• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Upgraded styli: AT95HE & AT95SA on an SL1300

kuma.

Active Member
On a separate thread, Trower pointed me to upgraded aftermarket styli for an AT95E.

I've checked out the link and found out there is also a Shibata Diamond version (95SA) available.

I've gone through two other cartridges on my stock SL1300 ( Nagaoka MP10 and much touted AT440MLa ) and the AT95E emerged as my favourite out of three.
It doesn't have frequency extensions nor much of resolution, but Iove the way it delivers the music direct and upfront. Bopping along nicely without much faults.
It does not sound strident and bright as costlier 440MLa ( altho, I've a feeling, I have too much capacitance in my system for this cartridge to work optimally. )

So, I've decided to try both to see what kind of improvements or changes they could bring.

The one on the right with blue body is the 95HE ( hyperelliptical ), on the left is the Shibata version. On naked eyes, it's really hard to see the differences.
three_styli.jpg

All the electrical specs are the same so I assume the only differences here are how the diamond is cut. I did not change the tracking force (1.85g or thereabouts) on all cartridges and used the same Sumiko headshell with an aux. weight to offset the extra weight.

Both styli retained what was good on an AT95E and tonal balance stayed the same. Tracking on all three styli is excellent. I haven't had any strange mistracking, no inner groove distortion. They all play clean through out.

The first up is the 95HE (60$ via LP Gear )
at95he.jpg

Smoother trebles and it can resolve a tad more than the original stylus. The bass line is slightly clearer, so the timing is also slightly improved. The note delivery is less choppy and can resolve better note decay. The midrange is also cleaner and can sort things out better.

I think the changes it brought were all pluses improving small niggles I had with the 95E here and there.

Then the Shibata Stylus. (a bit pricey at 130$ )
Originally developed for the old Quad system ( CD4 ) and it is said to be able to dig out more information. I'm usually skeptical for such a claim, but encouraged by what I have heard so far with the 95HE, what a hell....
at95sa.jpg

What I was hoping is that it won't take on 440MLa's character. ( too refined/hifi )
From the first note out, I knew I was going to like this. A better solidity in bass. Neither previous styli could resolve the bass dynamics quite well but the 95SA now can sort out a cleaner bass line through out. Yet this time, it added on a few octaves giving the music a better overall solidity and impact.
Comparatively, this is blazing fast and articulate. Much more so than the 95HE. Miles away from the original 95E.

Even better high frequency extension is heard whilst maintaining substance and weight over all without adding any hint of glare or congestion.

It also starts to build on a better tonal colour, too.
Ok. so this stylus upgrade is a bit more than a 440MLa, but the cost difference is well justified for what it delivers.

It's been an interesting experience since I have never tried different styli on the same cartridge.
 
Register to hide this ad
Kuma glad you liked the carts! I also have the SA but I recomended the HE because I thought that the SA with the huge price hike, (used to be under 90 bux for the 95sa cart) might not be as good of a deal for what you get out of it anymore. But even at its current price I would still go for it again over a 440. And its such a good needle I'm surprised that so many go after the 440 even though compliance wise the 95 family would be better suited.

Wait for this cart to break in and I think you will like it even more! Best of luck with your setup, Nick
 
Nick,

The rhythmic dexterity on the SA is so much better than the others on hand. ( including a 440MLa ), I am very pleased with it.

Too bad they've raised the retail pricing because if it was at 90$, this would have been one of the nicest cartridge at the price.
I know what you are saying about the HE. From the original stylus, it is a better cartridge and worth an extra dough.
The SA is basically double the price from the HE. But for me, I found that the performance gap is wide enough that I can justify it comfortably. ( anything beyond it is where the diminishing return starts settling in, maybe )

The 440MLa just doesn't groove as well as the 95s or it does different things from the 95 Series. In my system, it's definitely sounding slower than the HE or SA.
I do wonder about its compatibility with the SL1300's stock arm and capacitance. ( I don't have an MM phono that I can adjust its capacitive loading easily. )

Anyway, even right out of the box, it performs so whatever the improvements that a proper run in brings will be just an icing on the cake.
Thanks again for your recommendation. I am glad I tried.

btw, what is the stylus life on the SA?
 
My observations

The AT440's specs must be off or deceptive because it is in fact a very high compliance cartridge. I am one of those people who opted for a 440 over an AT95Sa on a Technics deck (SL-1700[no suffix]). It is very obvious that the compliance is not ideal for this arm. It is most apparent on an incredibly warped LP that I have that managed to play trouble free on my P-mount SL-Q200 and on the 1700 with a heavy tracking, conical Stanton 500. With the 440MLa, it simply won't track. period. I also notice that it does a little dance, and makes the right woofer go nuts (though it sounds fine) on an REM LP that other arm/cart combo's had no problem at all with.

I knew the compliance might be an issue when I bought the cartridge but my thinking was that so many people seem to mate these turntables with the 440 with good results so it would be fine. Additionally, though at the time the price for the 95Sa wasn't nearly so high, I felt more comfortable purchasing a higher level Audio Technica cartridge with a genuine AT stylus rather than a middling AT with a generic cartridge, since both options were around $100.

In any event, the 440 does just fine with most things and tracks well, though I don't think quite as well with the inner grooves as my Dual 505-II with a V15vmr. I haven't noticed records coming alive the same way as I do with the Dual/Shure. And as much as I hate such audiophilish language like that, it's true. It's a very good cartridge but not amazingly better than the Technics SL-q200 with an AT-316EP (nude 3x7 elliptical) which preceded the Sl-1700 in my system. It does do better with inner grooves with used records. With new or extremely well cared for used LPs, the elliptical was fine though. Unfortunately such records are quite rare in my collection.

I'm beginning to think that though the Technics SL-1700 is a fine turntable, that low mass arms are really the way to go because they give you more options for high compliance styli. I also think that while the better p-mount Technics tables (those with a metal as opposed to plastic arms) might look a bit insubstantial compared to my S-Arm, metal plinth, suspended 1700, that they actually are very good turntables with arms that are at least as good as the S-shaped ones. They seem to have great bearings and track wonderfully. Too bad the p mount Audio-Technica 331lp with the Microline stylus is no longer available and the LP Gear replacement is expensive. I think that the Pmount table with that stylus could be at least as good as the Dual.

I still like the SL-1700: it looks cool and sounds good enough but I think the AT95Sa was the way to go. Or a Denon high output MC.
 
But then a 440MLa has even lower compliance. (1.0-1.8g)

Yet something wasn't gelling.
No, compliance is inversely proportional to tracking force. The 440MLa is higher compliance. Think about it. A softer spring (high compliance) would use a lighter tracking force, stiffer spring (low compliance) would require a higher TF.
 
Oops.

I always get those mixed up.

I tracked the 440MLa at a recommended 1.4g ( opposed to 1.85g on 95s ).

It must be the incompatibility with the stock 1300 arm, then.

Goblue,

does your 1700 have the same arm as a 1300?
I didn't have much problem with tracking but then I haven't played the *turture* disc on it.
 
Oops.

I always get those mixed up.

I tracked the 440MLa at a recommended 1.4g ( opposed to 1.85g on 95s ).

It must be the incompatibility with the stock 1300 arm, then.
Exactly. Some people have success with the 440MLa and the Technics arm, but the 95 is a better match. Higher mass arms mate better with low compliance carts. And then the headshell factors in--I remember we were discussing that in a different thread. Which one are you using with the 95?
 
Howard,

I've tried both stock and Sumiko headshells on all the carts and I prefer the heavier Sumiko on the 95 Series cartridges. ( not so with a 440 or Nagaoka, surprisingly )
 
Howard,

I've tried both stock and Sumiko headshells on all the carts and I prefer the heavier Sumiko on the 95 Series cartridges. ( not so with a 440 or Nagaoka, surprisingly )
Not surprising. The higher the arm mass (Sumiko headshell), the better it mates with low compliance carts (AT95).
 
Oops.

I always get those mixed up.

I tracked the 440MLa at a recommended 1.4g ( opposed to 1.85g on 95s ).

It must be the incompatibility with the stock 1300 arm, then.

Goblue,

does your 1700 have the same arm as a 1300?
I didn't have much problem with tracking but then I haven't played the *turture* disc on it.

The two arms look different at the pivot points but I don't know how much of an effect it would have. They seem basically the same. The record that the 1700 couldn't handle was warped to an extreme i've never seen before, so it's not the end of the world if it can't play it.
 
The record that the 1700 couldn't handle was warped to an extreme i've never seen before, so it's not the end of the world if it can't play it.
This is the worst warped record i have. But I normally use a unipivot arm so it can track easier than gimbal types.
warp1.jpg
 
This is the worst warped record i have. But I normally use a unipivot arm so it can track easier than gimbal types.
warp1.jpg

hahah

I won't even post the picture of the record I have. It looks more like somebody bent it.

I wouldn't even consider that particularly warped. I have no doubt my technics/440 would handle that no problem.
 
Back
Top Bottom