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 rauliruegas

Dear friends: The Halcro sample has no Shibata stylus but eliptical one and its construction/specs are different because the X1 with shibata stylus was designed in that way for 4-channel that needs a wide open frequency response at the up part of the frequency spectrum.

Exist real differences between the Z-1 and X-1 shibata stylus and where both were marketed with berylium cantilever in Japan?

Yes and not only because the higher X-1 price but because true different performance that we can see and read here ( we can read that both models were not available in Canada and USA, at least according with the information. ):

file:///C:/Users/Rub%C3%A9n/Downloads/ve_jvc_x1%20(4).pdf 

The Halcro version is totally different, even does not " say " JVC but Victor and does not has the 4-channel sign.

JVC designed several MM cartridges ( more MC than MM ) and exist too the Z-4 models and the 4-MD models ( I own the top one on this series. ).

As I posted I was and am lucky enough to get the X-1 and latter on the MK2.

In the other side, the quality of all the SAS stylus replacement were manufactured to an specific price point ( IMHO not top quality. ) and many times with out to much knowledge of the cartridge overall charactheristics.

You can read read here what's happening about and the experience of that Agoner is exactly the one I had with the same cartridge with dedicated SAS replacement:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/telarc-1812-revisited-2 

Regards and enjoy the the music,
R.




Dear friends: I can't be sure but my speculative opinion is that the X-1 cartridges with the Victor denomination  and the X-1 with the top plate JVC denomination are not exactly the same or performs the same.

Of course this is not the first time that my experiences are different from the ones of some of you .

I read the Dover post and he talks about the Victor X-1 and he compared against Koetsu and Glanz and he found out that the X-1 ( overall ) is an inferior one.

My experiences with my JVC X-1 and MK2 is the other way around.

Anyway, enough for now on this topic.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Pryso: "  Some assumed you simply grew tired of the trials (or found musical nirvana "

Thank's to ask, as a fact I received several/many emails asking for that all were really appreciated. Things are that I'm to busy and need focus on what I do day by day.

Tired by the trails? never I could think that other/some agoner's maybe could be " tired " of me.
found musical nirvana? well I'm still in its quest, as all we know an endless target.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.


Dear jbethree: As I posted years ago the JVC ( X-1 MK2. ) along the MF-2500 are stellar performers.

Sooner or latter on the net , I hope, can appear for some of you can delight with.

Good that the Z-1 " dance " for you. Btw, the presentation of the JVC against the Denon you name it are just different and maybe the JVC does not beat it. I like that Denon and I like my JVC and MF, maybe different kind of " like ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear chakster:  ""  If it was top Astatic model ever made i have the feeling that Glanz top model beats them all. This is only my suggestion. Since these brands are clones of each other, ........................... The Astatic mf 200 equal to Glanz mf 31L is a good one, ...... """"


Where do you read or who told you that Astatic cartridges are clones of the Glanz?  In my understood Astatic ( that's a very old corporation. ) only took the Glanz patent ( moving flux. ) and that's all about.

The " clone " you name it: MF 200/ mfg 31L is a good example that those cartridges are not clones.
The output level on both cartridges is different 4.2mv vs 3.5mv. Inductance 90 vs 110. VTF: 1.75grs vs 1.25 grs. Cartridge weight: 6grs vs 5.5grs. Frequency response: 10hz to 20khz vs 20hz to 20khz with a 2 db deviation in both cases and I can go on with those differences.
As you can see far away to be clones.

The Astatic MF 2500 was an earlier cartridge than the MF 100/200, even its inductance value is different in between and IMHO the 2500 is the best performer in the Astatic catalog and way better than the MFG 71L. I can't talk on the 61 till I heard it.

As I said Astatic is an old and experienced corporation and did not to copy/clone Glanz in the way you posted.

Yes, I can be wrong and the best judge about obviously is you.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.



Dear chakster: I think that you have to re-read what I posted to you again. Here it's:

"""   The " clone " you name it: MF 200/ mfg 31L is a good example that those cartridges are not clones.
The output level on both cartridges is different 4.2mv vs 3.5mv. Inductance 90 vs 110. VTF: 1.75grs vs 1.25 grs. Cartridge weight: 6grs vs 5.5grs. Frequency response: 10hz to 20khz vs 20hz to 20khz with a 2 db deviation in both cases and I can go on with those differences.
As you can see far away to be clones. """

Please let me know where you can " see " ( read on those numbers. ) that both cartridges are clones?. For me it's  a" disturbing " ( for say the least. ) statement.


