartridges. I have a little note book on just them. Before the Richards handbook, the only information/knowledge I had was from my notebook of statements made by forum members that I trusted or just felt had correct knowledge. Richards handbook greatly added to that data base. I also bought the stylus thinking (from my notes), that the M/M line is what this stylus supported. Once I realized something was wrong, I went looking in Richards reference handbook for answers. Thumbing thru, I found nothing pertaining to the TL line. I had to reread the handbook from page 1. When I got to page 48, at the bottom of the page is a small list of cartridges/styli with cross-References to the line of like Stanton/Pickering cartridges. The TL-4Super cross-ref. is to the Stanton/Pickering M/I line. This little tidbit of information is the only mention of any of the TL line of cartridges. Like I said, I had to reread the entire handbook to find it. I have proven it to be true.
There are two Stanton Guru's (ex employees), on that forum you reference. They both readily admit to not knowing everything but they are far more knowledgeable than I.
For you, this cartridge journey will be like the Goldring G800. Cheap body (Stanton/Pickering M/I series), with surprise stylus (DTL-4S), = goldmine. You will not be disappointed.
Regards,
Don
My post Dated 12-16-12 took 17 hours to get printed! Moderator states 4-8 hours. When is the high speed improvement suppose to take effect?
Hi Acmam3

I have not tried a TL-4S cartridge, but I do now have my eye on a TL-3 body. What I'm trying to determine is if the TL-(X) bodies are any different than the TL(X)S bodies. Until Timeltel mentioned the DTL-4S stylus, I had not given the cartridge line much thought. I owe Tom a thank you for mentioning it in a previous post, thereby peeking my interest. From Richards handbook, it appears the TL-(x)S cartridge "bodies" are all the same. Only the stylus quality being the deciding factor for improvements in the "S" line. I am quite awe struck with the DTL-4S stylus top flight performance. I think it being thought of as a "P" mount type, has allowed most of us to overlook it. That is until now!
Regards,
Don
Raul,

"Btw, I already bought a DTL-4S in NOS condition for the non-Pmount Pickering cartridge version,"

Is yours the tall Stanton looking version, or the short flat Pickering looking version. Mine looks like a Stanton housing.
Regards,
Don
Tom,
The following quote is from a person on the Lenco forum in reply to a question I put forth to Richard. What he has said sort of snaps everything into focus.

"Your Stanton L747S, and the other L7x7 models: Stanton 680 in a P-Mount. Exact model
designation differs according to stylus.

The equivalent Pickerings are the TL series which are the Pickering XV-15 in a P-Mount.
Exact model designation (TLE, TL3-S, etc.) differs according to stylus."

Save yourself some money and just get the stylus. You already have 2 usable (identical), bodies.

Regards,
Don
Thanks, Tom,

I will be looking for some Gold XV-15 motors.
This DTL-4S is the top "P mount" Pickering stylus. Would not its twin be the top Pickering stylus in the XV-15 line. Is that not the XV-15/1800S!
The Stanton twins to the TL line/XV-15 line was the 681 solid mount and the L7x7S "P" mount. There top stylus was the 681EEES and the D84S. You and I have a D74S which is a step down from the D84S. There is no doubt in my mind that the DTL-4S is better that the/our D74S. Like is said earlier, this DTL-4S is a winner. Thank you for bring it to my/our attention. Quite a find and I'm looking for another!
Regards,
Don
Raul,
I also took note of Lewm's comment and found this on eBay (350668391609). For $21.75 it was a no brainer. The shear number of Stanton/Pickering M/I bodies that are out there, is stagering.

"I think that I will stay " calm " about Stanton/Pickering with my two Stanton 981 L/H version , the Pickering 5000XVS and the TL-4S."

Raul, with that group of cartridges, staying "calm" will be rather hard to do.

Regards,
Don
Raul,

After thinking a little more of your stay "calm" statement, I think I'm beginning to understand how you are able to come to that conclusion. With all the cartridges you have and have had, perhaps the excitement has dulled a little. I, and I would imagine others on this forum still look for and get excited over finding that stone cold bargain in a market of multi-thousand dollar cartridges. Your bar of "also ran cartridges" is much higher than most. This fact has to diminish some of that excitement factor that you have eluded to with your stay "calm". Your entire thread is based on NOT staying "calm" but getting excited and spreading the word on great finds. Keep the fires burning Raul. This is a great hobby!
Regards,
Don
Raul,

"There are several manufacturer " line contact " versions. It's right the name " line contact for them ? well is IMHO not important what is important is that as the Shibata or the analog-6 or even the MR the Stereohedron has a wider groove contact."

The Signet TK 7SU is a claimed to be a Shibata tip by Audio Technica. Their TK 7CLA is claimed to be a Line Contact. By your above quote, then they both must be the same stylus! Are they? I have both and they sure don't sound the same to me.
Regards,
Don
Raul

"About AT its Sibata ones are different than the Line Contact ones or the MR stylus shape even in what AT name it as Line Contact there are variations and diferent quality on the polish of the stylus or grain oriented and the like.

That is why I questioned PickeringUK's use of the term "Line Contact" for their Stereohedron stylus in their ad. They are not the same but different profiles. Same family but slightly different! Actually the Shibata came 1st. So it should be of the Shibata family, not line contact family.

Regards,
Don

How about we start the New Year off with a horror story with a happy ending!
Of the 2 Virtuoso's that I own, the Black with the Sound Smith's cantilever/stylus is the one kept in rotation. The original Red Wood with factory stylus/cantilever has been occupying shelf storage space. I discovered early on that its stylus guard also fits the Signet TK10 MKII cartridge in which I bought guard less. The TK10 also is kept in rotation so I have been storing the Red Wood guard less. Well a couple of months ago, while fumbling around looking for something on the shelf (wearing a sweater), somehow the bare stylus caught on my sweater sleeve and was flung across the room, bouncing off the far wall. After staring in disbelief, the only word that came to mind was S**T. I should of ordered a spare guard.
Well, a few weeks ago, when my wife asked me what I wanted for Christmas, my quick reply was a Jico/Shibata stylus. After explaining to her what the hell I was talking about, one got ordered.
To make this long story somewhat shorter, it has been received and the necessary trimming of the stylus housing has been accomplished and said stylus/plug installed. Well, upon first listen, I was not impressed. Thin, bass shy presentation. I tore everything down and reinstall/adjusted everything, No change. My first thought was surely Clear Audio didn't voice this cartridge to work only with the cheap ($33 at LPtunes), AT 95e stylus !
Perhaps, letting it run in for a few hours might change things. High hopes I did not have. Well, it didn't take a few hours, but only a few sides of record playing. I've never had a cartridge change so dramatically. Day/Night difference. It will be a few days before I get to compare it to my other Wood (the Sound Smith version). I can say that I am impressed with the added midrange clarity that is now quite noticeable.
The Jico was money well spent, but not an operation for the faint of heart. I had considered transplanting the cheap AT95e for practice, but if "smart" was something I practiced, I would have bought a stylus guard many months ago. Thanks to all that brought this stylus/plug transplant to our attention. Fun exercise. Updates to follow.
Regards,
Don
Hi Fleib,
Your comments are one of the underlying reasons I bought mine from TurntableNeedles.com. Their add states Jico manufactured. Actually never had a problem with either suppliers but truth in advertising being what it is, well, stated Jico, I went with them. I had taken notes from some of your statements pertaining to this transplant and did have on my list a ATN7V. Now that I have done this opperation, I just might do a 152LP that I have lying around next. Maybe my 440MLa (also not being used). This just might be fun. You are one of the people I must thank for leading the way in this transplant. Thank You!
Regards,
Don
Hi Fleib,

LPGear is in my understanding, the US distributor for Jico. Do you think Jico grades their stylus (grade 1,2,3,), then ships to LPGear? They (LPGear),then distributes to say TurntableNeedles and others, keeping the grades 1 for their own sale. Sounds like a good business decision to me. What you experienced kind of proves it. I think I'm going to start making all my Jico buys confined to just LPGear or Jico direct!
The Beryllium cantilever is my favorite and what I would like to install in a Virtuoso. What that cantilever (with shibata tip), did to my Goldring G800 still to this day has me absolutely stunned! I haven't intended to cut up the housing of either of the previous mentioned stylus (152LP or 440MLa), but do a transplant to a much cheaper AT95e (LPGear $33), green in color housing in which I would cut up to fit into the Virtuoso. I understand it to have the screw for stylus removal. I've experienced far to many bend stylus by accidents. I have no desire to start bending them on purpose. I remember reading somewhere that during the removal of a Boron or Beryllium cantilever, that just the backing off of the screw, shattered the cantilever so I'm a little nervous about this!
Considering your past experience and knowledge in this process, If you have additional or corrective input, it would be much appreciated. Thanks again Fleib for opening my eyes and ears to a this new experience!
Best of Regards,
Don
Hi Fleib,

If the slight difference in cantilever angle was quantified, lets say 2 degrees positive, could you instead of bending the cantilever, just place a thin, very thin tapered wedge on top of the cartridge body at installation to the tone arm/headshell/arm wand? Wedge could be made from ebony, lead, carbon fiber or whatever to satisfy resonance questions. Would not a tone arm with VTA adjustment on the fly (like my Graham 2.2), be able to do the same thing? If we are talkin slight angle adjustment of the cantilever, seems to me that this method would be a simple answer. Perhaps I'm not mentally seeing something?
Regards,
Don
Hi Acman3 and Balkin comrade!

Never heard of the Th 981? Surprised at amount of difference between the your 2 cartridges numbers! I didn't know/realize actual readings could be "that" amount of difference.
Regards,
Don
On the usaudiomart.com web site there is a Virtuoso Wood with a slightly bend stylus for sale. Concidering how easy and cheap ($33), to actually get a replacement stylus, the asking price of $250 seems down right cheap. If I didn't already own 2, you would of never seen this HEADS UP!
Tom,

"Just a thought." Yea, and a very good one!
Thanks to both you and Fleib. I'm not interested in having someone else change the Virtuoso. I wanted to do this myself. Yea, a fool and his money are soon parted but sometimes that's how we learn. Asking questions and having people like you two also contributes. Thanks.
Regards,
Don
Thanks Fleib,
I don't mean to be a pest over this. This angle difference must be far greater than I have been mentally picturing it.
You still have given me additional options with your previous sugestions. Thanks again, over and out!

Best of Regards,
Don
Acman3 & Comrade Nikola,

I only have spec. sheets for my LZS. I bought the HZS used and it didn't come with anything but the stylus guard!
From my Stanton Cartridge Specifications page,
Tracking range---.75-1.5
Channel seperation 35db
DC Resistance 535 Ohms
Inductance 400 mH
Output .8 mV
Nandric, the specs. for the cartridge just mentioned are much closer to what you have stated. The cartridge the specs. I have just listed are from a Stanton 500EE MKII from their Broadcast series.
Nandric, how sure are you that it is even a 981. Have you varied that it is even a M/M and not a M/I.
Raul,
As you are aware, I also have both the LZ and HZ 981's. I have spent hours swapping them back and forth trying to determine why "if at all", one could be preferred over the other. The comment you made, "tiny, tiny, hair", can not be stated more in the comparisons between these two cartridges. I have observed that after spending days listening to M/M,M/I style cartridges only, placing the LZ version in the session, I find it ever so slightly bright. Before anyone jumps to some type of conclusion, I must state I also tried it the other way. Days of listening to only M/C's, then adding to the session, the HZ version, I found it ever so slightly bass heavy. This hasn't come down to which is better, just what are the perceived differences. I too, could live with either, and I plan on doing just that. As far as one requiring a SUT and perhaps that's where the difference comes into play, well I hear no difference between weather SUT was in or out. When in, volume was set at 11:00. When out, the volume had to be set at 5:00. Perhaps there is distortion differences at various knob positions. I don't know. It's just to close to state one is better than the other. Preferring one over the other, well the door is wide open as to why, right down to signal levels pertaining to wire resistance in interconnect cables.
Regards,
Don
Regards,
Hi Professor,

Andy will take good care of the "TK7LCa". I intend dropping in on him this spring for a visit. Early M/C trip (Motorcycle not Moving Coil)! We're only a couple of hundred miles apart so for me (as well as it should be for you), a much safer shipment feeling than sending across the right pond to Axel. I've got a bid in on a Goldring G800 original stylus that Andy is waiting on. He wants to do a boron/LC replacement tip to see how well it compares to the Beryllium/Shibata stylus I had done with Axel. I am still quite impressed with the suspension rebuild he did on my Blue Oasis M/C. Sure is nice having someone so close with this type of expertise!
I'm still in wonderment as to how Stanton/Pickering can get such amazing sound from their short fat (Home Depot looking), pipe of a cantiliver. Sprinkled with "pixie dust" as you say.
Regards, and happy holidays to you,
Don
Stltrains,

"Has any of you tried the new Garrott P77i micro scanner."

I would also like to hear from someone with knowledge about this stylus. I do have on my P77 a Jico SAS1 stylus and concider it something special, I have heard it said that it betters the 77i micro scanner! Just words until someone I trust does a comparision. Shockingly more open and refined I must say is the SAS1 over the original P77.
Regards,
Don