Stanton 680EE/S

[Decibel_116]

I ran across an NOS Stanton 680EE/S today and picked it up. I did so based upon a positive experience I had with a Stanton 747S P-mount cartridge. I am not sure if this is the desirable "moving iron" type of Stanton cartridge with the "Stereohedron" stylus or, whether it is similar to the Stanton 500 used for DJ cartridges. Anyone know?

Cheers,
David

 

[Hifirob2]

I have seen the same cart and stylus. It is the desirable moving iron type, and the stylus should have an S on it - for stereohedron. Much nicer, IMO, than the 500 series.

 

[illinoisteve]

Stanton 680s can use any stylus that will fit on a Stanton 681 or Pickering XV-15. Original styli available are mostly NOS, and not all are easy to find, consequently fans of these cartridges take a critical interest in aftermarket styli, discussing (sometimes arguing) their merits compared to one another and to originals. Some AKers will say never consider anything but an OEM stylus, but others will disagree.

There is a long and current thread about the XV-15, but also inevitably about all of these Stanton-Pickering triplet cartridges, including a lot about styli here:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=615467

 

[Decibel_116]

Thanks for the replies. I was hoping that was the case. Years ago, I had a Pickering XV-15 with a brush that I enjoyed very much. I'm not sure what happened to it over the years. It's probably in a box that I have yet to open from my last few moves.

I first found out about these in my early 20's when I worked in a retail store named Service Merchandise in the late "70s while attending college. Back then, department stores had "sound rooms" in the electronics department. I was given the task to completely re-work the sound room including re-wiring all the selector switchboxes. Part of this job entailed setting up new working displays of all the new receivers, turntables, cassette decks, and reel-to-reels. It was mostly Pioneer, Marantz, and Technics. The room even had a Pioneer SPEC-2 rack complete with all the rack mount stuff of the day. Part of this VERY cool job was to set up working models of all the new turntables and cartridges. As far as cartridges went, we had the complete line of Empire, Shure, Pickering, and ADC. I mounted one of each brand cartridge on a headshell and tried them all out with the exception of the Shure V15 models (they wouldn't let me use one of those expensive models for display purposes). My favorites at the time (in order of preference) were the Pickering XV-15 (gold w/brush), ADC (ZLM I think?), Shure M95HE, Shure M91ED, and then the Empire 2000EIII. There were some lower end models that I didn't bother to mount up.

Sorry about the long post. I guess I got a little carried away thinking back...

Cheers,
David

 

[illinoisteve]

So, essentially you've got your XV-15 back! If you find your old one, or even just the original brush, hang onto it. Even people who like some of the aftermarket needles usually don't like the aftermarket brushes. Anybody who like using a brush, will be happier if they hang onto at least one original brush.

Cool story about your audio department days in the seventies. And that wasn't a long post.

 

[illinoisteve]

. . .

 

[ETI_5000]

The 680EE/S was a 680EE with a Stereohedron (extended line contact) stylus. It was the non-calibrated version of the calibrated 681EE/S. The ‘calibration’ just meant the 681 cartridges were individually measured to conform to certain frequency response limits, whereas the 680 cartridges weren’t. In most respects the 680 would have been the same as the equivalent 681, but slightly cheaper because it didn’t have to be individually measured.

The 680EE/S and 681EE/S were slightly better than the standard elliptical stylus 680EE, due to the benefits of the Stereohedron stylus over an elliptical, such as lower distortion, and lower record and stylus wear. The Stanton 680/681EE cartridges were the second highest level of the 680/681-series, just below the top level 680/681EEE models, and can be considered to be somewhere around Shure M75ED, M91ED or M95ED performance level, as those were the second highest Shure cartridges below the V15 Type II and Type III in the 1970’s.

The Pickering XV-15 was Pickering's equivalent to the Stanton 681/681-series - the only difference was the name on the side, and the stylus and brush assembly. The styli interchange between the Pickering XV-15 and Stanton 680/681, and there are roughly equivalent models between each brand. In the case of the Stanton 680EE/S, its closest Pickering equivalent was the Pickering XV-15/757 S, which was very similar, and had a Stereohedron stylus.

It’s a moving iron cartridge, quite unlike the MM Stanton 500, and quite a bit better.

 

[Decibel_116]

So, essentially you've got your XV-15 back! If you find your old one, or even just the original brush, hang onto it. Even people who like some of the aftermarket needles usually don't like the aftermarket brushes. Anybody who like using a brush, will be happier if they hang onto at least one original brush.

