The M-91ED competed head to head with the Pickering XV/15 400E, and had a slight edge sonically. The Pickering however was a workhorse that could stand a considerable amount of abuse that would have destroyed the Shure, and that's why all of us at Lafayette Radio at the time, sold the Pickering instead of the Shure. And our customers actually liked the idea of the brush: in my experience, it was almost never the customer who didn't like the brush, but the audio salesman who pushed his own beliefs on the customer.
The Brush on Pickering and Stanton carts
- Thread starter emaidel
- Start date
bohhey
Dualaholic
Couldn't agree more - it's human nature to steer a customer to what the salesman likes/uses/or wished he had! Also, I think that there were certainly regional issues going on - being in the midwest, & Shure being in Chicagoland, & just about everyone else from the east coast, we tended to favor Shure - we sure saw their reps more. In our area, the Stanton/Pickering rep kept those brocures in the back of his case - was more interested in selling container loads of Duals to the larger chain stores - Team Electronics comes to mind - they set up that Dual 1229 display with the table playing on a 45 degree angle - surrounded by inventory - stuff went flying out the door. As salesmen, we made our $$ on the larger items - carts (sorry to say) were more of a headache - after all, back in the days of customer service, we always correctly mounted the cart - & in our neck of the woods, Shure had the best name recognition. But, back to the matter at hand, thanks again for the info - it made me go to my partsdrawer & pull out a Pickering V 15 & a Stanton from the little metal "pillbox", mount 'em & give 'em a listen again.
bohhey said:
I know exactly who you're talking about, and when I returned to Stanton in the 90s (after a stint with Pickering in the late 70's) I fired him! Getting reps interested in selling phono cartridges was often pretty difficult back then, given the huge sums of money they could make selling mainline electronics and/or turntables and/or speakers.
Memories, memories, memories...
jt1stcav
Up and Coming Bottlehead
I'm still puzzled about proper tracking force for my 981HZS...
It was originally purchased for my new '84 Denon DP-62L turntable (now sold), and presently it's mounted on my dad's '79 Technics SL-1700MK2 I'm currently using. It works perfectly and still sounds wonderful, but now after reading your above post I'm somewhat confused if I have both the tracking force and antiskating set properly!
As you can see from the calibration data that came with my 981HZS, I went by their recommendations; after balancing the tonearm with the cartridge and brush attached (I've always used the brush), I set both the tracking force and antiskating to 1.4 grams...is this correct, or should I now add an additional gram to each? I've never experienced any misracking on warped albums throughout the years, so I assume I have everything set accordingly. What would you recommend?
Since I can no longer purchase the D98S replacement stylus for my cartridge, is there any service labs available that can retip my replacements to original Stanton specs, or am I SOL once this last replacement buys the farm? It's a shame to have a fabulous cartridge like the 981HZS go to waste. Or is it time to retire the cartridge when my last stylus is spent? Do the internal parts deteriorate after so many years of continuous (but careful) use?
Thanks for your thread...I've enjoyed reading it thus far. :thmbsp:
That pic used on Page 2 is my '84 Stanton Professional Calibration Standard 981HZS, using the last of two D98S Stereohedron "longhair" stylus replacements (the others are too worn for continued use IMO). This is my favorite MM cartridge and one I do not want to part with. But once this long discontinued stylus is also too worn for use, it'll be the end of a very long and fullfilling relationship, since neither the cartridge nor the stylus are made anymore!emaidel said:
It was originally purchased for my new '84 Denon DP-62L turntable (now sold), and presently it's mounted on my dad's '79 Technics SL-1700MK2 I'm currently using. It works perfectly and still sounds wonderful, but now after reading your above post I'm somewhat confused if I have both the tracking force and antiskating set properly!
As you can see from the calibration data that came with my 981HZS, I went by their recommendations; after balancing the tonearm with the cartridge and brush attached (I've always used the brush), I set both the tracking force and antiskating to 1.4 grams...is this correct, or should I now add an additional gram to each? I've never experienced any misracking on warped albums throughout the years, so I assume I have everything set accordingly. What would you recommend?
Since I can no longer purchase the D98S replacement stylus for my cartridge, is there any service labs available that can retip my replacements to original Stanton specs, or am I SOL once this last replacement buys the farm? It's a shame to have a fabulous cartridge like the 981HZS go to waste. Or is it time to retire the cartridge when my last stylus is spent? Do the internal parts deteriorate after so many years of continuous (but careful) use?
Thanks for your thread...I've enjoyed reading it thus far. :thmbsp:
Attachments
jt1stcav said:
that's incorrect, and you should add an additional gram to both settings. All calibrations were done without the brush on the cartridge, as the brush was a final step in the assembly of any Stanton or Pickering cartridge. And, as I've stated previously, either assembly weighs one gram.
That you balanced the arm (with the brush on the cartridge), then set the tracking force for 1 1/4 grams, and have experienced no trouble tells me the dial-in tracking numbers on the Technics are off, as your "net" tracking force should only be 1/4 gram, and NO cartridge made by anyone anywhere is capable of tracking that lightly. I'd suggest looking for a separate tracking force guage (Shure makes one that I think is still available) and use it to properly set your tonearm. (Settings: 2 1/4 grams for BOTH tracking force and anti-skating).
Insofar as re-tipping - yes, you are SOL. Sorry. And, no, the innards do not deteriorate over time.
Glad you've found this thread interesting.
jt1stcav
Up and Coming Bottlehead
I have that very Shure tracking force guage, and will readjust my setup this weekend.
I originally bought the Stanton for my Denon DP-62L, but that was back in '84 and I don't recall the settings I had used. I assume it was probably 1.5 grams for both tracking and antiskating. I don't ever recall the cartridge skipping due to being too light (I have no warped LPs). Then I sold the Denon a number of years ago and didn't use a turntable for years until just recently when I aquired my dad's '79 SL-1700MK2. Again I setup the Stanton with the Technics, and haven't experienced any problems thus far, although I've probably played a total of 10 albums since I've hooked it up. My dad bought the Technics new in '79 and it probably doesn't even have a 100 hours of play on it (it's in like-new condition, and his cartridges were the Pickering XV-15/625E with a D625 "Dustamatic" stylus, and a Signet TK7E).
The dial-in tracking numbers on the Technics could very well be off, but I guess I won't know for sure until I reset the setup with the Shure guage. I guess I've been extremely lucky so far not having experienced a bouncing, jittery stylus all this time!
I originally bought the Stanton for my Denon DP-62L, but that was back in '84 and I don't recall the settings I had used. I assume it was probably 1.5 grams for both tracking and antiskating. I don't ever recall the cartridge skipping due to being too light (I have no warped LPs). Then I sold the Denon a number of years ago and didn't use a turntable for years until just recently when I aquired my dad's '79 SL-1700MK2. Again I setup the Stanton with the Technics, and haven't experienced any problems thus far, although I've probably played a total of 10 albums since I've hooked it up. My dad bought the Technics new in '79 and it probably doesn't even have a 100 hours of play on it (it's in like-new condition, and his cartridges were the Pickering XV-15/625E with a D625 "Dustamatic" stylus, and a Signet TK7E).
The dial-in tracking numbers on the Technics could very well be off, but I guess I won't know for sure until I reset the setup with the Shure guage. I guess I've been extremely lucky so far not having experienced a bouncing, jittery stylus all this time!
idlerwheel
Active Member
With respect, I have two corrections:
1. Expert Stylus in England has a superb reputation for good re-tipping. I intend to use them myself when the time comes. They have a superb selection of tip dimensions for different types of use. Expert has been doing this for decades, especially for people who do archival transcriptions of shellac records.
2. Regarding the styli for the 680EE vs the 681EEE, my list shows these tips as being slightly different. The 681EEE's stylus is a .2 x .7 mil elliptical. The 680's is .3 x .7.
Recently, I've been re-discovering the "fatter" elliptical styli, and in some cases, I prefer the sound to the more "audiophile" tips. Since all records aren't made to the same standards, it's interesting to me to experience that some records actually sound better when played with a "downgrade" stylus like this.
I assume that what you meant (Maidel) was that the styli were identical in performance except for the difference in the ellipse. Is this correct? I've also noticed that most of the Pickering XV-15 better tips were .3 x .7, where Stanton's tended more toward the .2 x .7s.
I was told by Stanton's people during the 80s that they made their diamond tips themselves in Florida, but when the demand was great, they'd sometimes buy tips for the lesser models, I assume from overseas manufacturers. What seems to bear this out is that Stanton Special Products made special transcription tips (like truncated ellipticals) similar to what Expert has long produced, for archival customers like The Library of Congress. I'd like to know more about this.
Richard Steinfeld
1. Expert Stylus in England has a superb reputation for good re-tipping. I intend to use them myself when the time comes. They have a superb selection of tip dimensions for different types of use. Expert has been doing this for decades, especially for people who do archival transcriptions of shellac records.
2. Regarding the styli for the 680EE vs the 681EEE, my list shows these tips as being slightly different. The 681EEE's stylus is a .2 x .7 mil elliptical. The 680's is .3 x .7.
Recently, I've been re-discovering the "fatter" elliptical styli, and in some cases, I prefer the sound to the more "audiophile" tips. Since all records aren't made to the same standards, it's interesting to me to experience that some records actually sound better when played with a "downgrade" stylus like this.
I assume that what you meant (Maidel) was that the styli were identical in performance except for the difference in the ellipse. Is this correct? I've also noticed that most of the Pickering XV-15 better tips were .3 x .7, where Stanton's tended more toward the .2 x .7s.
I was told by Stanton's people during the 80s that they made their diamond tips themselves in Florida, but when the demand was great, they'd sometimes buy tips for the lesser models, I assume from overseas manufacturers. What seems to bear this out is that Stanton Special Products made special transcription tips (like truncated ellipticals) similar to what Expert has long produced, for archival customers like The Library of Congress. I'd like to know more about this.
Richard Steinfeld
The printed difference in styli dimensions between the 681EEE and the 680EE are only to justify the higher price for the EEE: there is no difference at all in size, despite the (truly miniscule) printed difference.
Insofar as Pickering and Stanton styli differing: it all depended on the model, and when the models were identical (Pickering XV/15-1200E and Stanton 681EEE) there were no differences at all.
Lastly, neither Pickering or Stanton ever made their own diamond tips, but purchased all of them. They did attach the diamond tips to the cantilevers, and that was something to behold, as it took a very steady hand, and a super, high-quality microscope to ensure proper positioning (especially with elliptical or STereohedron tips). Very much to the company's credit (and I believe this carries forth to this day with their DJ models) they use a very high polish diamond, which commands a premium.
Insofar as Pickering and Stanton styli differing: it all depended on the model, and when the models were identical (Pickering XV/15-1200E and Stanton 681EEE) there were no differences at all.
Lastly, neither Pickering or Stanton ever made their own diamond tips, but purchased all of them. They did attach the diamond tips to the cantilevers, and that was something to behold, as it took a very steady hand, and a super, high-quality microscope to ensure proper positioning (especially with elliptical or STereohedron tips). Very much to the company's credit (and I believe this carries forth to this day with their DJ models) they use a very high polish diamond, which commands a premium.
idlerwheel
Active Member
As always, it's wonderful to finally get some straight information about this mysterious (and often excellent) product line. This brings up more questions:
- When can I trust that the stated tip dimensions are true? I'm very interested in correlating my styli with what I'm hearing, but lacking the factory's electronic scanning microscope, I can only rely on what's printed. For example, is the 680EL (D6800EL stylus) really a .4 x .7?
- And when Stanton sold specialized styli to The Library of Congress, where were they getting their custom archival transfer tips, such as the truncated ellipticals?
- Finally, I'd love to know the names and origin countries of the actual tip suppliers.
Thanks
Richard
- When can I trust that the stated tip dimensions are true? I'm very interested in correlating my styli with what I'm hearing, but lacking the factory's electronic scanning microscope, I can only rely on what's printed. For example, is the 680EL (D6800EL stylus) really a .4 x .7?
- And when Stanton sold specialized styli to The Library of Congress, where were they getting their custom archival transfer tips, such as the truncated ellipticals?
- Finally, I'd love to know the names and origin countries of the actual tip suppliers.
Thanks
Richard