The greatest MM and MI cartridges ....

Dear Griffithds: Agree, that's why I'm questioning Halcro that was the one to post that sentence.

Btw, Nandric I agree with you too and you missed Mosin whom posted he owns 100+ ones.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Regards, Nandric: One purpose such reports serve is to reintroduce cartridges some (such as me) might consider of exceptional design.

Acutex LPM 320-111 STR:
Freq. resp./20-20k +- .75 dB.
Broadband resp. 20-45k Hz.
IM distortion 1.2%.
Channel bal. 33dB @ 1k Hz and 29dB @ 10k.
Eff. tip mass 0.5mg.
Statistics from the 1980 Acutex catalog.

Introduced in 1979, this is a tri-pole induced magnet system in which exists a single strong magnet housed in the body. Just ahead of the pivot block there are two armatures fixed to the cantilever in a "V" configuration, a third is a sleeve along the plane of the cantilever shaft. This third armature serves as a neutral to cancel any spurious crosstalk between channels, reenforces the base of the titanium cantilever and also aids in damping unwanted cantilever resonance.

The stylus is a tri-radial modified Shibata obtained from Ogura Jewel Ind. The diamond itself is rectangular with it's widest dimension oriented 90* to the axis of the cantilever and is a nom. 40% of the mass of a typical square shank nude stylus. It should be pointed out that the 1.2% measured distortion is within usual recording parameters.

Cartridges in the series include the 310e (elliptical), the 312STR (bonded tri-radial), the 315STR (nude tri-radial) and the reduced mass, nude mount and highly polished "Vital" 320STR.

The 320 is tonally accurate. A noticably neutral voice with a fast rise time and no audible overshoot is the first impression. Bass is well defined and decay/sustain is excellent, the cartridge is a confident and accurate performer. The 315STR with it's square shank stylus produces a prodigious bass foundation while still manageing to avoid evidence of excessive bloat or bloom. A sense of presence or immediacy is the hallmark of the LPM 3xx series but the 315 in particular offers a quality of presence I've not heard with any other pickup. The bonded and slightly less well polished stylus on the 312STR makes it an entertaining performer. Initial attack is slightly rounded but remains defined well enough so as to not seem confused in demanding passages.

I firmly believe that one, having listened to the 320-111 STR, would be pleased to add it to their complement of cartridges. IMHO & yada-yada.

Any other questions, Nikola my good friend?

Peace,

Anyone care to recommend MM and MI cartridges which have great dynamics/attack (like a MC) with detail and tonality to boot? From what I gather, this is something only really good MC do well but thought there might be exceptions.

Someone mentioned to me Grado offers .5mv low output MI carts, and they can do dynamics like moving coils along with the hallmark wood body Grado vocals and tonality. Not sure if this is true though or folklore.

Maybe there are other mm that can pull off killer dynamics with normal mm output, though with all those extra windings I dont understand how its possible?

Hi Fleib,
The Decca London is the only cartridge on my list which have neither owned nor heard.......and it's position at the top is certainly not meant to indicate any ranking.
The London had already achieved near legendary status in the late 70s with George Hadcock purportedly having designed his eponymous GH-228 unipivot arm specifically for it?
Together with the myth that no two samples sounded the same and a near continuous 40 year production history......it deserves to be on the list.

I agree with Timeltel that no list would be complete without the venerable Shure V15/III although again, I've neither heard nor owned.

Jeremy,

Anyone care to recommend MM and MI cartridges which have great dynamics/attack (like a MC) with detail and tonality to boot? From what I gather, this is something only really good MC do well but thought there might be exceptions.

It is not my experience that MCs possess any of those advantages over MMs. I realise that you are quoting an oft- repeated mantra by reviewers and others but I would really like actual examples to be submitted for peer review? :^)