Cool story about your audio department days in the seventies. And that wasn't a long post.

Thanks!

 

[Decibel_116]

The 680EE/S was a 680EE with a Stereohedron (extended line contact) stylus. It was the non-calibrated version of the calibrated 681EE/S. The ‘calibration’ just meant the 681 cartridges were individually measured to conform to certain frequency response limits, whereas the 680 cartridges weren’t. In most respects the 680 would have been the same as the equivalent 681, but slightly cheaper because it didn’t have to be individually measured.

The 680EE/S and 681EE/S were slightly better than the standard elliptical stylus 680EE, due to the benefits of the Stereohedron stylus over an elliptical, such as lower distortion, and lower record and stylus wear. The Stanton 680/681EE cartridges were the second highest level of the 680/681-series, just below the top level 680/681EEE models, and can be considered to be somewhere around Shure M75ED, M91ED or M95ED performance level, as those were the second highest Shure cartridges below the V15 Type II and Type III in the 1970’s.

The Pickering XV-15 was Pickering's equivalent to the Stanton 681/681-series - the only difference was the name on the side, and the stylus and brush assembly. The styli interchange between the Pickering XV-15 and Stanton 680/681, and there are roughly equivalent models between each brand. In the case of the Stanton 680EE/S, its closest Pickering equivalent was the Pickering XV-15/757 S, which was very similar, and had a Stereohedron stylus.

It’s a moving iron cartridge, quite unlike the MM Stanton 500, and quite a bit better.

Very cool. I can't wait to try it out. Especially after my latest disappointment with my Denon DL-301 mkII.

 

[Decibel_116]

Update

Thought I would post an update since trying the NOS Stanton 680EE/S on my SL-1200M3D. For context, I was using a Denon DL-110 on this particular deck and had been listening to it for about an hour or so before swapping in the 680EE/S. I must say that I am a little disappointed in it's performance. I was expecting the high frequencies to track better with the Stereohedron stylus than what I heard. Especially since the DL-110 has a .4 x .7 mil elliptical stylus. I re-checked the alignment just in case something slipped when installing. Nope. Everything is spot on. I suppose it could be the "Stanton House Sound" as they say. Compared to the DL-110, it sounds much "darker" and the midrange is just plain dull sounding. The extreme high frequencies, like cymbals and chimes come through fine if not a tad distorted. This is not going to be one of my favorite cartridges - at least for this particular system. It might be fine in a midrange heavy system. All of this is IMHO of course. System used is Pioneer SX-9 receiver, Pro-ject Phono Box S, Technics SL-1200M3D, Dynaudio tower speakers.

 

[majick47]

Give the Stanton some hours to "break in" if not used for some time, as suggested double check setup.

 

[Decibel_116]

Can't explain that. I didn't know the DL-110 has a .4 x .7 stylus. Do you have any references you can point to?

The DL-110 published specifications are 0.1 x 0.2 mm Square Solid Diamond Special Ellipse. This converts to .4 x .7 mil. I think it is probably a highly finished product since it starts with a square shank, but it is obviously an entry level HOMC with that diamond profile. But, it's not your run of the mill .4 x .7 product either. It certainly does a better job of tracking than my AT-95 which is also a .4 x .7 elliptical.

Dave

 

[Decibel_116]

Give the Stanton some hours to "break in" if not used for some time, as suggested double check setup.

How much break in time does this Stanton require? It may be that the suspension is not what it used to be considering it's age. I have triple checked alignment. Unless something happens during break in, this is not going to be one of my favorites. I thought it would sound similar to my D73S stylus (which sound phenomenal) that I have on a Technics SL-Q5, but it doesn't.

 

[majick47]

If you'v checked 3X the setup then the next thing I'd check is the stylus condition, not unusual for older stylus to have built up gunk/dirt on them that will impact the sound quality. Clean the stylus with a good stylus cleaning fluid, I'v used Last stylus cleaning fluid that removed all the built up gunk/dirt returning it to spotless. An inexpensive loupe will work to check the stylus, should be one of your standard tools in your turntable tool box.

 

[SaSi]

Thought I would post an update since trying the NOS Stanton 680EE/S on my SL-1200M3D. For context, I was using a Denon DL-110 on this particular deck and had been listening to it for about an hour or so before swapping in the 680EE/S. I must say that I am a little disappointed in it's performance. I was expecting the high frequencies to track better with the Stereohedron stylus than what I heard. Especially since the DL-110 has a .4 x .7 mil elliptical stylus. I re-checked the alignment just in case something slipped when installing. Nope. Everything is spot on. I suppose it could be the "Stanton House Sound" as they say. Compared to the DL-110, it sounds much "darker" and the midrange is just plain dull sounding. The extreme high frequencies, like cymbals and chimes come through fine if not a tad distorted. This is not going to be one of my favorite cartridges - at least for this particular system. It might be fine in a midrange heavy system. All of this is IMHO of course. System used is Pioneer SX-9 receiver, Pro-ject Phono Box S, Technics SL-1200M3D, Dynaudio tower speakers.

Interesting findings. They tend to agree with mine, to a certain extent.

I've had an 681 since I was a young boy and using it on crappy TTs generated crappy sound. I wasn't impressed. In fact I switched to CD and it was much better.
Several years later, I had the opportunity to get a decent TT with decent cart (Revox B791/Ortofon MC20MkII). I was blown away by the delicate and balance sound. The mid/highs were airy and the bass was controlled, not boomy and tight. This re-generated my interest in analog and LPs.

Since then, I've obtained an SL1210MkII and I'm using the 681 with various original styli on it. There is a definitely audible difference between the MC sound and the MI sound. Not for the worse - perhaps depending on music genre - but different.

I also have a DL-103 and it sounds more or less like an MC cart. Has the same attributes of the Ortofon MCs (I have acquired several).

If I had to chose one or the other, I'd go the MC road. BUT, I've also come across an Ortofon OM with a 20 stylus. I was also impressed by the sound, to the point I'm looking to get a 30 or 40 stylus.

Each cart has it's own sound and I'd use the 681 for Rock and the MC for classical music. Some Jazz recordings are sounding better with the MC.

I'd recommend you sample different LPs and genres and see how you like the sound of each cart with different kinds of music.

 

[Decibel_116]

I saw that spec. I didn't know how to convert it. Thanks. I even tried to Google the conversion but I was unsuccessful. I agree that diamond profiles aren't the whole picture when it comes to evaluating a stylus; one has to consider the entire system--well, you pretty much use your ears to judge. I've been let down by fancier specs.
Nonetheless, I have some pretty crazy good .4 x .7 styli.



There could be some other issues contributing here.

How clean are the contacts coming out of the back of the cartridge?
How clean are the contacts of the head shell wires?
How clean are the contacts where the head shell goes into the arm?
Can you try another head shell of a different kind or weight?
Is the stylus fully inserted into the cartridge body?
What VTF are you using?
Visually check where the stylus contacts the record for proper VTA (SRA)
Have you tried cleaning the stylus before testing it?
Have you measured the capacitance in your interconnects between TT and Phono stage?

Sorry if I'm just sending a list of things you've already checked. Sometimes it helps to have someone state some obvious checks, though.

All contacts have been cleaned with contact cleaner. I have the tracking set for 2g with brush. I have not tried another headshell or measured the capacitance in the signal path. Suggestions on how to measure the capacitance or another headshell type to try?

Thanks,
Dave

 

[Decibel_116]

If you'v checked 3X the setup then the next thing I'd check is the stylus condition, not unusual for older stylus to have built up gunk/dirt on them that will impact the sound quality. Clean the stylus with a good stylus cleaning fluid, I'v used Last stylus cleaning fluid that removed all the built up gunk/dirt returning it to spotless. An inexpensive loupe will work to check the stylus, should be one of your standard tools in your turntable tool box.

Stylus looks beautiful.

 

[Decibel_116]

Hate to dig up a really old thread, but is this where the rumor that the DL-110 has a .4 x .7 elliptical stylus actually started? 0.1 x 0.2 mm does NOT translate to .4 x .7 mil using any kind of math. 0.1 x 0.2 mm is the size of the diamond shank in section that is ground and polished to some dimension Major/Minor (R/r) radius to become a phonograph stylus point. If anything, most likely it is a standard Ogura PE which is 7.6/17.8 microns, commonly abbreviated to R/r = 8/18 microns and is found on the Ortofon 2M Blue, Ortofon Quintet Blue, Dynavector 10X5 before the switch to Namiki Shibata III and some others. The Ortofon and the Dynavectors are also 0.1 x 0.2 shank that is a standard Type 1 Vital shank dimension. In other words, whatever the R/r dimension is, the hole in the cantilever is going to be laser cut to 0.1 x 0.2 mm (or maybe a tiny bit smaller for a tight fit) as that is the size of the diamond block.

An old post for sure. I made a math mistake when I was investigating this stylus. I realized it later and never got around to correcting it due other priorities and then completely forgot about it. Thanks for the correction.