Cart advice

[SaSi]

I am looking to get a couple of carts for two reasons.

I want a moderately priced cart for lesser LPs

I want a decent cart for good LPs but for casual listening during which I don't want to wear out the Ortofon MC10 I normaly use.

I want to mount these on Technics headshells and on an SL-1500.

For moderately priced (<$50)
AT95E
AT110E

For a better cart (<$100)
Shure M97E
Denon DL110

What do you think about these? If there are better suggestions in this price range, I would also be happy to hear.

Also, where can I find the effective mass for the Technics tonearm? I know it isn't very low as it likes low-mid compliance carts better, but I'd like to know the figure and do some math.

 

[hakaplan]

The mass for the Technics arm is 12g. It's in the specs of all of its manuals. I don't know what kind of calculations you'll be performing. Most of the compliance specs are innaccurate or unreliable. It's a nice formula, but until cartridge manufacturers can provide a consistent, standardized number at 10Hz, it's worthless. And that's not going to happen.

The Technics arm would be the low end of medium mass, so medium to slightly high compliance carts would be the best match. The best predictor of compliance is the tracking force. All the carts you listed fit the requirement except the Shure, but the brush takes care of that. I would add the AT440MLa as a possibility.

 

[Stanton681EEES]

The AT110E is a killer little cartridge. I'd also consider the Stanton 500MKII as it's a little jem as well. I just reinstalled mine yesterday and forgot how good it can sound when running capacitance of 275pf. That AT 110E should sound great once it burns in as I'll assume you'll be getting a new one.

 

[lini]

The mass for the Technics arm is 12g. It's in the specs of all of its manuals. (...)

Sure, Howard? In the old Technics manuals, it often used to be more complicated... I think for the MkII it was something like 22 g altogether with a 6 g cart at 1.25 g VTF and the original headshell with 9.5 g - and the first generation should have been a just tad heavier...

SaSi: Hmmmm - how about a Pickering XV15/625E, for example? There used to be a shop named Hartcourthouse (iirc) on eBay UK that offered these for a pretty good price - I think it was 70 around quid including two original replacement needles. And if you like it, there also are a couple of Pickering and Stanton needles one could upgrade it with... A Denon DL160 wouldn't be a bad choice either, though - however, then you might also consider the DL160, as the latter plays a bit more refined and doesn't cost much more.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

[hakaplan]

Oops. I think I calculated 12g for the later tables, but forgot about the heavier headshell in the earlier ones. Sorry. Still you have to subtract the cartridge weight.

EDIT: Okay, my mistake. The SL-16/17/1800MK2 clearly state 12g and that included a 7.5g headshell. The earlier models were different. Sorry.

 

[BrocLuno]

Of all the ones discussed so far, I'd say get an M97 for the lesser LPs. Put it in an aftermarket stamped shell (<6.8 grams) to keep the mass as low as practical (besides it's way cheaper than a stock Technics shell). If LPs warped or out of round, run with brush down. If LPs OK, run with brush up. Great cart for these sorts of uses.

For slightly up-scale cartridge, maybe one of the AT's. But I think you are on the cusp of building a small functional cartridge library? So why not just do that. If that is a possible goal, then you can have some really good cartridge/LP matching options. Voicing is one thing to compensate for production values, older LPs made in studios with less than stellar equipment, etc.

BUT, the issue at hand is playing and tracking. To fill the gap in that regard, I'd make sure I have at least one micro-line or micro-ridge stylus in my quiver. To that end, I concur about the AT440MLa. It's an all-around good performer. It tracks like a lazer. It'll run OK with your arm. I'd mount it lite too just to minimize stress on the cantilever and suspension. It will make a real nice counter-point with the other two (the Orto and the Shure)

 

[jrtrent]

It's nice you can have an arsenal of cartridges to use; cartridge swapping is a bit of a pain with my LP12/Ittok combination, so I tend to use just one cartridge til I wear it out. For lesser lp's (i.e., scratched/noisey ones), I've found the Stanton 500 V.3 to do a great job of lowering the noise floor and make less-than-pristine albums eminently listenable. Though not quite as good for beat-up, bargain-bin albums, the Shure M97xE is a step up in several other respects, provides satisfying, fatigue-free listening hour after hour, and is what I've had mounted up for most of the last couple years, using it for all my listening needs, casual as well as critical (and the brush tames even my most-warped albums).

 

[SaSi]

Thanks to all for the suggestions.