""""  the answer is very simple:
I've learned about Astatic vs. Glanz right here on the forum reading posts of owners of the both models  .... ""

WOW!, I don't expect this kind of answer because I know several of the gentlemans posting here for years and many of them know about " cartridge differences on numbers ".

With  all my respect to you I think that what you read it was a misunderstood or a " fault " from you and if not then what you read it was totally wrong.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.


Dear friens: How could be that two " different  " cartridges with different specs and different people cartridge design voicing can sounds/performs the same ( as the MF 200 vs MFG 31L ) for many of you?
 or that could performs so nearest, for some of you, ( like the Z1/SAS vs JVC X1-MK2 ) when both are way way different  in all parameters ?

Maybe each one of us have a different explanation. I think that in a " perfect " audio world that can't happen but in our real audio world and talking of cartridges quality level performance and with vintage ones could happen many things:

- down-graded ( anywhere. ) cartridge sample because natural aged .
- damage in the cartridge samples.
- too many hours of play on that sample.
-  cartridge set up not fine tuned in one or both of the vs cartridges.
- different SPL on audition where the cartridges has different output levels as the ones I mentioned.

- Non sufficient audio system resolution level to discriminate.
- Not enough training in our ears/brain to really make the discrimintating very hard process during an evaluation comparisons.
- that we want to hear ( that way for any reason. We are biased in that " route ". ) what in reallity we are not hearing.
-  because is the " new " toy.
- obviously, different audio/music priorities.
- and several other reasons that you can think about.

Something that's " weird " for me is that after the last 2-3 years ( that I was out of this forum. ) I follow reading from many of you that still exist many differences in your cartridge samples quality performance and mines 

Perhaps I did not grow up. Who really knows.

I would like to know and maybe others too to know your overall opinion about. What's happening down there?.

I really appreciate ( from all of you. ) and need and want to know it and learn about. What " link " or " links " I'm not taking in count or still I do not give enough importance. Thank's in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.








""" ...  ( like the Z1/SAS vs JVC X1-MK2 ) when both are way way different  in all parameters ? """"  even the cartridge body design/construction and stylus/cantilever holder are different!!!!!! 

same cartridge body resonances?????

R.


Dear chakster: So, you have no facts and only:

"  The Astatic is a very good cartridge but I do not feel that it is in the same domain as these Glanz ... "  just  feelings with no real/objective facts that can confirm that opinion.

In the other side no one saids are clones. Example:

"""  Coil windings, materials used, coupling mechanisms and output are distinct across them. """ and even this gentleman has no single reference that confirm his words but " saids " are different and no clones.

"""  Glanz and Astatic carts are made by Mitachi Corporation. Even the boxes are identical. The only difference are the styli: Shibata by MF 100 and 200 and line contact by Glanz 71­31. The corpusses look to me also identical.  """", this gentleman said are differences but the cartridge body and box. Did he ( or you. ) knew/know the whole internal specific cnstruction?. 

chakster if we see two Honda Civic cars where one of them was modified to participate in a real race car to improves its performance : could we  say that both are clones just because the looking is the same?  or could we say are clones when those cars has different drive/running/design specifications?

I can tell you that for me makes no sense to say are clones. I think are differents.

Again, I think that you are not carefully reading or you have a misunderstood on the FACTS and explanation I gave you in my first post about . You need to read it again and read too my second post where I began: "" Dear friends """

It's weird that not a single gentlemans of the regulars in this thread posted,  yet,  to help you or help me on this very critical subject.

Seems to me that till now I'm not wrong, yet.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.




Dear chakster: Exist many audio subjects where we learned or understood in not the right way.

It's almost imposible to have even " twins " as you named on cartridges not even with cartridges coming from the same manufacturer.

Audio Technica, Stanton, Sonus and other manufacturers are a good example on my statement. 
Example: In the MM AT 20 series all the models ( " top of the line ". ) has same motor and loks identical but are not the same and does not performs the same, in that series the 20 SS were " hand selected " because best stylus polished and specs performance on play.
Stanton had the 980 and 981 ( same everything. ) where the 981 was " hand calibrated " to meet exactly cartridge specs and in the Sonus Dimension 5 happens the same with the calibrated version.

