Phono cartridges

[Deleted User]

I haven't had a turntable in decades since my beloved HK was stolen. I'm sort of considering getting back into it because, honestly, turntables are just the coolest looking piece of audio there is and I miss the sweet sound.

Question is: Which cartridge makers are still in business? I remember Ortofon, AT, Shure, Pickering, and B&O used to build some good sounding units. Which ones survived digital?

voltz

here some from Acoustic sounds
https://store.acousticsounds.com/index.cfm?get=results&categoryid=35&ResultsPerPage=100

Clipdat

Can't go wrong with an Ortofon Blue.

mpitogo

@The_Polkster I picked it back up sometime around 2011 and have been enjoying it since. I actually "listen" to more music now than I did when it was a digital download. I now have 3 TT and each has its own character. So far I have three integrated amps and they have a standard MM phono section, Rotel, McIntosh and Sansui. I have not yet looked into the rabbit hole that is MC and dedicated phono-pre.

Check out https://www.needledoctor.com and https://www.musicdirect.com. Those sites are pretty cool to show you what is out there but sometimes Amazon has them cheaper.

@Clipdat I was looking at Ortofon Blue for a medium mass tonearm on a Denon DP-2500. I think the specs show its a medium compliance cart. What TT do you have it attached to? I also have a Sansui FR-1080 and I tried an Ortofon Super OM-10 and it was a terrible combo. So much noise and and it lacked low and mid definition. I tried to make sure the cart was well aligned but it was just not meant to be. I went the super entry level and got an AT3600 and what a 360 in sound. The sound was much better balanced. The stylus picked up less noise and more body but was lacking top end compared to higher priced AT440MLb.

mhardy6647

Grado's doin' fine.

Plenty of good cartridges to choose from -- often not inexpensive any more, though.

gce

Ortofon Quintet Black was just what the doctor ordered for my table.

[Deleted User]

I forgot about my very forgettable experience with a Revox linear track that wasted a perfectly good Ortofon.

[Deleted User]

mpitogo wrote: »

@The_Polkster I picked it back up sometime around 2011 and have been enjoying it since. I actually "listen" to more music now than I did when it was a digital download. I now have 3 TT and each has its own character. So far I have three integrated amps and they have a standard MM phono section, Rotel, McIntosh and Sansui. I have not yet looked into the rabbit hole that is MC and dedicated phono-pre.

Check out https://www.needledoctor.com and https://www.musicdirect.com. Those sites are pretty cool to show you what is out there but sometimes Amazon has them cheaper.

I used to bring that very same Revox to Jerry Raskin (needle Doctor) many years ago. When I finally gave up on that TT I gave up on analog entirely. His place was a funny little hole in the wall back then. I should drop in and see what it's like now.

erniejade

There is a nice denon in the FS area. Denon makes some good carts..

kharp1

That Denon is sold, however, I researched for several months before I settled on a table and cartridge (lot of good that did ) and the Denon cartridges kept coming up as a universally agreed upon good choice. Many said it was just so easy to listen to.

erniejade

Agreed. Im still running a denon dl160 on my old 1200. It bested a goldring costing 3x as much.

jdjohn

Cartridges, as with every audio component, tend to have a house sound by brand, so many times it comes down to personal taste.

IMO, Grado and Shure are warmer;
Audio Technica is brighter;
Ortofon (at least MM) are analytical.

Denon is neutral and smooth, but you can't replace the stylus without shipping it off somewhere. Also, depending on which model, an MC preamp may be needed.

So, type of music, and the characteristics of other components in the system may dictate what makes the most sense, or what matches your taste.

mhardy6647

I concur with the post above (FWIW).
It does seem worth mentioning that, to me at least, it seems that there is a wider variety of cartridges ("brands", if you will -- some very botique) available today than ever before (even in the heyday of stereo hifi in the late 1950s into the late 1970s).

http://store.acousticsounds.com/c/35/Cartridges

https://www.musicdirect.com/equipment/phono-cartridges/?category=Phono%20Cartridges&sort=popularity|DESC&page=1&pagesize=24&c1=tab-products&c2=grid

... and don't forget


https://www.sound-smith.com/

As an aside (although perhaps not entirely irrelevant), the Denon DL-103 and Ortofon SPU cartridge line have been in continuous production since at least the early 1960s (the SPU perhaps a little earlier). The Shure M44 has been around since ca. 1964 (see http://www.shure.com/americas/support/find-an-answer/vintage-shure-catalogs-1933-1984). The basic Grado line is fundamentally unchanged since at least the mid-1970s.

I would submit that these survivors have survived for a reason.

Clipdat

I don't have the blue, I basically have the equivalent of this on my Technics 1200: https://www.musicdirect.com/phono-cartridges/ortofon-2m-pnp-red-mm-phono-cartridge

mpitogo wrote: »

@Clipdat I was looking at Ortofon Blue for a medium mass tonearm on a Denon DP-2500. I think the specs show its a medium compliance cart. What TT do you have it attached to? I also have a Sansui FR-1080 and I tried an Ortofon Super OM-10 and it was a terrible combo. So much noise and and it lacked low and mid definition. I tried to make sure the cart was well aligned but it was just not meant to be. I went the super entry level and got an AT3600 and what a 360 in sound. The sound was much better balanced. The stylus picked up less noise and more body but was lacking top end compared to higher priced AT440MLb.

nooshinjohn

I love ClearAudio, but have only had the Titanium V2 and the Stradivari V2 on my table...

mpitogo

https://www.lpgear.com

mpitogo

kharp1 wrote: »

That Denon is sold, however, I researched for several months before I settled on a table and cartridge (lot of good that did ) and the Denon cartridges kept coming up as a universally agreed upon good choice. Many said it was just so easy to listen to.

haha I offered to buy your TT but was too late. I have the DL-110 in my Amazon cart. I decided against the Ortofon Blue.

My problem, I can't figure out this compliance calculation. Need a compliance for dummy guide. I understand generally high mass tonearms should have low compliance carts, medium mass tonearms should have medium compliance carts and low mass high compliance carts.


Static compliance eg 35 x 10-6 cm/dyne
vs
Dynamic compliance eg 18 x 10-6 cm/dyne (100Hz) or (vs 10Hz)
vs
Compliance eg 10 μm/mN

kharp1

That's why I went with the Project, it was already mounted and had plug and play set up...mostly. After research I realized I didn't have an engineering degree and trying to figure out everything with installing a new cartridge was more than I wanted to deal with.

SCompRacer

The_Polkster wrote: »

His place was a funny little hole in the wall back then. I should drop in and see what it's like now.

I'll bet they can make you an offer you can't refuse.

AudioRefugee

mpitogo wrote: »

kharp1 wrote: »

That Denon is sold, however, I researched for several months before I settled on a table and cartridge (lot of good that did ) and the Denon cartridges kept coming up as a universally agreed upon good choice. Many said it was just so easy to listen to.

haha I offered to buy your TT but was too late. I have the DL-110 in my Amazon cart. I decided against the Ortofon Blue.

My problem, I can't figure out this compliance calculation. Need a compliance for dummy guide. I understand generally high mass tonearms should have low compliance carts, medium mass tonearms should have medium compliance carts and low mass high compliance carts.


Static compliance eg 35 x 10-6 cm/dyne
vs
Dynamic compliance eg 18 x 10-6 cm/dyne (100Hz) or (vs 10Hz)
vs
Compliance eg 10 μm/mN

Go to VinylEngine.com - Tools - Cartridge Resonance Evaluator.

wolfie62

I think vintage carts are the way to go. There has been zero improvement over the last 35 years, just changes in appearance. Why I say that: There are few objective test labs that put these carts through the paces that was once common in the 70s/80s/90s. Now, any cart mfr can make and sell anything, and no one is the wiser. Sure, you can flowery objective praise and descriptions, but not REAL LAB TESTS. The vintage carts lived and died by objective lab tests. When I buy vintage, I know what I am getting!

