What's a Stanton 980 ...
- Thread starter BrocLuno
- Start date
neobop
Well-Known Member
Forgive me for editing your post. There's only a couple of points I'd like to address.
The 980LZ is remarkable for its lack of coloration. I have yet to hear it with an upgraded stylus, but in that respect I think it might have greater potential than the HZ. This is conjecture as I don't own an HZ version. I did have an 881 but that's a different cart. Some people do prefer the HZ, but not everyone so I think that's a matter of opinion. Flat frequency response and lack of coloration isn't everyone's cup of tea. Sometimes it can sound a little uninvolving.
Yes, there definitely seems to be a correlation between listenability and lack of reactance. I noticed this correlation in the AT line. Carts like the 20SS, Precept 440/550, top Signets, etc all seem to share this relationship between resistance and impedance. I think an impedance/resistance graph could be plotted similar to a speaker driver resistance graph and David, you're just the guy to do it.
Sorry for putting a burden on you, but you'll do it anyway.Looking forward to seeing those plots.
BTW, anyone know if the AT12E, 13E(a) generators (4.2mV, 1200 ohms) use OCC wire?
neo
griffithds
Active Member
Neo,
It is only a guess, but I doubt that these inexpensive cartridges back in the day, had OCC wire. Someone should have a manual on one of these. Hell, they must have sold 10,000 of them! I had a 12Sa and its manual said nothing about OCC wire. It talks mostly about the so called "amazing shabata tip"! This cartridge time frame was during the "CD4/quad" era!
Best regards Neo,
Don
It is only a guess, but I doubt that these inexpensive cartridges back in the day, had OCC wire. Someone should have a manual on one of these. Hell, they must have sold 10,000 of them! I had a 12Sa and its manual said nothing about OCC wire. It talks mostly about the so called "amazing shabata tip"! This cartridge time frame was during the "CD4/quad" era!
Best regards Neo,
Don
I have a Stanton 980 HZS which I bought about six years ago but have only used.briefly and never given careful setting up. The cartridge itself also looks to never have been used(no marks at all on the mounting lugs).
I have roughly mounted it a few years ago and wasn't impressed with the sound. Today, I was re-aligning my Soundsmith The Voice using a Yip Mint alignment protractor and I decided that while I was at the task I'd remount the Stanton on another headshell(one of my Yamaha PX-2 shells).
I'll digress here and say that when I bought the 980, the seller included the instruction booklet for the 980 LZS. Stupidly, not remembering that to be the case I reset the Moon LP5.3's impedance to 100 ohms the firgure given for the LZS. I also made two other changes while the Moon's case was open, I applied 100pf of capacitance(from none previously) and upped the gain to 66 dB. I upped the gain because my Hornshoppe The Truth is a no-gain stage and I wanted to have a little bit more gain up my sleeve.
I played the HZS and naturally because the 100 ohm setting is completely wrong for the 47K specified cartridge, the sound was severely muffled and the treble completely closed-down. Realising my mistake I reset for 47K and had another listen. This was the best that I'd ever heard the Stanton, but the other thing that I was hearing was the 66dB circuit for the LP5.3 needing to burn-in. I switched out the Stanton and reintroduced the Soundsmith after readjusting the tracking weight(I've got the Stanton at 1g and the Soundsmith at 1.3g). It was obvious that the Soundsmith was also exposing the fact that the 66dB circuit was burning-in. So I'll reserve my judgement on the Stanton until I get a chance to re-listen to it tomorrow. By the time that I stopped listening tonight(around 20:00) it was clear that the 66dB circuit was singing nicely. The Audio Fidelity reissue of Kate Bush's Hounds Of Love was sounding spectacular.
I heard enough from the Stanton while the circuit was burning-in that I am looking forward with anticipation to giving it another hearing. The sound of the Stanton(through the 66dB circuit that was settling-in) was not all that different to the Soundsmith when I eventually put it back onto the arm. The Soundsmith might have the edge, but tomorrow will tell the story. I can't wait. I know that the Soundsmith is a stunning,stunning cartridge and I have a feeling that the Stanton might be a real pearl as well. It's nice to know that I have two great cartridges to play with.