In other cartridge manufacturers they do the same ( for the top modelñ ) and don't " disclose " it.


""  Glanz 61 I would say there is nothing like that made by Astatic in their top of the line cartridges  ... """

why should exist that? Astatic took only the patent and that's all. As I said the voicing of Astatic cartridges was do it from a totally different gentleman than for Glanz cartridges. This subject is critical to understand the whole cartridge design.

Do you think that Lyra  just send to Scan-Tech ( Lyra manufacturer as was Mitachi for the Astatic. ) what they want with out makes a deep cartridge voicing to know if what ST did it meets the Lyra " specs "? or we can think that through that voicing and modifications on the cartridge  on its building characteristics is what permit Lyra to have the final product. That's the way things happen.

Every thing is impórtant in the design/building of a cartridge and its deep voicing could be one of the higher importance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.







Dear Lewm:  In that Astatic series the top of the line is the MF 100 that's IMHO is very good neutral performer where rhe MF 200 is very good too with more " drama ". You can't go wrong with any of those two Astatic's.

In the other side, I owned the CS 100 that many of us ( as me . ) could think the best of the best Stanton but the 981 calibrated beats with some " easy ". For some people is the top one but IMHO not on quality performance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: The Collector's Series 100 was one model that in theory was the top of the line in the Stanton catalogue ( over the 981. ).

Nowe, we can't compare the HZ with the LZ because are different cartridges that IMHO both outperforms the 100. If I remember Stanton gave the model name ( 100 ) because they builded 100 cartridges but this I can't confirm 100%.

Anyway, you already have it just listen and decide about.


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: On the JVC X-1/Z-1/SAS topic and when all of you have very diferent quality performances experiences than me I always re-think what's happening with what I heard and in the last days I was busy listening both JVC cartridges through my own evaluation/comparation process.

First I would like to know whom of you own the X-1MK2 where you can read in the top plate: JVC X-1 ( not Victor. ) and in the stylus holder 4 channel.

Now, after my listening days my opinion is that the Z-1/SAS still is a mid-fi cartridge and not near the overall performance, stellar one, I experienced with the JVC X-1 MK2.

What do you think of my latest evaluation about? why exist so high differences on these experiences with your collective bias?

Your answers be appreciated.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.


Dear friends: This is for those owners of JVC X-1MK2 and Victor/SAS that decided not participate in my open dialogue.

People say here in México:  """ Whom stay quiet/silence consent """"

So, I understand no one but me owns the JVC X-1MK2 and my different point of view against all of you could be because of that and about the Victor because my two Victor/SAS samples are in bad conditions and yours are first rate.

Good!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear jbethree: Maybe I need a third Victor sample or maybe today I prefer a different kind of distortions. I can tell you that every one of us " day by day " are learning.

I respect your opinion and hope you can find out the original JVC X-1MK2 that IMHO is a totally different cartridge that the Victor you own.

Btw, it's a pity that the DVD-A almost disappears. Fortunatelly digital always is wroging up on quality level and today 32/384 technology is almost unbeatable even by our be loved analog hobby..


I take advantage of this post to send to every one of you and your dearest family my very best wishes in these holidays!!


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.


Dear Fleib: I own and owned all those Ortofon cartridges and IMHO the MC 2000 is unsurpassed not only by the 2000 MK2 but even both 3000 are no better.

The 2000 MK2 was the Ortofon answer to the buyers in two issues: where the 2000 was a " problem " for its very very low output and very high compliance the MK 2 is a higher output cartridge with lower compliance, same for the 3000. The other change was the body cartridge material instead of aluminum the other use ceramic and in the 3000 stylus is different and I think ( I'm not sure right now ) cantilever material too.

As you said, different cartridges but very good ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear griffithds: Thank's to answer. Keep enjoying what you like.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Lewm: I was and am a fan for Ortofon cartridges and yes the MC 2000 is a hiden gem with a quality levbl performance to spread every where.

Right now I'm exploring in my system another vintage ( non Ortofon. ) MC cartridge that I bought several years ago and that I had it in new condition and never touched,  I will report on it when I be sure can be of interest to the audio community but right now I like it .

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear diamond ears:  Nagaoka is a very older cartridge manufacturar that IMHO always works with is own cartridge/motor principles.