Having said all that, I love the ADC XLM/ZLM carts. Styli are abundant and varied, with the choice of boutique diamond cuts, or elliptical. Also, you don't need beryllium cantilevers to get the designed response such as for the Shure V15 IV/V series than no one makes anymore. I bought and sold the Ortofon 2M Bronze and Black. Just not enough detail and air. The ADC carts are inexpensive, and have the flat frequency response, air, imaging, detail, tracking ability that are missing from modern carts that cost FAR MORE MONEY. It's a very neutral cart, yet is extremely revealing, and so "MC" like, you won't ever wish you had gone the MC route.

halo

wolfie62 wrote: »

I think vintage carts are the way to go. There has been zero improvement over the last 35 years, just changes in appearance. Why I say that: There are few objective test labs that put these carts through the paces that was once common in the 70s/80s/90s. Now, any cart mfr can make and sell anything, and no one is the wiser. Sure, you can flowery objective praise and descriptions, but not REAL LAB TESTS. The vintage carts lived and died by objective lab tests. When I buy vintage, I know what I am getting!

Having said all that, I love the ADC XLM/ZLM carts. Styli are abundant and varied, with the choice of boutique diamond cuts, or elliptical. Also, you don't need beryllium cantilevers to get the designed response such as for the Shure V15 IV/V series than no one makes anymore. I bought and sold the Ortofon 2M Bronze and Black. Just not enough detail and air. The ADC carts are inexpensive, and have the flat frequency response, air, imaging, detail, tracking ability that are missing from modern carts that cost FAR MORE MONEY. It's a very neutral cart, yet is extremely revealing, and so "MC" like, you won't ever wish you had gone the MC route.

I guess that all depends on how the cart will work with your tonearm/table.

I have an ADC "Tech Series" cart which, according to the experts over at vinyl engine, accepts a wide variety of ADC styli. I currently have an ADC Series III stylus on it but I did try the LP Gear replacement for ADC RSZ stylus. Unfortunately, it didn't fare well with my medium mass tonearm on my Technics SL-Q3. I got the ADC cart when it came attached to a Pioneer PL-7 table I bought and that cart/stylus is an ideal match to the low mass tonearm on the Pioneer. Sadly, I no longer have the Pioneer so, I don't know how well the RSZ may have sounded with the low mass tonearm but it definitely didn't work out with the Technics.

That said, I have several carts including a Shure M95ED that came with the SL-Q2 when I bought it. That cart is a very good match and sounds really nice. Unfortunately, the Shure isn't the best tracking cart and doesn't do well with older, well-loved, LPs. The AT carts that I own (AT96E & AT120Eb) are the best trackers on that SL-Q2 but the sound quality isn't the best overall. Personally, I find the Grado Red1 does the best in regards to sound quality among all the carts that I own. Thus far, in my experience, there are trade-offs depending on which cart, or carts, you go with. YMMV.

I had a Nagaoka MP110 but foolishly parted with it & I may be looking to get another one in the future. I would also like to try a Denon DL110 as I don't have a SUT.

SCompRacer

wolfie62 wrote: »

There has been zero improvement over the last 35 years, just changes in appearance. ....

Your absolute is absolutely untrue......

Just one example...2018-1997 = 21 years.

1966 V15 Type II: first analog-computer-designed superior tracking cartridge, the model that introduced 'Trackability', Shure's term for 'the ability to maintain contact between stylus and record groove at minimum tracking force throughout audio spectrum.' It also introduced the flip-action, built-in stylus guard

1970 V15 Type II Improved: upgraded stylus; flatter frequency response

1973 V15 Type III: new laminated pole piece; 'uniformly flat, unaccented, uncoloured frequency response'; 25% reduction of effective stylus mass

1978 V15 Type IV: hyperelliptical nude stylus tip resulting in optimised tip-groove contact area; 'viscous-damped Dynamic Stabilizer overcomes record warp and electrostatically neutralises record surface'

1982 V15 Type V: ultra-thin-wall beryllium (Microwall/Be) stylus shank; MASAR-polished tip to reduce friction; packaged with Duo-Point Alignment gauge to minimise lateral tracking angle error

1983 V15 Type V-MR: 'Micro-Ridge stylus tip emulates shape of cutting stylus for unsurpassed trackability, particularly in high frequency range'

1997 V15VxMR: pole piece position changed; 'warmer and more musical than ever'



'MC like' is settling for less than MC actual.

mhardy6647

SCompRacer wrote: »

...
'MC like' is settling for less than MC actual.

