• 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

Cartridge Reviews

cscottrun4it

cscottrun4it

Active Member
I keep looking up posts about various phono cartridges I'm interested in, and, of course, Audiokarma members are full of opinions. However, every thread seems to go like this: (1) I just got/have X cart, should I buy a new stylus/how does it rate/should I buy a more different cart/modern cart? Then we all pile on with our varied opinions with little focus other than I love it! ...or I had one and it sucked! ...or I didn't like it compared to....

What I'd like to see is a single-member review a single cartridge s/he owns using consistent criteria to help others get some actionable advise. I'm also think a consistent format would help us all. Let's try the following. Items in brackets following the line header are just examples or directive.

-----
Cartridge: [Pickering XV-15 625 E]
Year(s) Sold: [1972 to ? - if you don't know, just write IDK]
Stylus: [Original Pickering D625]
Know Sources of Replacement Stili: [needledoctor.com, lpgear.com... - again, if you don't know, just write IDK]
Tonearm/Turntable Used: [Kenwood KD-2100 - if you can name the tonearm , do so. Otherwise just use the turntable maker and model]
Headshell: [LPGEAR Zupreme - if you don't know, just write 'generic headshell']
Tracking Force: [2.0 grams]
Anti-skate: [2.0]
Other Notes: [Using OEM Dustomatic brush, using X spacer to adjust VTA, etc.]

Review: [Write about qualities of the cartridge, things like break in period, soundstage, hi and low frequency performance, trackability issues, detail, warmth, roll off issues, music genre you like with the cartridge, how a new stilus performs with the cartridge etc. Don't write comparisons to other cartridges - for example, it's better than the Shure M95ED because... - the cartridge's cost (this changes every day), something you didn't like in someone else's review, those sorts of things.]
-----

Multiple cartridge reviews are encouraged - the more opinions the better! I'd love to see 10 people write about the Ortofone 2M Red or the Shure M91ED. If you'd like to write 10 reviews of the 10 cartridges you own, go for it! If you want to compare two cartridges, fight about an opinion of a cartridge, ask for general opinions of a cartridge, START A NEW THREAD.

I'll take the first stab at a review... as the second post to this thread (or maybe someone will beat me to it).
 
Register to hide this ad
Cartridge: Shure M95ED
Year(s) Sold: 1976 (?) to unkown
Stylus: Aftermarket LPGEAR stylus for the M95ED
Know Sources of Replacement Stili: lpgear.com
Tonearm/Turntable Used: Kenwood KD-2100
Headshell: LPGEAR Zupreme
Tracking Force: 1.5 grams]
Anti-skate: 1.5
Other Notes: NA

Review: As the mid-line of Shure's M series of cartridges, the M95ED offers many of qualities I expect out of a high compliance, mid to late 1970s cartridge.
  1. It is warm and detailed.
  2. It's is tonally balanced with no roll off.
  3. Its tracking is better than average.
  4. Although not particularly wide or deep, the soundstage allows me to hear distinctive instrument and vocalist placement and movement around the stage.
  5. It handles rock and jazz in a way that is pleasing to my ears and to the ears of most of my guests. It is not, however, as good at handling the complexities of symphonic or large vocal esemble music. It does handle chamber music well, however.
This cartridge's greatest strength is its ability to handle a variety of listening situations. It is great for passive listening (aka rocking out while cleaning the family room) and for active listening (sitting on the couch in the sweet spot taking most every detail of a recording).

While not as good at handling large ensemble music as it is small jazz groups and rock bands, it is still enjoyable to listen to large ensembles. It's just that the details could be better. (For example, you can hear cellos but you can't hear individual cellos in an orchestra.) It does a good job, however, of providing instrument details on solo works and small accoustic groups. The stand up bass has a woody tone, for example, and it is possible to hear finger movement across the strings on an accoustic guitar. Further, vocals are warm and a bit airy because of the cartridge's solid mid range.

Overall, I'd buy this cartridge again in a heartbeat. It is a very good midrange cartridge, just as you would expect from Shure.
 
I like this, but I'm not particularly well-versed in most aspects of cartridge performance. I just know what I like when I hear it.
 
