How much difference does the (quality of ) stylus make?

[flavio81]

Better in what way and why do you say that?

Higher young modulus for its density, basically the stiffness to density ratio is better. See "sound speed" in the table below.

See chart. Source: Orbray (ex "Namiki"), makers of the Microline stylus and they sell it mounted on cantilevers.

 

[Quadman2]

Many cartridges are over 10k, and there are a lot well over that. I see every week cartridges over 20k ( Australian dollars) and some well over that.
Chris

If it is built...they will buy!

For some, cost is relative and is of no concern.


Q

 

[Matonanjin3]

The focus on cartridge upgrades is probably because of the ease and cost of upgrading versus upgrading other parts of the turntable.. But I can only assume in this respect.

This thread has certainly raised some food for thought with me.

Good! I started the thread in hopes of learning something. I'm pleased others, or at least one I now know of, found it thought provoking.

 

[loudnoises]

Something I wondered for a while that's just been answered recently, the costs are a bit mystical for most of us. It's tossed around maybe more than it should be. If you have a $5k+ cart it's an obvious choice, but the cost of a retip exceeds the cost of most replacement styli.

 

[Mr Boochie]

Higher young modulus for its density, basically the stiffness to density ratio is better. See "sound speed" in the table below.

See chart. Source: Orbray (ex "Namiki"), makers of the Microline stylus and they sell it mounted on cantilevers.

View attachment 3733109

I presume the higher the [C = SQ RT E/p] number, the better?

Is there a site that describes what these parameters mean?

Thanks!

 

[Mr Boochie]

If it is built...they will buy!

For some, cost is relative and is of no concern.


Q

Yes, sometimes it comes down to the market desirability and what it will bear.

Some guy HAS to have the first "1962 Ferrari 250 GTO" on the block. Right?

 

[Apreggiator]

Many cartridges are over 10k, and there are a lot well over that. I see every week cartridges over 20k ( Australian dollars) and some well over that.
Chris

Usually true on this "account", but with high grade/performance cartridges, they may in some cases rival the cost factor of one of the other components.

Q

Of course the situation changes at the upper end of the cost scale. It would be interesting to know what the spend scale looks like for upgrades. My assumption is that the vast majority of upgraders is looking in the 150 to 350 cost bracket, and also assume that that usually lands them in the Ortofon/Audio Technica domain, aftermarket tonearms are in a different price category, unless I don't know where to look.

 

[Matonanjin3]

That (turntable) there is a thing of beauty.

Yes it is! Wow!!!!!

 

[cafe latte]

Something I wondered for a while that's just been answered recently, the costs are a bit mystical for most of us. It's tossed around maybe more than it should be. If you have a $5k+ cart it's an obvious choice, but the cost of a retip exceeds the cost of most replacement styli.

No a retip can be as little as 350 US dollars which is cheap really.
Chris

 

[doctor fuse]

No a retip can be as little as 350 US dollars which is cheap really.
Chris

“How much is a retip?”
"They start cheaply at $350.”
“Oooh, that’s a bit pricey for my budget….”
“IT’S CHEAP YOU MORON”

 

[cafe latte]

“How much is a retip?”
"They start cheaply at $350.”
“Oooh, that’s a bit pricey for my budget….”
“IT’S CHEAP YOU MORON”

If you have a 10 or 20k cartridge a new exotic stylus retip is hardly expensive at 350 US dollars when MM stylus on say a 2m black or other decent MMs cost more.
Chris

 

[Old Guy8]

Listening to records needs a total synergized system. Stylus through phono stage. All are important.
Once that's in place. Tweeking a piece here and there can make a bigger difference. Only my 2 cents

 

[loudnoises]

No a retip can be as little as 350 US dollars which is cheap really.
Chris

In some cases it's a damn steal.

But $350 will buy a lot of stylus for most of us.

 

[mkane]

Got to like those $25 units from vom

 

[doctor fuse]

If you have a 10 or 20k cartridge a new exotic stylus retip is hardly expensive at 350 US dollars when MM stylus on say a 2m black or other decent MMs cost more.
Chris

Billionaires think $1 million is a drop in the bucket.

 

[cafe latte]

In some cases it's a damn steal.

But $350 will buy a lot of stylus for most of us.

Sometimes it is false economy though.
An vm95e is cheap, but you will change it 3x while the ml keeps playing.
350 US to get a 10k cartridge back to like new is a steal really.
If your budget is a,AT3600L or an AT95E then it is expensive but if your budget is high end MMs even then it is very cheap.
Chris

 

[jrtrent]

Sometimes it is false economy though.
An vm95e is cheap, but you will change it 3x while the ml keeps playing.

Maybe, but what did you think of Ray Parkhurst's SWS3 study involving the VMN95ML? His conclusions seem to think AT's 1000-hour lifespan is a bit optimistic, and several comments there have people thinking they'll limit their ml's to somewhere in the 400-500 hour range. Two of Ray's conclusions were "Higher levels of vinyl dust due to damage to HF grooves was noticed by 400 hours," and, "Significant damage to grooves and "furrowing" occurred by 672 hours." The conical in the SWS4a study seemed to fare rather well in terms of meeting AT's expected lifespan for it.