On cart+shell weight. It didn't strike me as critical until I read lini's response. So I did a little test.
I have a couple of aftermarket headshells that look identical to the Technics version, an AKG shell, and an ultra low mass headshell I inherited from a good tonearm that a friend managed to break. Either a Stax or Grace, can't remember.

The aftermarket headshells weigh 9.5 gr.
The original Technics shell with a Stanton 681EEE-S mounted on weighs 19.5gr,
The AKG shell with an AT cart weighs 13.2gr.
The ultra low mass headshell with an Ortofon M20E Super cart mounted weighs 12.5 gr!
I checked the manuals and service manuals for the 1300/1400/1500 range and found no reference for tonearm's effective mass.
I only found info for the 1500MkII: 22g with a 6gr cart at 1.25gr VTF. I don't know if the MkII tonearm is that different or if the shell is different but as I found, the original Technics headshell with a Stanton goes up to 19.5gr. Something doesn't add up.

I guess that for tracking and resonance frequency, I will resort to the Ortofon and Shure Test LPs.

I think that I will get the AT 110E. I do have a Stanton 500, bought used with very very little play hours from a friend some years ago. I will also look into the Denon DL160. Not sure if I can get it localy but there is also ebay and internet stores.

As the Shure M97 is rather high compliance, I am now considering this for a Revox B795 that I got with an OM5 cart with broken stylus. Would that be a good match?

 

[hakaplan]

Sasi, go over to VE and look carefully under the SL-1500. The instruction manual is there. It clearly says:

Effective mass: 23g (6.5g cartridge weight, 1.5g stylus pressure)
Headshell weight: 9.5g

23 - 6.5 - 1.5 = 15g (They are including stylus pressure as part of the mass so it must be subtracted)

That means that with the 9.5g headshell, the arm mass is 15g. If you replace that headshell with the later, lighter one, i. e. the one with the three holes that weighs 7.5g, you will effectively reduce your arm mass to 13g.

I don't know why your Technics headshell plus Stanton cart = 19.5. The only way to know the cause is to remove the cart. Don't forget that heavy hardware can make a difference.

What's the Revox arm look like? Is it an s-arm?

 

[PeterFCassidy]

Stanton 500! Nice!

I concur. Had a Stanton 500 on an old AR and it gave outstanding performance for a very reasonable cost. Tracked flawlessly (even on abused records) and sounded great playing any literature I threw at it. Still, the decks still here are running 681 and AT440MLa.

Peter

The AT110E is a killer little cartridge. I'd also consider the Stanton 500MKII as it's a little jem as well. I just reinstalled mine yesterday and forgot how good it can sound when running capacitance of 275pf. That AT 110E should sound great once it burns in as I'll assume you'll be getting a new one.

 

[gusten]

SaSi
I see that You got an OM body. A really great bargain is to buy a Digitrac200NE from ebay and use this stylus on the OM. Only $20 and it´s got a genuine nude diamond, at least as good as the OM20.
/gusten

 

[SaSi]

Sasi, go over to VE and look carefully under the SL-1500. The instruction manual is there. It clearly says:

Effective mass: 23g (6.5g cartridge weight, 1.5g stylus pressure)
Headshell weight: 9.5g

23 - 6.5 - 1.5 = 15g (They are including stylus pressure as part of the mass so it must be subtracted)

That means that with the 9.5g headshell, the arm mass is 15g. If you replace that headshell with the later, lighter one, i. e. the one with the three holes that weighs 7.5g, you will effectively reduce your arm mass to 13g.

I don't know why your Technics headshell plus Stanton cart = 19.5. The only way to know the cause is to remove the cart. Don't forget that heavy hardware can make a difference.

What's the Revox arm look like? Is it an s-arm?

I found the info on the arm mass. I was looking at the service manual the first time.

The Revox is a linear tracker and the tonearm is a few cm long, very low mass and unipivot design.

 

[BrocLuno]

For high compliance cartridges like the M97 and the AT150MLX, I always try to keep the mass down as it exercises the suspension the least on small warps and such. As long as it does not get into audible resonance range, the lower the better as far as I'm concerned.

If you can lessen the suspension deflection over irregularities, it will less the cone excursion on the speakers in response. Running a low-cut filter helps, but it all adds up.

 

[hakaplan]

I found the info on the arm mass. I was looking at the service manual the first time.

The Revox is a linear tracker and the tonearm is a few cm long, very low mass and unipivot design.

Yes, then the Shure M97 would be a good match. Interestingly the OM5E was not a particularly good match.