Hello all! I'm curious about this cart and where it fits in. Any good? I know it was made in the 70's and found on many different TTs, Thorens, Technics. The one I came accross is the "calibrated standard" and then learned there are mkII s. Of course all the usual questions come up -- are the styluses interchangable or do they even make a replacement stylus for these? I think I read somewhere that its an "iron" cart and not sure what that means. Can anyone shed some light on these.......I will do a search in the meantime, thanks!
Opinions/Info on Stanton 681EEE
- Thread starter day67
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
SpruceMoose
Super Member
Excellent cartridge! Long-time TOTL for Stanton. I had a double- e a long time ago. Wish I still had it...
beans
Got arth-a-ritis
I have a new Mark 3 and think it sounds about as good as my old one. Had a hard time getting it aligned because, it turns out, the cantilever was not quite mounted parallel. You pretty-much have to use one of those Best Tract (?) optical protractors... I just aligned mine by listening, but it took a number of tries.
I have loved its sound since I was in high school... bought one by mail order for $40!
I have loved its sound since I was in high school... bought one by mail order for $40!
SaSi
Seriously Illogical
I'm sure Stanton681EEE will soon chime in to give you more details. For the time being, some preliminary info from me.
This has been my main cart back in 1980-90 when my only TT was a Dual 1009. The tonearm on that TT was advertised as "low mass" and it sure was by '60s standards but I guess not enough for that cart.
The "calibration standard" was perhaps a marketing hype. Anyway, my cart came in a nice wooden case with a small pillbox with screws, a small screwdriver and a serialized handwritten frequency response chart.
My original cart was a 681EEE-S and since I bought it I purchased quite a few replacement styluses. Perhaps a few too many, as upon close inspection with a microscope now they all seem fine. But good to have now, perhaps.
So, I have tried EE, EEE, EEE-S and EEEMkII needles on that cart. All are 6800 type.
It's not a bad cart at all, despite my personal less than perfect experience (which I attribute to the mismatch with the tonearm and possibly the wrong VTA as the Dual didn't have an adjustable VTA).
If you look at this chart at www.cartridgedb.com you will see (green numbers) that the cart requires an ultra low mass tonearm to match well. Certainly my Dual didn't qualify for that. The 681EEE has a lower compliance and probably the reason I got better performance when I mounted that styli to the cart on my Dual.
What is your TT by the way?
This has been my main cart back in 1980-90 when my only TT was a Dual 1009. The tonearm on that TT was advertised as "low mass" and it sure was by '60s standards but I guess not enough for that cart.
The "calibration standard" was perhaps a marketing hype. Anyway, my cart came in a nice wooden case with a small pillbox with screws, a small screwdriver and a serialized handwritten frequency response chart.
My original cart was a 681EEE-S and since I bought it I purchased quite a few replacement styluses. Perhaps a few too many, as upon close inspection with a microscope now they all seem fine. But good to have now, perhaps.
So, I have tried EE, EEE, EEE-S and EEEMkII needles on that cart. All are 6800 type.
It's not a bad cart at all, despite my personal less than perfect experience (which I attribute to the mismatch with the tonearm and possibly the wrong VTA as the Dual didn't have an adjustable VTA).
If you look at this chart at www.cartridgedb.com you will see (green numbers) that the cart requires an ultra low mass tonearm to match well. Certainly my Dual didn't qualify for that. The 681EEE has a lower compliance and probably the reason I got better performance when I mounted that styli to the cart on my Dual.
What is your TT by the way?
Hifirob2
NEC and Klipsch rock!
I'll add my two cents.
I use my 681EEE on my Technics, and while not an ultra low mass arm, it works very well. Very VERY well.
So well, that I've made it my number one cart. I also have some Pickering XV-15's that I love, and the styli are interchangeable.
It's a keeper.
Rob
I use my 681EEE on my Technics, and while not an ultra low mass arm, it works very well. Very VERY well.
So well, that I've made it my number one cart. I also have some Pickering XV-15's that I love, and the styli are interchangeable.
It's a keeper.
