Removable headshells 101


Due to the influence of Raul's thread on MM cartridges, I believe that some of us (perhaps for the first time), have acquired a tonearm/s with a removable headshell?
In my case, there was a vacuum of knowledge or information about what makes a good headshell and for the last 6 months a great deal of my time and effort has been expended in acquiring personal hands-on experience.
Perhaps a Forum to share experiences will help new adherents to this once denigrated (by the High End) segment of tonearm design?
128x128halcro
Hello, so far my modest experiences have suggested to me that a well made magnesium headshell (without the rubber washer) is almost always the one that I prefer. In fact the only exception in my memory that I've experienced so far is that my odd-duck gold body Stanton 500 with a d5100ee stylus sounds better on an aluminum one (AT LT model).

But which magnesium headshell? I have examples of only seven--the inexpensive Technics, the (2) ADC models, two AT MG models (9, 10), the Jelco, and the Sumiko. On this point mileage varies for me--perhaps due to arm/cartridge variables.

Cartridge leads...I prefer silver wire and not wanting to pay $70+ for each set I make my own.

Jim
Dear Halcro: I'm more sursprised by your post:
+++++ " state that he has no understanding of the reasons for the performance changes of various headshells is contradictory to.... " +++++, please let me know where I stated that sincerely I can't remember where.

No the headshell subject as any audio subject is in no way a " black art ", things are that exist almost no scientific research that can be confirmed through listening process or the other way around and due to this fact there are several " black art " audio subjects, that's all.

Now, if you re-read the MM thread ( first page. ) I stated there that I had " bad time " with the AT 20SS till I mounted in the SAEC UL3X headshell, I tested that cartridge in those " old " times with several other headshells and in different tonearmsand till today I don't have a precise explanation about. This seems like " black magic " but certainly it's not.

A few weeks ago I posted that I had some " problems " trying to made that the ADC 25 performs at its best, well I tryed in at least five different headshells ( where my guide was my experiences about. ) with no success til with out real foundation I mounted in an aluminum AT headshell that is full of holes/perforated and is not only ugly headshell but when you see it and when you have in your hand you can't trust in it! and you know what this AT headshell was the only one that made the ADC 25 really sings.
Black magic?, certainly not but even that I would like I don't have the time to design a scientific model to find out why that happened.

In the last four years I tested around 80 different cartridges with different tonearms and different headshells and even this kind of whole experiences I can't be aware today why the ADC 25 performs so well with that AT headshell maybe you have a precise explanation and I would like to hear it and learn about.

+++++ " The best removable headshells generally are those that are integral with the cartridge.... " ++++++

I respect your opinion but I have to disagree here, why?:

IMHO an integarted cartridge/headshell design preclude that we can find out which tonearm/headshell is the best match ( the cartridge examples you named were designed almost 40 years ago and between all those tears till today many things already change it on the whole subject. ) for that cartridge today shows us at its best even we can't test it in a fixed tonearm headshell design.

In the other side the internal wire/connectors inside that kind of cartridge designs are 40 years old and IMHO we today have better wire/pin connectors for cartridge mount: no doubt about.

There are other " problems " like in the FR where you can't change overhang or azymuth ( if the tonearm does not has it. ) or offset angle for testing different geometry tonearm/cartridge set up or for anything else.
I like more flexibility.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Henry, a few really good headshell ? O.k. let me suggest a few:
- if weight really matters and has to be really low: Orsonic AV-1.
- if weight should be low, but not that low: Orsonic AV-101 or Stability Titan
- if weight not that much issue: AT Technihard AT-LH18 (ONLY the "18" !!)
These three do represent technically the best I have found in 30 years. If a cartridge/tonearm sounds bad with any of these 4 headshells, it is not the headshell's fault.
The AT-LH18 is absurdly cheap compared with the competition - it is the clear "best buy" in headshell design (even it's standard wires and clips are good!).
Litz wires for headshell ? Ikeda or Nagaoka silver litz wire w/rhodium plated clips.
There are other headshells out there - much more expensive ones and cheaper ones. None of these 4 equipped with the wires mentioned will let you down.
Each will easily stand it's own against any other headshell for any other price tag.
They stood the test of time (30 to 12 years on the market) and have all 4 superb rigidity, very good energy transfer and are technically smart designs with a no-nonsense approach.
They are the right stuff if you want to know whats really in the cartridge and in the groove.
Cheers,
D.
Dear Dertonarm: I own the Orsonics and the AT ( the three models. ) ones, I think I own over 35 different headshell designs that I use trying to make the best cartridge match.

++++++ " These three do represent technically the best I have found in 30 years. If a cartridge/tonearm sounds bad with any of these 4 headshells, it is not the headshell's fault. " +++++

as almost always with you a statement that you can't prove. In the other side I can prove it is not that way.

The ADC 25 and AT20SS are only two examples that even if one headshell design could seems the " best technically " not always is a good cartridge match and with some cartridges could sound bad.
IMHO there is no audio perfect items and headshells are not an exception.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Dear Nandric: +++++ " I am not able to understand your
conviction that an forum is somehow more objective. Ie one
get usualy 15 different answers from 10 persons. " +++++

normally I don't trust on professional reviewers that are biased some way or the other to commercial compromises, I don't trust either in 30 years old reviews where the audio items ( audio systems. ) used are way different from today ones.

I don't trust on reviewers where things were that their reports are faulty ( by its review process. ) and where their findings are different from what we heard on different home systems or that are out of reality against live events taked as music reference.

Even that Halcro and I are not always in agreement ( we are in the main audio targets. ), fortunately, I trust with out doubt over say MF. There are many reasons why I trust in Halcro but one critical is that Halcro is not biased in any commercial way and in his honesty that he reports what he heard, it does not matters if I agree or not.

In this forum there are several persons whom I trust with out doubt over any single reviewer out there.

Do you think that I don't trust in Downunder only because he and I almost always are in disagrement?, no I trust in him that's not biased in anyway.

There are several other persons in this forum that are very well regarded, that own great audio systems and that I don't trust on them, mainly because are biased: biased or in a commercial way or biased to support some one.

In good shape: can I trust in Dertonarm or Syntax or Nandric ? could you?

Yes, I trust in non-biased people in this and other forums against/over reviewers even if we have " 15 different answers from 10 persons ", the subject here is which of those 15 answers are the " one " and only your skills/experience/know-how level along some type of research ( who is telling what, which audio system they own, music sound priorities of those persons, biased?: to what, etc, etc ) can tell you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.