I never cared on which other cartridge manufacturer took the Moving Flux principle but now that you mentioned that one was Micro Seiki whom  name it Vartiable Flux, I have two samples ( I think ) some where and the cartridge body design is similar to Astatic ones but if I remember they did not use plastic but metal material in its construction and I remember that the MS are good performers. Years ago I think I mentioned some where in this thread.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.





Dear nandric: you have good memory on the JVC  X-1 MK2 because was you ( thank's again. ) whom bought it for me ( MK2 NOS JVC stylus replacement. ) in Europe with out knowing what in a " hell " was the JVC X-1.

Now, when you own several great cartridges and one has a diferent and higher quality performance, like the Astatic MF-2500, you can choose whatever adjective you want: stellar, outstanding, fabulous, marvelous, etc .
I choosed " stellar " because it belongs to a unique and diferent " league ". I own or owned some: fabulous, outstanding, etc. cartridges but IMHO " stellar " MM is the adjective that the 2500 deserves, at least till today.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: I can't dispute about your modified 7 fz because I owned in original shape where I agree with JC about. The cartridge is a good cartridge but IMHO both frequency extremes are only " so, so "  and nothing to " die for ".

I posted here that if we want a real FR winner we need to listen the MCX-5 that was not designed by the " master " but for engineers that work in FR and that latter founded Entré. This MCX-5 is the one in FR quality level performance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: For good reasons I have not any more the 702. Normally I don't like to stay sticked with one or two cartridges . I like to learn  and one way to do it is: listen, listen, listen and listen to diferent cartridges ( today/vintage ) and diferent audio systems.

The series 7 is not for me. Please do a learning exersice: take any of your stand alone cartridges and connect to the headshell with the oldest wires you can have on hand, listen it and then change those headshell wires for the best ( today ) you have on hand. Certainly will be a " huge " diference in the quality level sound performance in the side of the newest headshell wires ( at least this is what happen in my experiences always. ).

Well the 7's has a very old internally wires and that's what you " like " along what that integrated headshell makes not for the better but the other way around. Years ago  I like those kind of distortions, not any more.

Anyway, I'm sure that like me you will learn too or : maybe not?. In the mean time enjoy it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R. 
Dear normansizemore:  What look I for any type ( headshell wires, tonearm internal wire, IC, speaker ones, etc. ) of wire/cable for my system?: a dead neutral cable and ( please ) I don't want to have a dialogue here about neutrality, maybe only that characteristic needs a dedicated thread.

Normally I use silver or silver/cooper blended cables, even some of my power cables.

I can open a cable store with all my tested cables through so many audio years. I can tell you ( for example ) that I own over 400 sets of headshell wires.

Now, each one of us have diferent audio/music sound priorities and this is what many times makes the diference and is the main issue on audio dialogues.

At the end the important subject ( for many and diferent reasons. ) is to listen what we like.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: What I know is that you and me are in diferent treads on that learning curve/stair.

"" 

I myself was never obssesed

with any wire whatever and am convinced that this myth is

invented by P&R people. ""  and you gave you an answer that you are wrong with that statement:


""" 

 I know that copper sound different than

silver """", so needs no additional coment from my part.


""" 

Kondo-san used by preference the ''old kind'' , say,

100 years old silver from Italy... """


with all my respect : who was Kondo-san?, japanese people are very skillful but......????????


Do you know when bought I my Ikeda ( no cantilever ) cartridge sampler?. I already posted here and in other threads ( years ago ) my opinion about. You are starting with, we will see what the time can tell you on that cartridge.


Regards and enjoy the music,

R.






Dear normansizemore: You are welcome.

For me was and is a surprise that exist a real alternative to MC cartridges, too.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear ddriveman: Happy new year for you and your family too!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear griffithds:  """  I guess we all should discard our Marantz's, McIntosh's, and Dynaco amps """

I agree with you on this sentence, good.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: Yes, I could be wrong so I appreaciate your explanation about:

you posted:

""" 

with any wire whatever and am convinced that this myth is

invented """""


so for you is only a myth that was/is invented.


in the same post you said:


""" 

I know that copper sound different than

silver """


I would like to know what do you mean with those statements?


is still a myth for you or you know but can't hear it? opr what?


Btw, any one knows who was Kondo-san. Siome japanese audio manufacturers like to surround they products with " mystic and mysteries "  and Knondo was a good example. Sugano-san was other: I can remember at the began of the Koetsu cartridges no one ( included the japaneses. ) knew any single spec on the Koetsu cartridge, not even the VTF. In those old time ( even the professional reviewers ) were " inventing " the VTF on those cartridges and every one used diferent VTF. That was a myster AND THAT'S ALL


Regards and enjoy the music,

R.

Dear tubed1: Reading over the link seems to me that there is nothing new in the cartridge design that other cartridge manufacturers not did/do it.

Maybe the more atractive characteristic be its price if the quality level performance is higher that the cartridge competition inside its price range. Sooner or latter we all can be informed by its owners or maybe a audio magazyne review.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear griffithds: I don't discard any cartridge because we have not alternative to listen to. In the other side you can't compare the kind and length of the wire used in the cartridge coils against an amplifier.

Please read again my post to you where I said that I agree only with that " sentence ". I don't posted about wires ?????


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear nandric: Ok, you are not deaf: good!. That's all about.


Regards and enoy the music,
R.
Dear griffithds: """  because articles written by actual Electrical Engineers, do not agree with what you have stated. The difference being, they have test results that have been verified through repeated lab testing """"

unfortunatelly and with all my respect almost all those Electrical Engineers are not ( at the same time ) TEA.

In the other side maybe they are measuring not what they have to measure that has a direct relationship with music/sound quality performance characteristic.

I read it and agree with you on that part of your overall sentence, that's all.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear lewm: """  some DIYers that old transformers, obtainable by parting out high quality vintage amplifiers, like Acrosound, Marantz, etc, do sound superior to newly wound transformers... """

I'm not an expert on wire-wound and I suppose not every coil/inductor is wounded the same. I know for sure that not all cartridge coils are wounded the same even inside the same manufacturer.
In the other side could be, some times, that those DIYers what are listening not always is better quality performance but only DIFERENT quality performance.

Anyway, each one of us have diferent opinions and dialogue inn between could helps to understand in better way the complexity of audio subjects.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear danvignau: I don't know to whom you are refering about that "  MC hummed ". Certainly not my case.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear florence4/lewm: There are at least two cartridge Grace series that never been marketed out side Japan/Asia: the Level II and the 14 series ( both with more than 7 diferent models, even the 14 serie has a Disco model for DJs. ).

The 14 top model appeared in 1985 with a boron cantilever and MR stylus and this is the one that could outperform the 9Ruby ( Level II has too a Ruby model. ).
Sellers take advantage that in America/Europe are not well know cartridges and put on sale at very high prices that seems to me don't justify its quality performance.

I seen on Agon/ebay the 14 entry level asking more money for it even up than the 9 ruby!.

Obviously that we can try it, certainly not me in this time.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Chakster: You posted:

"""
Do you like SAS or prefer the original stylus of Victor X1II or XIIE ? I think the best is to find NOS Victor. It was you who said earlier that SAS made with specific price tag in mind when Victor is more complicated design made to be the best in competition between companies in the golden age of analog and MM design. It was not a big problem for me to find NOS original Victor X1II (with original stylus) and later another lightly used X1IIE.

I don’t care about SAS since it was on my Technics 205c mk4. The original technics mk4 stylus was much better.

There are plenty of new design with similar Micro Ridge stylus profile available today but who cares? Pretty much detailed sound but somehow boring compared to some vintage eliptical, shibata or line contact models.

In most cases SAS replacement looks ugly on nice vintage cartridges that never been designed to wear sas on them.

p.s. Now i remember your post about Ortofom M20FL when you clearly explained that M20E (eliptical) is your choice over M20FL (fine line). So why the most advanced profile is not always mean the best? So why bother with SAS aka Micro Ridge? """



Chakster, first I’m not convinced that the Victor cartridge branch designation been exactly the same design than the branch name JVC model, even that both were designed/builded by JVC.
Somewhere here in the last 3 thread pages already gave my explanations about.

I tested the Victor/SAS and IMHO is far away on quality performance against the JVC X1-MK2

Now, SAS stylus replacements were a good option against some original cartridge stylus on non-top/average cartridge performers.
Your exoeriences with your top Technics confirm it and you are not the first person that report about that same SAS replacement in the same Technics model.
I own the Shure M97 Xe a mediocre cartridge that I bougth because many people on VE loved with the SAS replacement and yes it sounds a little better but still in the mediocrity.