Rob
ETI_5000
Super Member
It’s still made, and is currently Stanton’s best cartridge, as it was back in the 1970’s, until the 881S was released. The 681EEE cartridge is a “moving iron” cartridge. See here for an explanation of how that differs from MC or MM cartridges http://www.decibelhifi.com.au/webcontent23.htm . I’ve been listening to, servicing and building hi-fi for more than 30 years, both as an electronics engineer (in another field, related to sound) and part time hi-fi serviceman for several dealers, and I’ve seen the 681EEE reviewed by countless magazines over the years, and can’t remember one review that didn’t like the sound. I do own one, along with an 881S, and while it’s not the best cartridge I’ve ever heard or owned, I’d happily live with it if I had to sell all my others. All that I’ve heard which sounded better were more expensive.
It’s still a very competitive cartridge among other cartridges in its price range. I have a comprehensive test of a number of cartridges around the same price level in the UK, including tracking, distortion, frequency response and sound tests, by a UK magazine in 2004. I must have been thinking of buying something then, because I rarely buy hi-fi magazines these days. They tested the following cartridges: Stanton 681EEE, Audio Technica AT-440ML (not the later, and current, 440MLa), Shure M97xE, Ortofon 510Mk2, Grado Prestige Silver and Goldring 1006, as “affordable MM cartridges”. It was quite a technical test, and being an engineer, I thought it was one of the best I’ve seen recently, as the measuring proved why objective testing is so valuable to back up their listening test comments, which it did, plainly showing the differences they were hearing. They tested for different loading to see which loading gave the best results and flattest response for each cartridge.
The order of merit overall, including their comments in quotes, and mine without, was:
1st Goldring 1006:tresbon: (OK, it was a UK test, so it may be no surprise that a UK cartridge took out the prize!
However, it did have the flattest frequency response and was a very good tracker, although it suffered some high frequency drooping on the inner grooves. “Superlative value for money” - it was made in the UK, so it should be – “few obvious nasties”. It also had by far the best stereo separation, beating the next best by 6dB. They did say it needed careful attention to VTA, as setting that wrong would make it sound dull, and it was quite sensitive to different settings.)
2nd Stanton 681EEE (“tracking was superb”, “a very fine unit which deserves an excellent turntable and arm to partner it”, “delightful” - they obviously really liked it, even if it was made in the wrong country, “stylus is superb, suffering virtually no inner groove loss” – here they meant high frequency losses at the inner grooves, and their frequency response graphs showed it was far better than all the others on inner grooves, including the AT-440ML, which was also quite good. The 681EEE also had possibly the flattest frequency response out to 12kHz, but after that there was a quite sharp peak to be +3dB at 16kHz, but which didn’t make it sound too bright, as it’s well above most people’s hearing upper limit, unless you’re 20 or younger.)
3rd Grado Prestige Silver (“adds warmth” “measurable weaknesses, but they are not major”, “tracks well” apart from some “slight shakiness” on the torture tracks, “a tad pricey”. The frequency response was quite uneven, compared to the others, with the bass starting out well, and then a general downward drooping as the frequency rose, with a few droops and then a sharp peak at 10kHz, which wasn’t as high in level as the bass region, followed by a further tilt down to 20kHz.:nono: That overall droop in level as the frequency gets higher is what gives it the characteristic Grado warmth that some people love.)
4th Shure M97xE (“classic high frequency roll off” causing “a warm sound”. Tracking wasn’t very good, even with the stabiliser down, which was a surprise, based on Shure’s past superb tracking performance, which they commented about, and were also surprised, like me, that it didn’t appear to meet the standards of past Shure models.)
5th AT-440ML (This was the best tracker of the lot, as you’d expect with the microline stylus. However, it had a large peak at high frequencies: +2dB at 6.3kHz, +3dB at 8kHz, and over 3dB at 20kHz, which made it sound "too bright", and “fatiguing”. They said it was “a flawed gem that will sing with some systems, and grate with others”, which seems to agree with the comments of plenty of people here. It also didn’t trace inner grooves quite as well as the elliptical stylus of the 681EEE, which was a surprise.)
6th Ortofon 510 Mk2 (“tracking was good” but “not up to rivals”, “crude and charmless”.:thumbsdn: Tell us what you really think! They did say it wasn’t up to Ortofon’s usual efforts, and showed the gap between their “superb, state-of-the-art” moving coil cartridges and their “very ‘also ran’ moving magnetic range”.:nono: They also said that since Ortofon was under new ownership in 2004, they expected “a replacement soon”, and obviously Ortofon have delivered that recently with their 2M range, which reviewers seem to like.)
So you can see that the 681EEE is very competitive, and performs very well.
-Don
It’s still a very competitive cartridge among other cartridges in its price range. I have a comprehensive test of a number of cartridges around the same price level in the UK, including tracking, distortion, frequency response and sound tests, by a UK magazine in 2004. I must have been thinking of buying something then, because I rarely buy hi-fi magazines these days. They tested the following cartridges: Stanton 681EEE, Audio Technica AT-440ML (not the later, and current, 440MLa), Shure M97xE, Ortofon 510Mk2, Grado Prestige Silver and Goldring 1006, as “affordable MM cartridges”. It was quite a technical test, and being an engineer, I thought it was one of the best I’ve seen recently, as the measuring proved why objective testing is so valuable to back up their listening test comments, which it did, plainly showing the differences they were hearing. They tested for different loading to see which loading gave the best results and flattest response for each cartridge.
The order of merit overall, including their comments in quotes, and mine without, was:
1st Goldring 1006:tresbon: (OK, it was a UK test, so it may be no surprise that a UK cartridge took out the prize!
However, it did have the flattest frequency response and was a very good tracker, although it suffered some high frequency drooping on the inner grooves. “Superlative value for money” - it was made in the UK, so it should be – “few obvious nasties”. It also had by far the best stereo separation, beating the next best by 6dB. They did say it needed careful attention to VTA, as setting that wrong would make it sound dull, and it was quite sensitive to different settings.)2nd Stanton 681EEE (“tracking was superb”, “a very fine unit which deserves an excellent turntable and arm to partner it”, “delightful” - they obviously really liked it, even if it was made in the wrong country
, “stylus is superb, suffering virtually no inner groove loss” – here they meant high frequency losses at the inner grooves, and their frequency response graphs showed it was far better than all the others on inner grooves, including the AT-440ML, which was also quite good. The 681EEE also had possibly the flattest frequency response out to 12kHz, but after that there was a quite sharp peak to be +3dB at 16kHz, but which didn’t make it sound too bright, as it’s well above most people’s hearing upper limit, unless you’re 20 or younger.)3rd Grado Prestige Silver (“adds warmth” “measurable weaknesses, but they are not major”, “tracks well” apart from some “slight shakiness” on the torture tracks, “a tad pricey”. The frequency response was quite uneven, compared to the others, with the bass starting out well, and then a general downward drooping as the frequency rose, with a few droops and then a sharp peak at 10kHz, which wasn’t as high in level as the bass region, followed by a further tilt down to 20kHz.:nono: That overall droop in level as the frequency gets higher is what gives it the characteristic Grado warmth that some people love.)
4th Shure M97xE (“classic high frequency roll off” causing “a warm sound”. Tracking wasn’t very good, even with the stabiliser down, which was a surprise, based on Shure’s past superb tracking performance, which they commented about, and were also surprised, like me, that it didn’t appear to meet the standards of past Shure models.)
5th AT-440ML (This was the best tracker of the lot, as you’d expect with the microline stylus. However, it had a large peak at high frequencies: +2dB at 6.3kHz, +3dB at 8kHz, and over 3dB at 20kHz, which made it sound "too bright", and “fatiguing”. They said it was “a flawed gem that will sing with some systems, and grate with others”, which seems to agree with the comments of plenty of people here. It also didn’t trace inner grooves quite as well as the elliptical stylus of the 681EEE, which was a surprise.)
6th Ortofon 510 Mk2 (“tracking was good” but “not up to rivals”, “crude and charmless”.:thumbsdn: Tell us what you really think! They did say it wasn’t up to Ortofon’s usual efforts, and showed the gap between their “superb, state-of-the-art” moving coil cartridges and their “very ‘also ran’ moving magnetic range”.:nono: They also said that since Ortofon was under new ownership in 2004, they expected “a replacement soon”, and obviously Ortofon have delivered that recently with their 2M range, which reviewers seem to like.)
So you can see that the 681EEE is very competitive, and performs very well.
-Don
Thanks all, great info here! My TT is a Technics SL 1700 -- not exactly a low mas arm but it's worth a try. I'm a little unsure of the alignment issue, but glad to hear others favor this cart. When you mention "the cantilever was not quite aligned parallel...." what exactly does that entail? This one does not have the brush attached, is that common or was the brush found on the mk II and III's?
Stanton681EEES
Addicted Member
I'll chime in do to my name and tell you it was as Stanton put it The Calibration Standard used in more recording studios and masterin labs, to test test pressings. I will say this I like mine better when running capacitance per Stanton's recomendations meaning to my ears it sounds better at 275pf then it does at say 200 or lower.
beans
Got arth-a-ritis
You can use it without the brush... many people do... just be sure to properly adjust VTF.
What I meant was that I was having a hard time aligning the cart so it tracked properly all over the record. I removed the stylus to make sure I hadn't somehow damaged it and that is when I noticed the cantilever was not perfectly aligned... it was a few degrees off, so once I compensated for that I was able to get it aligned by ear.
I had read somewhere on AK that it is pretty common for the cantilever to be off slightly and it's no reason to return it, though many would do so. All it means is that you cannot minimize tracking angle error simply by aligning the body of the cartridge, the way many protractors work. The "Best Tractor" is the name of a protractor that can be used for greatest precision but they are custom made for $110, not including the lupe you'll also need.
What I meant was that I was having a hard time aligning the cart so it tracked properly all over the record. I removed the stylus to make sure I hadn't somehow damaged it and that is when I noticed the cantilever was not perfectly aligned... it was a few degrees off, so once I compensated for that I was able to get it aligned by ear.
I had read somewhere on AK that it is pretty common for the cantilever to be off slightly and it's no reason to return it, though many would do so. All it means is that you cannot minimize tracking angle error simply by aligning the body of the cartridge, the way many protractors work. The "Best Tractor" is the name of a protractor that can be used for greatest precision but they are custom made for $110, not including the lupe you'll also need.
ETI_5000
Super Member
SaSi
Seriously Illogical
The brush is a Stanton "signature" thing. All the similar carts had one and it helps both tracking and cleaning the grooves.
My brushless EEE-S stylus would not track well on the Dual 1009 but with brush it was much much better.
The Technics 1700 should have a tonearm similar to the SL1500 that I tried the 681 on. Not a bad match. I am now waiting for a new TT, an SL1200MkII that I got mint, NIB, which has a lower tonearm mass and adjustable VTA. I am going to give the 681 a new chance on this TT to see how it performs. At least with that one I can try to get a better alignment and match.
Capacitance and VTA should be the biggest issues in matching this cart. When I tried it initially, I used a Dual MM pre. Very old design based on a 4 transistor per channel circuit. I have no idea what sort of capacitance load it had. But I recall (still have several TDK SA tapes recorded through that TT) the muddy bass and bright but fuzzy highs. It did sound much better than that on a newer integrated amp.
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
The Technics tonearms are a superb match to a Stanton 681 EEE-S Mk II or III. I use one in my hot-rodded Technics SL-1600. The only audiophile cartridge which can be used on FM radio to boot. Calibration Standard is no lie, these cartridges have been used as a broadcasting and recording industry reference standard.
honestabe316
Oh Chief! - Jane Hathaway
Does anyone know where a replacement brush for the 681eee could be found?
Scott
Scott
boreas
"If it sounds good, it IS good." E.K.E.
A worn out stylus, any with a brush, is pretty much the only option. Try to avoid aftermarket. They're not as effective and can be noisy.
John
honestabe316
Oh Chief! - Jane Hathaway
I just read a post where a guy said he prefers to remove the brush and adjust the weight by 1.25...he claims he can hear noise caused by the bristles....I usually give my lp's a wipe before playing and I clean my stylus/needle after every half album, so is the brush necessary? Im sure this topic has been addressed in the past but what do you folks think?
Scott
Scott
I had a 681EE in the 70's. It was an excellent cartridge! I was in my 20's and spent most of my money on audio gear (especially phono cartridges) and wish I still had it.
fuzzywobbles
Lunatic Member
Stumbled on a Stanton 681 EEE II-S cartridge on a Yamaha turntable I picked up for next to nothing.
Read this thread and a couple others. Sounds like I got lucky that it appears to be in nice shape including the stylus. Thinking about trying it on my Marantz 6200 but heard some about it being best on an ultra low mass tonearm which the Marantz is definately not. Likely will try it anyways but curious what you all may think compared to the Denon DL-110 MC thats on there now?
Read this thread and a couple others. Sounds like I got lucky that it appears to be in nice shape including the stylus. Thinking about trying it on my Marantz 6200 but heard some about it being best on an ultra low mass tonearm which the Marantz is definately not. Likely will try it anyways but curious what you all may think compared to the Denon DL-110 MC thats on there now?
Last edited: