Yamaha MC-7 cart

Fuzzbuster

Addicted Member
Looking at one of these as an entry into the MC world. Anyone have any thoughts/experience with one of these?
 
28db separation and 10-20khz.... Doesn't strike me as anything special... 0.3mv so a LOMC so you'll need a LOMC phono stage or SUT.

If just curious about LOMC's then why not? On the other hand I've found that the MM/MI's from Stanton 680/1, 880/1, 981 and Pickering counterparts compete with LOMC's until you get to frankly obscene amounts of money (talking $1,200 cart, $2,000 step up etc). Having a ruby cantilever and micro scanner tip fitted to a Stanton / Pickering stylus gets incredible performance for the cost.
 
Last edited:
28db separation and 10-20khz.... Doesn't strike me as anything special... 0.3mv so a LOMC so you'll need a LOMC phono stage or SUT.

If just curious about LOMC's then why not? On the other hand I've found that the MM/MI's from Stanton 680/1, 880/1, 981 and Pickering counterparts compete with LOMC's until you get to frankly obscene amounts of money (talking $1,200 cart, $2,000 step up etc). Having a ruby cantilever and micro scanner tip fitted to a Stanton / Pickering stylus gets incredible performance for the cost.
I have a NAD 7140 that has a LOMC input. I am currently running a Stanton 680EL cart with a Stanton 6800 stylus that sounds very good . Do you think the MC-7 will be a noticeable improvement?
 
I´ve got this cart and love it: very low profile but highly musical. Ideal for classical music and jazz. It provides wonderful sound on a medium effective mass tonearm. What tonearm/turntable are you having in mind to match this cart to?
 
I have a NAD 7140 that has a LOMC input. I am currently running a Stanton 680EL cart with a Stanton 6800 stylus that sounds very good . Do you think the MC-7 will be a noticeable improvement?

Try going higher up the range of styli. Maybe a Jico shibata. If you want it to compete with a $1,200 cart though get it retipped with ruby cantilever and micro scanner tip
 
I´ve got this cart and love it: very low profile but highly musical. Ideal for classical music and jazz. It provides wonderful sound on a medium effective mass tonearm. What tonearm/turntable are you having in mind to match this cart to?
I'm using a Technics SL-1600 table.
 
I'm using a Technics SL-1600 table.

I guess it´s got a medium effective mass tonearm and therefore a good match for the MC-7 ! You may check that using this tool: https://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_resonance_evaluator.php (perhaps https://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_database_tools.php also). The MC-7 seems to be very little known in AK but it sold well locally during the 90´s. All the owners of it that I know personally (including myself) are very enthusiastic about its performance. A really excellent first LOMC to start a wonderful journey of discovery. The Denon DL-103 that seems to be proposed by many as a first LOMC cart seems a bit more complicated to me (I own one). It is a great "budget" cart but has some aspects to be taken care for: conical stylus (therefore performs better on older, pre 1966 lets say, LP releases), very low compliance that needs a heavy tonearm (it shines on the stock arm of my Lenco L75) and very low output (which needs excellent transformers or phono preamps to shine). I´m taking about the plain DL-103. Of course, there are tweaks (changing the body, etc) and later versions that take care of some of these issues of the Denon cart but the point is that the MC-7 needs nothing extra to be enjoyed right away (besides the transformer or phono stage with LOMC capability) and it is very easy to setup with excellent record tracking (seems more like a MM cart in this respect).
 
Last edited:
I guess it´s got a medium effective mass tonearm and therefore a good match for the MC-7 ! You may check that using this tool: https://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_resonance_evaluator.php (perhaps https://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_database_tools.php also). The MC-7 seems to be very little known in AK but it sold well locally during the 90´s. All the owners of it that I know personally (including myself) are very enthusiastic about its performance. A really excellent first LOMC to start a wonderful journey of discovery. The Denon DL-103 that seems to be proposed by many as a first LOMC cart seems a bit more complicated to me (I own one). It is a great "budget" cart but has some aspects to be taken care for: conical stylus (therefore performs better on older, pre 1966 lets say, LP releases), very low compliance that needs a heavy tonearm (it shines on the stock arm of my Lenco L75) and very low output (which needs excellent transformers or phono preamps to shine). I´m taking about the plain DL-103. Of course, there are tweaks (changing the body, etc) and later versions that take care of some of these issues of the Denon cart but the point is that the MC-7 needs nothing extra to be enjoyed right away (besides the transformer or phono stage with LOMC capability) and it is very easy to setup with excellent record tracking (seems more like a MM cart in this respect).

I have the following vintage Yamaha carts:
MC-1x (Needlestein retip)
MC-1s (2)
MC-11
MC-100 (original)
MC-100 (either prototype or retip...not sure)

Even with (hyper? special?) elliptical styli, the 1s & 100 are amazing in the inner groove. They handle the sizzle as though they were microline. The MC-1x can be a little hit and miss near the end of a record but the overall body it pulls out of the music is killer. It really draws you in. I haven't spent much time with the MC-11 but would likely try it on my PF-800 or P-751. Some folks may complain about a cart being bright or thin but that usually signifies a mismatch with the arm and improper loading. I would try every cart in the Yamaha stable if I could afford it. I'm sure the 7 is a sweet little cart.
 
I have the following vintage Yamaha carts:
MC-1x (Needlestein retip)
MC-1s (2)
MC-11
MC-100 (original)
MC-100 (either prototype or retip...not sure)

Even with (hyper? special?) elliptical styli, the 1s & 100 are amazing in the inner groove. They handle the sizzle as though they were microline. The MC-1x can be a little hit and miss near the end of a record but the overall body it pulls out of the music is killer. It really draws you in. I haven't spent much time with the MC-11 but would likely try it on my PF-800 or P-751. Some folks may complain about a cart being bright or thin but that usually signifies a mismatch with the arm and improper loading. I would try every cart in the Yamaha stable if I could afford it. I'm sure the 7 is a sweet little cart.
I think you just made my mind up for me. Thanks.
 
I think you just made my mind up for me. Thanks.

mjw21a makes a great point though. You can get the MC-7, try it and if you like it then put some money into it with a replacement cantilever/diamond. You will end up with a cart that punches well above its price point. There is a certain individual (not on this forum) that buys up as many broken hi-end carts as he can on the cheap and then has them retipped with boron/microline cantilevers. It's an economical way to better sound. For the MC-7, if the sound has good depth but the top end is a little rough no matter how you load or align it then retip it. If it sounds fine and the top end is clean then leave it alone and enjoy it. I'm really curious to hear more about it.
 
I have the following vintage Yamaha carts:
MC-1x (Needlestein retip)
MC-1s (2)
MC-11
MC-100 (original)
MC-100 (either prototype or retip...not sure)

Even with (hyper? special?) elliptical styli, the 1s & 100 are amazing in the inner groove. They handle the sizzle as though they were microline.

The Yamaha ‘Special Elliptical’ stylus was an extended line contact profile.

Yamaha has stated that it had dimensions of 8 x 40 μm, so it was similar dimensions to the Ortofon Fine Line and the Ogura Vital, or Audio-Technica’s ‘Line Contact’ (7 x 38 μm).
 
I had two MC 7s in a row. A good honest cartridge. The MC 1, on the other hand, was a great cartridge, worth the extra cost, which not all are. But I also bought an MC 5 perhaps 15 years ago that sounded terrible - I think the damper had harded quite badly. So I'd approach with caution - if the damper and stylus are good, I believe you will like it - perhaps not love, but certainly fond respect. It's not flashy, or sweet, but you can listen for hours.
 
Back
Top Bottom