Yes, the SAS ones were designed with a very strictly price range on mind and that’s why were so inexpensive replacements but far away from the very best stylus replacement or re-tipped coming from the cartridge manufacturers. Not all MR or Shibata’s or whatever are manufactured with the same quality level, either: stylus and cantilevers.

Do you know why some replacements through after market retippers ( as Alex in germany. ) have so low prices?
Exactly, because the stylus/cantilevers they buy are not top/first rate because on many of those rettipers they even can’t get it from the original builders.

Yes, I made a mistake to retip several of my cartridges through Axel and now in the top ones I’m retipping again with top ones replacements.

In the other side, I own both Ortofon cartridges ( at least two samples of each one. ) and I prefeered the e over the l but I have several years I don’t " touch " neither.
Now even today some top cartridge manufacturers still use elipthical stylus tip and the old Shibata shapes. We have to remember that is more easy to make a precise cartridge set up with ellipthical stylus tip than with MR ones and in reality I can't know if what in theory is true about the advantages on the MR and the like stylus profiles is absolutely true during playback tests with same cartridge and with different stylus shape. Those Ortofon's were an experience about.

No, I don’t bother about SAS, I’m with you on this subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear CH.: Maybe I don't explained very well. I'm not saying that Axel is not and skilled and knowledge as a retipper because is very good doing what he does.
What I want to say is that his stylus/cantilever combinations are not the premium ones that comes with many of the today top LOMC cartridges.

For that suspension problem Axel is fine. My retipper source is VdH.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends:  Nandric posted:  """  Dear Raul, Your info about Axel is misleading... """"

I don't thik so:

time before that you or any one is this forum and other net analog forums I found out Axel  cartridge rettiper and investigated his works before I " tested " to fix by him one of my cartridges, after I did it and received that cartridge I brought to " the audio community " Axel.
I know perfectly and repeat again : before you, anything how was and is the Axel's work who first than all email me his options price list for the cartridges retips.

He never had premium cantilever/stylus parts. Even he contacted with me expressely for I can give him some information where he could buy those premium parts.

The problem with premium parts suppliers is not only that are only 3-4 of them but that the really premium parts are reserved to the cartridge manufacturers and no one else. Many times even those suppliers choose the best of their samples for that cartridge manufacturers. So we can't wait that rettipers can buy those top premium parts. Perhaps only that gentleman in UK with his paratrace patented stylus.

You can be shure that even through VdH or Benz Micro ( top rettipers. ) the rettiping is first rate but not the one choosed for their top VdH/Benz Micro models.

VdH not only fixed my 100MK4 but at least other sample with the same problem of other Agoner.

Chakster VdH could be a good option for you or try through Benz Micro.

In the other side, I respect a lot to JC and I can be wrong but my opinion in that problem with those top Technics cartridges in its suspension is that that tension wire has an utility to tame the Technics quality level.

It's dificult to think that Technics used some kind of characteristics in their designs with out need it. That other gentleman that fixed his 100C MK4 through VdH latter on bougth the Lyra Atlas and somewhere he posted that he prefered the Technics to the Atlas.

IMHO and till today Technics research and designs are second to none and till today no one even its greatness.
Technics was not the company/enterprise of one or two persons but part of the greates/bigger consolidated electronics gigant in the world: Matushita.
So, full of resources of every kind to the research, design and manufacture. Period.
It's pity that we can't have that Technics today in our top audio analog world.

Now, the 205 MK4 is not a total different anaimal than the 100C MK4. The 205 MK4 quality level performance level is just remarkable and has the 100C MK4 legacy.


The 205 MK4 was the last top cartridge Technics cartrige and started in the audio market in 1984 against 1982 for the 100 C MK4.

Btw, the latest Technics LOMC 305 MK2 is a must to listen it and can put on " shame " some today top LOMC ones.


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.




Dear N: """

The expression ''low rider'' is a kind of friendly

substitution for defective suspension... """"


that statement is part of each one ignorance level and in your case no experiences about.

Low rider?, low riders the VdH Colibri even after the 300 hours fine tunning. The FR MC X5 or the Linn Akiva and many more.

So don't spread that kind of statements.


In the other side:


 """ that is why you needed to search for some other re-tipper """



Wrong, totally wrong. That's was not the reason but that I learned about premium retips.  In the other side,  I email you in private/confidence way about that " conflict " trusting in you but now I know that you are a news paper. Shame of you, pity.
.

regards and enjoy the music,
R. 
N.:  WRONG again in all what you posted.

Btw, who wants and enemy with " friends " like you?, no thank's.

Have a good time,
R.
Dear chakster: """ Still great sound quality though. """

is " normal " that the vintage cartridge suspension is really out of spec as when manufactured, some times a little " loose " sometimes a little " firm ". Now, the quality level of its sound is a good parameter to " measure " in some way if exist a real problem there and from the frequency range we have to discern/listen carefully through a very well knowed LP tracks  if both frequency extremes are " optimal ", if no one of them puts a non equilibrated kind of sound. Here what we have to listen are subtle sounds changes in those frequency range, not easy.
I remember when one of my 6-7 samples of the Ortofon 20 super suddenly colapsed its suspension.  In that model the quality of the high frequency extreme was just gorgeous as I think never heard it in any other cartridge but against the rest of the frequency range was out of context: too much of that lovely high frequency sound. I had more than 3-4 experiences with cartridges that suddenly colapsed and those experiences were never exactly the same changes in the listen sound.

Btw, in the VdH Colibri is almost imposible to measure the distance between the below of the cartridge body and the LP surface even we can think that with the LP warps it will hit that surface, this never happen but that distance is at minimum at least in my four samples of that VdH samples I owned and own.

Btw, I see in your Technics cartridge picture that you own the headshell integrated models, if you can try to get the stand alone models on both cartridges  where you can choose for the right headshell and headshell wires for each cartridge model.


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear chakster: I don't know if Dominic still has the same prices as 3 years ago ( maybe higher today. ) but here it's his prices then:

"""   I prefer fitting either boron, ruby or my own nickel cantilevers.Tips include elliptical, micro ridge and Fritz Gyger II and S tips.Guide prices include-fitment of boron cantilever with micro ridge tip £250fitment of ruby cantilever with FG S tip £350fitment of FG II tip to existing cantilever £250. I can also straighten bent cantilevers within reason.Inspection fee of £30 applies to all carts sent in for examination. Included if work undertaken. """

all that plus shipping.


Now, as I told you the best way to do it is to send the cartridges to him because with cartridges as the 100C MK4 or 205 MK4 money can't be object, those cartridges deserves it. Rewards comes for sure.

I will send to him with out ask some of my cartridges where one of them is for recoil. Of course that I ask for Dominic only on those cartridges that are worth for his premium job.


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.


Dear chakster/jpjones3318: I think that no one here is a cartridge expert/designer or manufacturer to give you a clear and precise answer. We are just audiophiles like you.

To solve both of you yours Technics cartridges you have to send it to an expertise for he can analize each single cartridge grading/level of " damage ". Asking by emailo is ot the way to go.

This link can gives you a true opportunity to fix those cartridge problems. Dominic is the only retipper that even offer a cartridge recoil! where no one else evenj thinks to do it.
I know very well Dominic where I had information through several emails, he was the gentleman who told me about that " gem " name it Goldring 800 and in its time I posted here all about that cartridge and the Dominic site. I do it again for you and any one ( btw, no here you don’t find out those low prices of other rettipers. Here we are talking of premium repairs at all levels and this has a price a fair price for that kind quality of job. Dominic is a music lover, an audiophile and an enthusiast of the analogue experiences, in that order. ):

http://www.northwestanalogue.com/cartridge-repairs.html


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear friends: For a long time I had not the opportunity to listen again my Precept 440 LC till 2 days ago and all I can say is: gorgeous performance.

The ones of you that own it and as me do not listen it for a time I think is time to do it. What a wonderful experience.
For thepeople that don't own it yet is time to go for it. Recomended.

This 440 LC could put on " shame " almost any of our beloved " gems ",  with it I'm not in a " hurry " to listen something diferent or even " better ".


Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear @jeff1225 : The Ortofon M20 Super ( both models. ) are a good MM experience.
As all cartridges those ones are very sensitive to load impedance and to load capacitance. As always system dependt too and dependent against our music/sound priorities.

Now, if you have opportunity to buy it then do it and give it the chance to shows in your system its good quality level performance. You can't go wrong with the Ortofon's.

In the other side the 77 is a diferent performer and very good too and you can find the A&R 77 ( same as the Garrot. ) normally on Canada or UK ebay sites.

I can't now if the 77i is really an improvement or in reality a diferent performer.

Talking of the Garrot/A&R cartridges you can't find out the SAS stylus replacement because from months now is out of production.

Vintage AT MM cartridges are very good and you still can buy: 20SS, 20SLa, 15SS and the like.

The MM cartridge experience is really wide and normally a very good one.

Now that you mentioned the Ortofon I will give a listen and I'm sure I will deligth it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear @jeff1225 : I can read that you already experienced the MM alternative, so the " road " is to listen diferent very good " flavors " that asm you said gives " more fun ". Good.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear @o_holter : I owned/own the 99, Helikon, Clavis, Clavis D'capo, Kleos and heard the Skala ,Titan, Titan i, Etna and Atlas. These last two Lyra models along the Kleos are way diferent performers against the other Lyra kind of designs.

Lyra started with the Kleos a new cartridge kind of design/concept that goes up to the Atlas. Is this kind of design I really like it and way better than the " old " one designs where I was not enterely satisfied.

Yes, I agree with you: if in some one system the Etna, Kleos or Atlas performs " bad/not good enough " it's just because the system and not those Lyra great performers.

Congratulations to be a proudly Atlas owner. I envy you! in good shape.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.


Dear @jeff1225 / @chakster : Exist many information in the net about the original P77  vs  A&R P77.

This is a minimum part of it:


"""  Recently a very knowledgeable friend, told me to try this combination:

Get a A&R Cambridge 77 cartridge from e-bay or similar source, and combine it with a Jico SAS Stylus 1 http://stylus.export-japan.com/index.php?cPath=88&osCsid=nmk8hofpu6vfml9e6v8tmutso4

He said that he had measured the generator to be exact as the Garott Brothers 77 cartridge and that the SAS Stylus 1 will fit the generator and it might even surpass the sound of the well known and very very good sounding Optim http://www.garrottbrothers.com/opt.html

I was really intrigued by these statements, and because i trust my friend very much on vinyl sound matters, i proceeded to buy a second hand A&R Cambridge 77 cartridge off e-bay, and combine it with the SAS Stylus 1...

Well immediately i noticed detail and timbre that my Benz Wood L2 didn't bring out... i haven't got many hours on it yet, but i am really amazed by the sound quality... and i wish to share this finding with you...


A&R Cambridge were no cartridge manufacturers, though their cartridges did enjoy some success in the UK in the 70´s and 80´s.

The A&R P77 is a mid 1980s vintage moving magnet high compliance cartridge designed in the UK by A&R Cambridge and manufactured in Japan to very exacting standards.

The P77 featured a Weinz Paroc (parabolic oval cone) stylus on an aluminium cantilever, and was noted for its warm musicality and punchy output. It became a very popular cartridge due to its ability to work well in a wide range of tonearms from budget level to the more expensive. Although now long out of production, the cartridge is still much sought after today, a testament to both its lasting musical capability and good build quality.

At 6 grams, this is a medium mass cartridge.

Specification
Output Voltage @ 5cm/sec 4mV
Channel Balance @ 1kHz 1.5dB
Channel Separation @ 1kHz >20dB
Frequency Response 20Hz - 20kHz
Compliance 20μm/mN
Recommended Tracking Force 1.8g
Tracking Force Range 1.6 - 2.2g
Recommended Load 47kΩ in parallel with 200-400 pF
Cartridge Weight 6.0g
Stylus Type Profiled
Stylus Radii 50x7 μm
Cantilever Type Aluminium Dual Tube


Tonight I've also fitted the roughly 25 year old A&R p77 that came with my secondhand Linn and played some charity shop records. Wow, what a match compared with my DV10x5! Despite not maybe being the highest of Fi, there's a fullness and richness that seems to complement the IBLs very well. 

The P77 stylus was originally supplied to Arcam by The Expert Stylus Company in Kent. As far as I know they are still around and can still supply replacements. It's worth a try. """




IMHO Garrot and A&R have the same generator/motor design ( Dynamic Coil concept. ) but with diferent cartridge voicing and not exactly the same and precise cantilever/stylus shape combination, maybe ( even if the same stylus. ) not with the same polished quality level. So, the P77i maybe is not necessarybetter performer, only diferent.


Now, with original vintage cartridge the quality performance on cartridge samples could be diferent because " agging " and in diferent operation conditions.

In the other side cartridge quality performance is system dependent and not only because the " kind/quality " of system but because diferent levels of accuracy during the cartridge/tonearm set up overall parameters.




Regards and enjoy the music,

R.