350 US to get a 10k cartridge back to like new is a steal really.
If your budget is a,AT3600L or an AT95E then it is expensive but if your budget is high end MMs even then it is very cheap.

Makes sense, and something to consider anytime a retip costs less than a cartridge exchange or new stylus assembly. Even if a retip costs more, it's something to consider if there's reason to believe the retip would result in better sound. For my modest needs, though, there's plenty of happiness to be found in styli sitting below the $100 price point.

 

[flavio81]

Maybe, but what did you think of Ray Parkhurst's SWS3 study involving the VMN95ML? His conclusions seem to think AT's 1000-hour lifespan is a bit optimistic, and several comments there have people thinking they'll limit their ml's to somewhere in the 400-500 hour range. Two of Ray's conclusions were "Higher levels of vinyl dust due to damage to HF grooves was noticed by 400 hours," and, "Significant damage to grooves and "furrowing" occurred by 672 hours." The conical in the SWS4a study seemed to fare rather well in terms of meeting AT's expected lifespan for it.

It is not wise to easily jump into conclusions.

Stylus wear will really depend on:

- Quality of the diamond itself, and if it's "grain oriented" or not
- Quality of the polish on the stylus tip. If one wants an example of how a truly good polish looks, see the stylus tip of a DL-103 under a microscope.
- Vertical tracking force (see Shure investigations of this, under 1.2g VTF dramatically increases stylus tip life)
- Quality of the vinyl compound (highly important!)
- Was the record cleaned or not? I mean, properly cleaned, at least with a vacuum machine.
- On tests where they repeatedly play the same record, was it vacuum cleaned after each playback? Otherwise you're depositing diamond dust on the same surface over and over again.
- Do you use wet playback? (i.e. Lencoclean)? This greatly affects record and stylus tip life.

There are way too many variables. Additionally:

- What is "damage"? What is really "groove damage? Some people consider that if there is a slight trace of something on the groove, it counts like "damage". But you could see a faint trace or mark on the groove under a SEM microscope, yet no audible difference.
Other people, IIRC on tests by either Shure or Victor (JVC), "groove wear" (not damage) was defined as a function of how many dB of loss there was at 18KHz, so under that definition of "wear" the record would still be satisfactorily playable...

The best way is simply to get a microscope and learn to visually judge stylus condition.

 

[Matonanjin3]

The best way is simply to get a microscope and learn to visually judge stylus condition.

Seriously?!?! Get a microscope? Simply? Do you consider that a realistic option for most before we even consider it whether or not the best?

 

[jrtrent]

It is not wise to easily jump into conclusions.

Stylus wear will really depend on:

- Quality of the diamond itself, and if it's "grain oriented" or not
- Quality of the polish on the stylus tip. If one wants an example of how a truly good polish looks, see the stylus tip of a DL-103 under a microscope.
- Vertical tracking force (see Shure investigations of this, under 1.2g VTF dramatically increases stylus tip life)
- Quality of the vinyl compound (highly important!)
- Was the record cleaned or not? I mean, properly cleaned, at least with a vacuum machine.
- On tests where they repeatedly play the same record, was it vacuum cleaned after each playback? Otherwise you're depositing diamond dust on the same surface over and over again.
- Do you use wet playback? (i.e. Lencoclean)? This greatly affects record and stylus tip life.

There are way too many variables.

Anyone is at liberty to read the 46-page thread at Vinyl Engine, see all the details of how the study was conducted, and decide for himself whether there is anything valuable in it to help inform his own choices about how many hours to use a VMN95ML stylus. The one conducting it is aware of its limitations, but I value the work he put into it and found it interesting to read.

Additionally:

- What is "damage"? What is really "groove damage? Some people consider that if there is a slight trace of something on the groove, it counts like "damage". But you could see a faint trace or mark on the groove under a SEM microscope, yet no audible difference.
Other people, IIRC on tests by either Shure or Victor (JVC), "groove wear" (not damage) was defined as a function of how many dB of loss there was at 18KHz, so under that definition of "wear" the record would still be satisfactorily playable...

Most of the old studies I've seen are on record wear using different stylus shapes and tracking forces rather than on stylus life, but they are helpful, too, as well my own casual record wear tests at home. One of my favorite, and most comforting, quotes on record wear was in a study by J. G. Woodward in which he said, "some of the photomicrographs of record grooves shown here exhibit what might be judged to be really horrendous wear patterns, and one might reasonably expect that these would have a serious effect on the reproduced sound. Actually, even the most sensitive playback tests fail to bear out this expectation."

The best way is simply to get a microscope and learn to visually judge stylus condition.

Maybe you're right, but it's not worth it to me to buy the equipment or find the training needed to understand what I'm seeing. I only want to have a reasonable shot at not changing a stylus too late, and my records tell me that I'm succeeding well enough at that.