Yes -- like tube-like.



There are certainly cartridges today that are different than those of 40, 50, or 60 years ago. Whether they're better may be more a matter of taste, although I'll grant you that there are quantifiable ways of assessing goodness (tracking test records), so it is entirely possible that there are quantitatively better cartridges now, too.

There are certainly quantitatively more expensive cartridges now than 30, 40, 50, or 60 years ago (even allowing for inflation).

... and I already "spoke" my piece about the Ortofon SPU family and the Denon DL-103 family.


All in all, though, I would say we are living in a golden age for phono cartridge options -- especially if one has deep pockets. That's where I hit the rocks, unfortunately.

cortico

How about the Shure M97xE is a great cartridge? It costs less the $100... sounds super smooth to me.

https://www.shure.com/americas/products/phono/m97xe-audiophile-phono-cartridge

mhardy6647

cortico wrote: »

How about the Shure M97xE is a great cartridge? It costs less the $100... sounds super smooth to me.

https://www.shure.com/americas/products/phono/m97xe-audiophile-phono-cartridge

I like the M97xe just fine (FWIW).
Some folks think it's too mellow, round, rolled-off, etc.
Those same folks tend to like the lively sound of certain A-T and Ortofon cartridges which remind me of ice picks being inserted into my ears.

Those people are way too wound up IMO

Msabot1

Gold Ring has a very good lineup for every budget...

halo

Nagaoka carts have been very well reviewed time and time again. Do a search on the interweb.

Dawgfish

^^Yes the Nagaoka MP-500 is easily one of my favorite carts even compared to low output moving coils from Benz, Dynavector, Shelter, and Koetsu. A fantastic cart that sounds great with everything.^^

AudioRefugee

Everyone has different ears, different rooms, different equipment, different mentors, and different wallet. Find a cartridge that works, but above all... enjoy your music.

jdjohn

SCompRacer wrote: »

wolfie62 wrote: »

There has been zero improvement over the last 35 years, just changes in appearance. ....

Your absolute is absolutely untrue......

Just one example...2018-1997 = 21 years.

1966 V15 Type II: first analog-computer-designed superior tracking cartridge, the model that introduced 'Trackability', Shure's term for 'the ability to maintain contact between stylus and record groove at minimum tracking force throughout audio spectrum.' It also introduced the flip-action, built-in stylus guard

1970 V15 Type II Improved: upgraded stylus; flatter frequency response

1973 V15 Type III: new laminated pole piece; 'uniformly flat, unaccented, uncoloured frequency response'; 25% reduction of effective stylus mass

1978 V15 Type IV: hyperelliptical nude stylus tip resulting in optimised tip-groove contact area; 'viscous-damped Dynamic Stabilizer overcomes record warp and electrostatically neutralises record surface'

1982 V15 Type V: ultra-thin-wall beryllium (Microwall/Be) stylus shank; MASAR-polished tip to reduce friction; packaged with Duo-Point Alignment gauge to minimise lateral tracking angle error

1983 V15 Type V-MR: 'Micro-Ridge stylus tip emulates shape of cutting stylus for unsurpassed trackability, particularly in high frequency range'

1997 V15VxMR: pole piece position changed; 'warmer and more musical than ever'

Do you really want to count that 1997 change? Leave that out, and we're back to 35 yrs. Anyway, I would call those improvements in stylus design, not moving magnet cartridge design. But IMO, stylus design/construction is more important, and makes a bigger difference, than the cartridge in most cases. That's why OEM replacement styli cost over half (usually two-thirds) the amount of a total cart/stylus combo replacement.

MHardy mentioned several models that have been in production for a looong time, basically unchanged.

I was on the M97xE bashing bandwagon awhile, but I found that with better supporting electronics, it sounded better. I think for folks just starting (or getting back into) vinyl with entry-level equipment, the M97xE is pretty boring. The Audio Technicas and Ortofons are more impactful and make a bigger difference in sound using basic gear IME. Now, whether said impact is for the better - mhardy called it 'lively' - is up to the listener.