Last edited:
cscottrun4it said:
Cartridge: Shure M95ED
Year(s) Sold: 1976 (?) to unkown
Stylus: Aftermarket LPGEAR stylus for the M95ED
Know Sources of Replacement Stili: lpgear.com
Tonearm/Turntable Used: Kenwood KD-2100
Headshell: LPGEAR Zupreme
Tracking Force: 1.5 grams]
Anti-skate: 1.5
Other Notes: NA

Review: As the mid-line of Shure's M series of cartridges, the M95ED offers many of qualities I expect out of a high compliance, mid to late 1970s cartridge.
  1. It is warm and detailed.
  2. It's is tonally balanced with no roll off.
  3. Its tracking is better than average.
  4. Although not particularly wide or deep, the soundstage allows me to hear distinctive instrument and vocalist placement and movement around the stage.
  5. It handles rock and jazz in a way that is pleasing to my ears and to the ears of most of my guests. It is not, however, as good at handling the complexities of symphonic or large vocal esemble music. It does handle chamber music well, however.
This cartridge's greatest strength is its ability to handle a variety of listening situations. It is great for passive listening (aka rocking out while cleaning the family room) and for active listening (sitting on the couch in the sweet spot taking most every detail of a recording).

While not as good at handling large ensemble music as it is small jazz groups and rock bands, it is still enjoyable to listen to large ensembles. It's just that the details could be better. (For example, you can hear cellos but you can't hear individual cellos in an orchestra.) It does a good job, however, of providing instrument details on solo works and small accoustic groups. The stand up bass has a woody tone, for example, and it is possible to hear finger movement across the strings on an accoustic guitar. Further, vocals are warm and a bit airy because of the cartridge's solid mid range.

Overall, I'd buy this cartridge again in a heartbeat. It is a very good midrange cartridge, just as you would expect from Shure.
Click to expand...
Ok so how does it perform on a SOTA Star Sapphire with a SME Series V arm, and in my system.

You see what I'm getting at?
 
As to what I might have missed, add what needs to be there in your review. As for how it will sound on your system, you're just providing g your experience of the cartridge. You can't tell others how it will sound on their systems in a review. If someone needs an answer to that question, it's off to a new thread. So, try writing a review and see how it works. The kinks will get worked out.
 
cscottrun4it said:
I keep looking up posts about various phono cartridges I'm interested in, and, of course, Audiokarma members are full of opinions. However, every thread seems to go like this: (1) I just got/have X cart, should I buy a new stylus/how does it rate/should I buy a more different cart/modern cart? Then we all pile on with our varied opinions with little focus other than I love it! ...or I had one and it sucked! ...or I didn't like it compared to....
Click to expand...

cscottrun4it said:
You can't tell others how it will sound on their systems in a review.
Click to expand...

Well that was my point
 
It is a laudable goal to make cartridge reviews more objective. My suggestion is to describe all the system's components including speaker placement and a description of the room plus any treatments. Let folks draw their own conclusions on how a cartridge might work in their system after looking at all the reviewer's variables. Just my two cents.
 
I'd be a bit lenient on cartridge comparisons, just because sometimes that's the best way to figure out how the reviewed cart handles. For instance my Nagaoka MP 500 has a great soundstage - but how great is great? Answer - it's a bit deeper than my Empire 4000d/iii, although just as broad.
 
I find it very difficult to do cartridge reviews without comparing not only between other cartridges, but between entire systems and situations, i.e. in full context. Perhaps this is because I do not take notes, but simply remember impressions. Years ago in the late 70's, I had a Stanton 681 EEE, a Fidelity Research FR1Mk3, and a GAS Sleeping Beauty, but had been living with considerably less for 30 years. Here are the main ones I've had in the last ten years:

Cartridge: Denon DL-160
Year(s) Sold: NLA
Stylus: stock, "0.07 x 0.14mm special elliptical solid diamond", non-replaceable
Tonearm/Turntable Used: Music Hall MMF 5
Headshell: stock integrated
Tracking Force: 1.6 grams
Anti-skate: ?
Other Notes: Into re-capped Apt-Holman preamp, Hafler DH-220 amp, Magneplanar MMGs - my getting-back-into-the-hobby system, about 10 years ago.