The dark-horse here is the Soundsmith Strain Gauge which is sitting there and I haven't even opened the box. Tomorrow might be the day when I mount it. I have another spare Orsonic headshell that I can put the Strain Gauge into. Interesting listening ahead definitely. :thmbsp:
I'll report back tomorrow evening.
I have roughly mounted it a few years ago and wasn't impressed with the sound. Today, I was re-aligning my Soundsmith The Voice using a Yip Mint alignment protractor and I decided that while I was at the task I'd remount the Stanton on another headshell(one of my Yamaha PX-2 shells).
I'll digress here and say that when I bought the 980, the seller included the instruction booklet for the 980 LZS. Stupidly, not remembering that to be the case I reset the Moon LP5.3's impedance to 100 ohms the firgure given for the LZS. I also made two other changes while the Moon's case was open, I applied 100pf of capacitance(from none previously) and upped the gain to 66 dB. I upped the gain because my Hornshoppe The Truth is a no-gain stage and I wanted to have a little bit more gain up my sleeve.
I played the HZS and naturally because the 100 ohm setting is completely wrong for the 47K specified cartridge, the sound was severely muffled and the treble completely closed-down. Realising my mistake I reset for 47K and had another listen. This was the best that I'd ever heard the Stanton, but the other thing that I was hearing was the 66dB circuit for the LP5.3 needing to burn-in. I switched out the Stanton and reintroduced the Soundsmith after readjusting the tracking weight(I've got the Stanton at 1g and the Soundsmith at 1.3g). It was obvious that the Soundsmith was also exposing the fact that the 66dB circuit was burning-in. So I'll reserve my judgement on the Stanton until I get a chance to re-listen to it tomorrow. By the time that I stopped listening tonight(around 20:00) it was clear that the 66dB circuit was singing nicely. The Audio Fidelity reissue of Kate Bush's Hounds Of Love was sounding spectacular.
I heard enough from the Stanton while the circuit was burning-in that I am looking forward with anticipation to giving it another hearing. The sound of the Stanton(through the 66dB circuit that was settling-in) was not all that different to the Soundsmith when I eventually put it back onto the arm. The Soundsmith might have the edge, but tomorrow will tell the story. I can't wait. I know that the Soundsmith is a stunning,stunning cartridge and I have a feeling that the Stanton might be a real pearl as well. It's nice to know that I have two great cartridges to play with.
The dark-horse here is the Soundsmith Strain Gauge which is sitting there and I haven't even opened the box. Tomorrow might be the day when I mount it. I have another spare Orsonic headshell that I can put the Strain Gauge into. Interesting listening ahead definitely. :thmbsp:
I'll report back tomorrow evening.
The only proviso I'll make if I decide to mount the Strain Gauge: The SG uses it's own unique gain stage which dispenses with RIAA equalisation. So comparing the SG to The Voice and the Stanton will be comparing apples to oranges.
Very Good apples to a very good orange.
Edit: Yes, I have unpacked the Strain Gauge box from where I have had it stored. I have yet to open the box.
Very Good apples to a very good orange.
Edit: Yes, I have unpacked the Strain Gauge box from where I have had it stored. I have yet to open the box.
Last edited:
Yes I did some comparative listening done between the Soundsmith The Voice and the 980 HZS. However I snapped a headshell lead on the headshell I'm using the Stanton on. So until I substitute another set or single lead, no more listening to the Stanton.
What I will say regarding the listening to the 980 HZS that I have done, it is a mighty cartridge, not shamed by the Soundsmith The Voice. I'd like to do more listening before I declare either one the winner. That should tell you how good the Stanton is. :yes:
What I will say regarding the listening to the 980 HZS that I have done, it is a mighty cartridge, not shamed by the Soundsmith The Voice. I'd like to do more listening before I declare either one the winner. That should tell you how good the Stanton is. :yes:
I have been relistening to the 980 HZS over the last two days. It is a very good cartridge. I think that the Soundsmith The Voice is the better cartridge by way of being more natural in tonality, more subtle in fine detail, better able to delineate individual images within choirs orchestras etc. Basically able to paint with a finer brush. The Stanton isn't shamed it sounds very good. It just doesn't render the finest factors that the Voice does.
Am I impressed with the Stanton? You bet. It is an amazing cartridge and a true classic.
Am I impressed with the Stanton? You bet. It is an amazing cartridge and a true classic.
Hi Theo,
I have the close relative from Pickering XLZ7500, pretty much the same as the low output Stanton 980LZS.
I did some measurements of the same D7500 stylus both in the low output XLZ7500 body and in a XSP3003 (which I believe may be the same as the 980HZS - in p-mount form).
The two sounded very similar(obviously) - but the high output body had the standard MM/MI midrange "trough" (around 2db loss) starting around 2kHz
The high end also did not rise as much due to the higher inductance.
I think more detail comes through on the low output bodies due to reduced magnetic losses (eddy current, hysteresis) particularly with higher level signals (louder records).
Might I suggest searching for one of the low output bodies from that family, you might find that it takes it a slight notch further...
I have the close relative from Pickering XLZ7500, pretty much the same as the low output Stanton 980LZS.
I did some measurements of the same D7500 stylus both in the low output XLZ7500 body and in a XSP3003 (which I believe may be the same as the 980HZS - in p-mount form).
The two sounded very similar(obviously) - but the high output body had the standard MM/MI midrange "trough" (around 2db loss) starting around 2kHz
The high end also did not rise as much due to the higher inductance.
I think more detail comes through on the low output bodies due to reduced magnetic losses (eddy current, hysteresis) particularly with higher level signals (louder records).
Might I suggest searching for one of the low output bodies from that family, you might find that it takes it a slight notch further...
I don't think I ever answered the question... (apologies for noticing very late).
To give a real answer I would need to measure the stylus and cartridge response, feed it all into my model and crunch numbers for optimal loading....
But typically, lower end styli are slightly higher mass, lowering the resonant frequency, and therefore increasing the high end rise (all else being equal).
So typically as the mass increases, the designer compensates by increasing the electrical roll off/damping to better control that rise - ie: increase inductance and/or capacitance. Although reducing R loading can also be used.
A step down from the D7500 stylus might shift the resonant frequency from 25kHz to something like 21kHz, a slightly higher inductance body would probably balance that out nicely. (addition 100mH maybe?)
bye for now
David
dlal,
I wouldn't know what is affecting what in this instance. I only know what I am hearing. I don't even know whether the VTF is optimum. I tried it at 1.07gm. I will listen again. I am not finished with the Stanton. I'd like to try a different capacitive loading. I read that this series(980/981 high and low) were sensitive to the capacitance. I have the LP 5.3 set to 150pf. The leads of the tone arm contribute 130pf. I am certain that I am the first person to use this cartridge. I might well be still in the process of breaking it in. :yes:
I am getting a rare Pickering model the XLZ 3500E soon(bought on Sunday from Germany). I will try that one also. My experiences with the Stanton inspired me to try the Pickering and it was cheap.
They are very interesting cartridges.
The Pickering XLZ 3500E arrived this morning. I won't be using it immediately. The spec sheet was interesting though. Output 0.6mv. Resistive load 100 ohms or greater. Seems like it is similar to the 980/981 LZS Stantons only with an elliptical stylus instead of a stereohedron.
restorer-john
Addicted Member
here's a magazine ad scan from ETI Feb 1981.
Yeah, they are not brilliant (understatement) - but they are designed to be used with the little rubber slide in nuts - which makes things easier... they are not intended to be used on their own (which is how most people use them).
The body you have is identical to my XLZ7500 body, I would suggest running it with relatively high capacitance, and with 1k load....
Thanks dlal. :thmbsp:
Speaking of the body of the Pickering, it has a very sexy looking black body. Kind of 'Stealth' looking. So you're saying that if I had the correct stylus I'd essentially have a Stanton 980 LZS? :scratch2:
Nice to know. It was a good purchase then.
I think that the 980 HZS that I have probably needs a touch more capacitance than I have applied. The Moon LP 5.3 has one more capacitance option of 400pf. I might try that next. I appreciate your contribution.
I tried the 980 HZS with more capacitance. The Moon's higherst capacitance setting is 470pf. I tried that. I really, really liked the sound of the 980HZS with this capacitance setting(nothing else was changed except the tracking force was set at 0.987 grams). I set the tracking force there because although I don't know the correct tracking force for the 980 HZS and that is exactly in the middle of the 980 LZS tracking range( 0.5g - 1.5g).
With the increased capacitance the 980 HZS loses a 'bright' edge to the sound and becomes more detailed, more natural in tonality with better imagery and soundstage. Do I prefer it to the Soundsmith The Voice? I don't know for sure. But what I will say is that it sounds wonderful. Much, better than I have heard it prior to this change. I really really like this cartridge and I wish that I had a lighter headshell(I'm using the Orsonic AV-101) in order to give this high compliance cartridge a more compatible operating environment.
Another question for dlaloum:
Would using the D98/S stylus from the 980 HZS in the Pickering XLZ 3500 make the Pickering into the equivalent of the 980 LZS?
With the increased capacitance the 980 HZS loses a 'bright' edge to the sound and becomes more detailed, more natural in tonality with better imagery and soundstage. Do I prefer it to the Soundsmith The Voice? I don't know for sure. But what I will say is that it sounds wonderful. Much, better than I have heard it prior to this change. I really really like this cartridge and I wish that I had a lighter headshell(I'm using the Orsonic AV-101) in order to give this high compliance cartridge a more compatible operating environment.
Another question for dlaloum:
Would using the D98/S stylus from the 980 HZS in the Pickering XLZ 3500 make the Pickering into the equivalent of the 980 LZS?
ETI_5000
Super Member
There are actually two different tracking force ranges quoted for the Stanton 980/981 series, and the Pickering 7500 series, depending on the version of Sterehedron stylus. For the Mk1 Sterohedron, the tracking force (for both Pickering and Stanton) low output models was 1g ±0.5g, while the MkII Stereohedron (as used on models like the Pickering XLZ-7500-IIS and Stanton 981-LZMkIIS) tracking force was 0.75-1.5g. The later specifications are given in a Stanton product catalogue I downloaded, which shows all the 785/885/980/981 models, as well as numerous other cartridges and styli – if you do a search for ‘Stanton Product Catalog’ on Google you’ll probably find it.
An experienced member on another forum has also stated that Pickering/Stanton specifications couldn’t always be trusted in their brochures and user manuals – they sometimes got them wrong (allegedly)! As one of my former colleagues, an elderly WWII veteran, used to diplomatically say, “I’m not sure that I would have said that, but because he’s said it, I’ll go along with it!”
Both Pickering and Stanton specified the recommended capacitance for their low output cartridges as being ‘up to 1000pF’. The Stanton 980/981 HZS (high output models) require 275pF for the flattest frequency response according to Stanton, as is typical of virtually all high output Stantons. They had a range of different styli, all interchangeable, which included (Stanton and Pickering equivalent models next to each other):
• Pickering XLZ-3500-E (D3500E bonded 0.2 x 0.7mil elliptical stylus) ~ Stanton 785LZE (D78E bonded 0.2 x 0.7mil elliptical stylus)
• Pickering XLZ-4500-S (D4500S bonded Stereohedron stylus) ~ Stanton 885LZS (D88S bonded Stereohedron stylus)
• XLZ-7500-S (D7500S nude Stereohedron stylus) ~ Stanton 980/981 (D98S nude Stereohedron stylus – for both HZS and LZS)
• XLZ-7500-IIS (D7500-IIS nude Stereohedron stylus) ~ Stanton 980/981MkII (D98 IIS nude Stereohedron stylus – for both HZS and LZS)
• Pickering TLZ-7500-S (T4P version of XLZ-7500-S – also uses D7500S stylus)
• Pickering TLZ-7500-IIS (T4P version of XLZ-7500-IIS – also uses D7500-IIS stylus)
The styli should all produce fairly similar frequency responses within the audio (sub-20kHz) band, although the Sterehedrons are probably better at tracking the ultrasonic frequencies (particularly on CD-4 records in good condition). The specifications certainly seem to bear that out – the elliptical stylus cartridges were specified as having an upper limit of 30kHz (that’s probably the -6dB limit, and objective reviews seemed to show they met that -6dB standard easily), while the bonded Stereohedron stylus cartridges reached 40kHz and the nude Stereohedrons got to 50kHz. The low output models all have a resistance of only 3Ω, while the inductance is just 1mH, so it’s no wonder they are immune to capacitance changes!
The cartridge bodies are all the same (within the respective low and high output groups), except for the p-mount Pickering TLZ-7500-S, which has identical electrical specs to all the other low output models, and shared the Pickering D7500(II)S stylus with the XLZ-7500-(II)S. That would have been one of the very few low output p-mount cartridges (Technics had a few) – I don’t think it had a Stanton equivalent. It also came with the brush, although Pickering does have a note in the user manual that the brush is only useable for half inch mounting applications (they supplied a half inch mount adaptor).
The method of mounting the Stanton stylus assembly is more secure than the Pickering mounting method, and the Stanton brush pivot is also slightly better than that of the Pickering stylus assembly, as those of us who’ve used both know. I’ve had problems (not unique, according to another thread) with microphonic Pickering stylus assemblies, when the cartridge body isn’t gripped tightly enough by the Pickering stylus assembly ‘wings’, although using shims to make the mounting tighter seems to cure it.:thmbsp:
An experienced member on another forum has also stated that Pickering/Stanton specifications couldn’t always be trusted in their brochures and user manuals – they sometimes got them wrong (allegedly)! As one of my former colleagues, an elderly WWII veteran, used to diplomatically say, “I’m not sure that I would have said that, but because he’s said it, I’ll go along with it!”
Both Pickering and Stanton specified the recommended capacitance for their low output cartridges as being ‘up to 1000pF’. The Stanton 980/981 HZS (high output models) require 275pF for the flattest frequency response according to Stanton, as is typical of virtually all high output Stantons. They had a range of different styli, all interchangeable, which included (Stanton and Pickering equivalent models next to each other):
• Pickering XLZ-3500-E (D3500E bonded 0.2 x 0.7mil elliptical stylus) ~ Stanton 785LZE (D78E bonded 0.2 x 0.7mil elliptical stylus)
• Pickering XLZ-4500-S (D4500S bonded Stereohedron stylus) ~ Stanton 885LZS (D88S bonded Stereohedron stylus)
• XLZ-7500-S (D7500S nude Stereohedron stylus) ~ Stanton 980/981 (D98S nude Stereohedron stylus – for both HZS and LZS)
• XLZ-7500-IIS (D7500-IIS nude Stereohedron stylus) ~ Stanton 980/981MkII (D98 IIS nude Stereohedron stylus – for both HZS and LZS)
• Pickering TLZ-7500-S (T4P version of XLZ-7500-S – also uses D7500S stylus)
• Pickering TLZ-7500-IIS (T4P version of XLZ-7500-IIS – also uses D7500-IIS stylus)
The styli should all produce fairly similar frequency responses within the audio (sub-20kHz) band, although the Sterehedrons are probably better at tracking the ultrasonic frequencies (particularly on CD-4 records in good condition). The specifications certainly seem to bear that out – the elliptical stylus cartridges were specified as having an upper limit of 30kHz (that’s probably the -6dB limit, and objective reviews seemed to show they met that -6dB standard easily), while the bonded Stereohedron stylus cartridges reached 40kHz and the nude Stereohedrons got to 50kHz. The low output models all have a resistance of only 3Ω, while the inductance is just 1mH, so it’s no wonder they are immune to capacitance changes!
The cartridge bodies are all the same (within the respective low and high output groups), except for the p-mount Pickering TLZ-7500-S, which has identical electrical specs to all the other low output models, and shared the Pickering D7500(II)S stylus with the XLZ-7500-(II)S. That would have been one of the very few low output p-mount cartridges (Technics had a few) – I don’t think it had a Stanton equivalent. It also came with the brush, although Pickering does have a note in the user manual that the brush is only useable for half inch mounting applications (they supplied a half inch mount adaptor).
The method of mounting the Stanton stylus assembly is more secure than the Pickering mounting method, and the Stanton brush pivot is also slightly better than that of the Pickering stylus assembly, as those of us who’ve used both know. I’ve had problems (not unique, according to another thread) with microphonic Pickering stylus assemblies, when the cartridge body isn’t gripped tightly enough by the Pickering stylus assembly ‘wings’, although using shims to make the mounting tighter seems to cure it.:thmbsp:
Last edited:
I've been using the Stanton HZS 980 for the last week. I haven't played that many records but I'm certain that I am breaking this cartridge in. As I've said somewhere on the net, this cartridge shows zero signs of ever being used before. I therefore suspect that the improvements that I'm hearing as I'm using it are the signs most of my cartridges have exhibited as they were breaking in.
Am I enjoying the sound? Oh! You betcha.
Am I enjoying the sound? Oh! You betcha.