Boy, I thought this setup was fantastic, and a considerable upgrade from the entry-level Technics P-mount with an AT MM cart that I'd been living with (and seldom playing) for years. But everything else was new to me as well, and the combination made me a planar "space cadet". The DL-160 has a rep for an exaggerated soundstage, but I found it exiting and fascinating. I don't know if the TT/preamp/etc. was particularly synergistic with the DL-160, or if my tastes changed, but in my friend's system I was later bothered by some aspects of its high frequency presentation, after having lived with the next setup for about a year.
-------------------
Cartridge: Denon DL-103
Year(s) Sold: still available
Stylus: stock, conical, non-replaceable
Tonearm/Turntable Used: Denon DP-1200
Headshell: Sumiko
Tracking Force: 2.5 grams
Anti-skate: "1.5"
Other Notes: Into Denon AU-300LC SUT, Hafler DH-110 preamp, Hafler DH-220 amp, Magneplanar MMGs.

This cartridge re-acquanted me with tone, and force. At first I wondered where the highs were. It took some acclimatizing to realize that they were still there, perhaps not as detailed, but presented more organically. It also seemed to have more impact and better bass tonality, firming up the low end, which had acquired some "tubby-ness" when the Apt-Holman broke and was replaced with the Hafler DH-110. It got even better into my Luxman L-505u and Magneplanar 1.7s, and became my friend's favorite when I gave it to him. Ever since I've come to consider it a great all-rounder musically, and a "workingman's reference", I wish I had it back. :)
------------------
Cartridge: Benz-Micro Wood SM
Year(s) Sold: NLA
Stylus: stock, 5 x 120 µm nude line-contact diamond, mirror polished - non-replaceable
Tonearm/Turntable Used: Denon DP-1200
Headshell: Sumiko
Tracking Force: 1.8 grams
Anti-skate: "1"
Other Notes: into Luxman L-505u + Magneplanar 1.7s, and also Quad ESLs via Hafler, Luxman C1000 + MB3045, Primaluna

Unquestionably more detail than the DL-103, with an even more refined tone and textures, but with less impact, especially in the bass. I had a series of alignment and setup doubts at first, after pursuing the cause of more surface noise on one channel than the other. I must have polished it up nicely, trying different azimuths and alignments :rolleyes:, before it finally settled down, with a standard Geo-Disc, maybe a year later. Later, while my Teac TN-400 was working, I had it on a Jelco 12" SA-750L tonearm. This combination seemed to lower the rumble, and make the bass more accurate and revealing. Musically, marvelous for anything with rich harmonics or textures - vocals, strings, etc. Lots of natural air and separation. Somewhat lacking in kick-ass - perhaps not the best choice if your main genre is Rock 'n' Roll. Or Dub-step.
----------------------
Cartridge: Clearaudio Virtuoso
Year(s) Sold: available
Stylus: stock, 4 x 40 µm elliptical - non-replaceable
Tonearm/Turntable Used: Marantz TT-15
Headshell: integrated
Tracking Force: 2.2 grams
Anti-skate: ?
Other Notes: into present system - Fosgate Signature, Promitheus TVC, Primaluna, Quad ESLs

This is my first moving magnet since my Stanton 681EEE of years ago, and I had forgotten how good one can sound! It combines the force and impact of the Denon DL-103 with most of the detail and texture of the Benz. Nice, proper bite on brass. Great on plucked strings, percussion. Surprisingly fine soundstage, separation, and spatiality - another great all-rounder musically, imo. Not quite as refined as is possible, but not lacking in kick-ass, whatsoever!

So, there are my impressions, comparative though they are.

Lastly, I would sure like to get my Ortofon Synergy GM pickup head going on my Jelco tonearm again, because for the short week I heard it, it seemed to have everything!

:music:
 
cscottrun4it said:
Cartridge: Shure M95ED
Year(s) Sold: 1976 (?) to unkown
Click to expand...

Not far off!:) It was first sold in the later months of 1975, based on the information from electronics magazines of that time. The slight upgrade of a hyperelliptical stylus came with the M95HE in 1979.
 
Personally I think cartridge reviews are very difficult. Mostly no review is better. Besides the objective one, are we really helped in any way by a subjective one? One of the problems is having anything neutral to compare with.
 
gusten said:
Personally I think cartridge reviews are very difficult. Mostly no review is better. Besides the objective one, are we really helped in any way by a subjective one? One of the problems is having anything neutral to compare with.
Click to expand...
DaveyW's site is pretty good at this.........he does give his opinion, but he also offers sound files with each. It gives most a good glimpse of what to expect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom