First MC Cartridge

[Angsty]

I have been using an Ortofon 2M Blue with a VPI Traveler and a Sutherland Insight phono for a few years now. I’m ready to try something new in the form of a Hana EL moving coil cartridge. My question is about loading.

Excel Sound recommends a loading of 400 ohms or more for the cartridge. I have sufficient gain at 60 dB for the 0.5 mV output, but my Insight has loads of 200 ohms and 1000 ohms, but nothing in-between. The internal impedance is 30 ohms.

Would 200 ohms or 1000 ohms be appropriate in this application? I don’t want to buy a cartridge that would be poorly suited for the phono; I’m not changing it out. Should I consider a non-invasive jumper modification that would yield a 400-500 ohm load? The loading in the Insight is set with jumper pins.

There is the Hana EH which would use a 47k ohm loading for the same price, but if I’m going MC, I thought I’d go all the way.

BTW, when would you use a 10K load? The older Sutherland designs had it, but some of the newer ones appear to have replaced it with a 470 ohm load.

 

[dougi]

This link has some reasonable info for both loading of MM (capacitance sensitive) and MC (resistance sensitive) cartridges. ( loading ).

Using the "normal" MC loading may roll-off the highs too much if the cart was truly designed for a higher loading. Installing a jumper arrangement to get to 470 ohms say may be appropriate. The impedance of the cart does seem high (30 ohms) so it is a probably best to run with a higher load impedance than 100 ohms.

 

[Angsty]

Thanks, @dougi !

 

[Tom C]

I think the 10 to 1 rule of thumb is pretty widely accepted. So if your cart has 30 ohms internal, you would want a minimum of 300 ohms phono input impedance. Going above the minimum has no downside. Using that logic, the 1000 ohm option would be the better of the two.
As an aside, I recently wanted a MC mono cart with a hyper-elliptical stylus, which is actually not easy to find in the under $1,000 price range. Even the pricey Mayajimas use conical styli. So I selected a Hana Mono SL, which has a shibata stylus. I was very disappointed with it. It sounds like high distortion, really unlistenable. I looked at it with a microscope, and the stylus seemed to be mounted slightly off center, but not hugely so. The coils might not be exactly aligned, but I wouldn’t expect that to matter too much. I wish I had a way to measure, but I don’t. I tried different alignments, but I just couldn’t get it dialed in to sound good. I suspect a defect in manufacture, but I can’t prove it. Still, it turned me off to Hana.
I have had excellent results with all my Audio Technica carts, and never had trouble getting them to sound great. I have the ART 1000 on my main table, and ART 7, AT33 Mono and VMN 70SP in the bedroom, and have been pleased with them all. Really disappointed in the Hana, and I had been so looking forward to a great cartridge. But it soured me on the whole Hana line, and I’ll never buy another one.
All anecdotal, of course.

 

[JeffS7444]

I looked at it with a microscope, and the stylus seemed to be mounted slightly off center, but not hugely so. The coils might not be exactly aligned, but I wouldn’t expect that to matter too much. I wish I had a way to measure, but I don’t.

Have you tried this technique for measuring angles with the aid of a USB microscope? Although this video is specifically about determining best arm height, perhaps you could apply it to other areas of measurement and figure out whether the cart needs to be mounted slightly askew? Gotta love posting links to Michael Fremer's videos here, but he's a pretty good presenter, and I think the nuts-and-bolts content is solid enough. For my microscope, I selected an inexpensive unit as recommended in EEVblog video #566: Works great for stylus inspection and alignment.

 

[Tom C]

Yes, I have. I got one that’s a little, pencil-like affair popular with vinyl enthusiasts, about $40 on Amazon. The problem I encountered was that I couldn’t get the scope in close enough to see what was going on. If you have an exposed cantilever, it’s much easier, but for whatever reason all my carts have thick, tall bodies, making the stylus and cantilever barely visible. Also, that side shot in the photo is good for SRA, but to set azimuth (which I figure is what’s required to correct whatever may be wrong with the Hana), you have to position the microscope at the front rather than the side. The ‘scope is just too big to fit in close to the cartridge, so it has to be positioned way back, off the edge of the turntable in order to have the correct angle to see the stylus. But then the magnification drops because of the distance, so I can’t get it to work. You’d need something with a looong relief in order to work. Or maybe a very thin fiber optic that could fit close to the stylus.
I hear you about MF. I think he’s a pretty good writer, though, and his reviews cans be an enjoyable read. Just need to take what he writes with a grain of salt. Or a whole box.

 

[Tom C]

OK. I’m taking a second look at that photo, and am reminded about using the CD. That would probably work. I’ll try again.

 

[Angsty]

As an aside, I recently wanted a MC mono cart with a hyper-elliptical stylus, which is actually not easy to find in the under $1,000 price range. Even the pricey Mayajimas use conical styli. So I selected a Hana Mono SL, which has a shibata stylus.

Aren’t the grooves in a mono record wider than stereo grooves such that a non-spherical stylus would be less than optimal?

 

[mhardy6647]

Aren’t the grooves in a mono record wider than stereo grooves such that a non-spherical stylus would be less than optimal?

The biggest issue with a "true" (i.e., pre-stereo) mono LP record -- zero vertical modulation of the grooves. True mono cartridges (of the pre-stereo era) had zero or little vertical compliance -- thus were they anathema vis-a-vis stereo records when they came along! Later on, things got murkier, as "mono" pressings were often cut with stereo cutting heads, simply using a mixed-to-mono signal.

 

[Tom C]

Aren’t the grooves in a mono record wider than stereo grooves
Yes...but...
The fact is, narrower needles play the wider grooves just fine. The groove is a “V” shape, so the smaller needle just rides deeper in the valley than the older, wider needles did. And some of the latest reissues of mono recordings are cut with a narrow, stereo-size stylus.

such that a non-spherical stylus would be less than optimal?

My personal experience is that non-spherical is a bit better than, I prefer to say, conical. Not by leaps and bounds, just by an increment. And they are better on all phono, whether shellac or vinyl, mono or stereo. Because the technologies for producing the record were similar enough for that to be the case.

Over the past 15 or 20 years, a number of very old recordings have been transferred to digital using the latest techniques for transcription, and are remarkably good, considering their age, and the technical limitations of the time of their origin. This is because what we have now is actually better than what we had then.

 

[anmpr1]

My personal experience is that non-spherical is a bit better than, I prefer to say, conical.

Generally I've found that the Adamant-Namiki sourced Microridge (Microline) diamonds are more detailed, but I prefer standard elliptical or even ball point pen styli from a sonic perspective. This likely has less to do with the diamond than the overall FR of the cartridge.

Microridge are found on a lot of AT cartridges, which to my ears are too bright (440ML and 740ML). Denon rounds (DL103) and ellipticals (301, 160, 110), or the Shure M97x are for me more natural sounding. On the other hand I had a V15xMR which didn't sound bright at all. However, Shure cartridges are history.

For mono I sometimes use a spherical AT Mono-3 high output MC which sounds natural, much less aggressive than AT Microridge MM cartridges I own. The AT mono is fairly inexpensive and probably a good buy if you have a lot of monophonic records, and a record player that allows you to change cartridges easily (removable headshell).

For entry to mid level, AT are priced reasonably. Denon MC cartridges sell at a premium considering what they were going for just a few years ago. Ortofon are also priced quite high, IMO.

After old management ran it into the ground, the new post bankrupt Gibson recently sold Stanton to a pro audio outfit. I sent them an email suggesting they get back into the audiophile market, but never heard back. Shure, for their part, claims they will never get back into the phono business. But never say never.

 

[DSJR]

I can't get on with expensive conical tipped cartridges (Denon 301* [edit, I meant 103 - DUH!!!] immediately comes to mind). The hf response tail off (or added hf distortion in cheapies with conical tips) really bugs me towards the end of side and back in the day when I bought vinyl and CD 50/50 to hedge my bets, even with elliptical styli, the end of side roll offs were very noticeable.

Hana got a bad rap on another forum recently due to very short diamond life. No proof to back this comment up, but I've never had issues with AT's cartridges over several hundred hours of use, as long as the tip is kept clean. After a 2M Blue, an OC9 varient would be nice I think, although I'm so fond of the 2M Bronze over its lesser siblings, I'd give serious thoughts to a 2M Bronze stylus myself - The Bronze has a funkier and less hf-fussy kind of reproduction I remember (measurements with soundbites made with a Rega 9 on the German Lowbeats site)

 

[mhardy6647]

I can't get on with expensive conical tipped cartridges (Denon 301 immediately comes to mind).

What 301 has/had a conical tip? The current MkII is elliptical -- and hardly expensive, by current standards, either.

EDIT: Perhaps you meant the 103? The 103 is an atavism (and a wonderful one, IMO), and one of the least expensive LOMC cartridges extant.
It was even better when Comet Supply (in Florida) some years back had them for $118.

DSC_8876 (2) by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

 

[Frank Dernie]

My personal experience is that non-spherical is a bit better than, I prefer to say, conical.

Pedant here
You may prefer to say conical but the stylus' playing surface is spherical not conical, so you are being inaccurate (or wrong as we used to say).

 

[Angsty]

Would 200 ohms or 1000 ohms be appropriate in this application? I don’t want to buy a cartridge that would be poorly suited for the phono; I’m not changing it out.

I got a return email from Ron Sutherland at Sutherland Engineering today. He said that he spoke with one of his dealers that sells lots of Hana and the dealer says he prefers a loading of 200 ohms and sometimes 100 ohms.

So I should be OK given my setting options.

He further went to say that he had a Hana EL in his home system for many years and enjoyed it. It was using a PHONO LOCO which presents a load of 0 ohms, and that worked well also.

I’ve always valued purchasing audio equipment from small domestic manufacturers who work hard to make great products. Sutherland Engineering is one of those companies. This personal response from Ron helps cement that preference.

 

[Tom C]

The manufacturer should be the best source for that type of information.
Let us know how you like your Hana. Maybe I just got a bum one. Or maybe I’m just a dork. Either is possible.

 

[anmpr1]

The 103 is an atavism (and a wonderful one, IMO), and one of the least expensive LOMC cartridges extant. It was even better when Comet Supply (in Florida) some years back had them for $118.

The price of entry level (which were always first rate) Denon cartridges has tripled over the past few years. The 110 used to sell for about a hundred dollars, but is now at three hundred. The price on my DL-160 was $160.00 (I bought it from the old Needle Doctor organization). I ran it through the inflato-calculator which shows a current adjusted price of $212.00. That would be a good deal if it was still available.

The original 103 is a '60s design that was evidently intended originally for broadcast use. It sounds great for such an old design. But my HF ears are likely long gone. IMO the best of the series was the elliptical tip 103D. That was my personal standard. If I was looking for a low output Denon I'd probably go with a 301, but even those are four hundred dollars. It used to be a (plus or minus) two hundred dollar cartridge not that long ago.

If I was looking to getting started with records, I'd probably go with one of the reasonably priced MM AT or Grado. Maybe an entry level Ortofon, but Ortofons rise in price pretty quickly once you go up the color scale.

Low output MC carts tend to be money funnels. I can't say one would be better than another once you reach the lofty price points. The best I ever heard was a Koetsu black (low end for them). And the best wine I drank was a Lafite Rothschild Pauillic. Unfortunately those are all out of my pay scale. LOL

Hana got a bad rap on another forum recently due to very short diamond life.

I would bet that most Japan cartridges use Adamant or Ogura sourced jems. I don't understand why one diamond would have a 'shorter life' than another. On the other hand, if the diamond is bonded the cement could possible come loose, or the crimped hole securing the stylus assembly could open up causing the stone to come out.

 

[Angsty]

The original 103 is a '60s design that was evidently intended originally for broadcast use. It sounds great for such an old design.

I thought it interesting to contrast that in the 1960’s, moving coils were still a relatively new design, having been invented in the 50’s by Joe Grado. I get what you mean, but I’d suggest that the moving coil technology hasn’t really advanced much in the last 40 years beyond a few tweaks of materials and manufacture. I expect the 103 to be around a long time, still.

 

[anmpr1]

I thought it interesting to contrast that in the 1960’s, moving coils were still a relatively new design, having been invented in the 50’s by Joe Grado. I get what you mean, but I’d suggest that the moving coil technology hasn’t really advanced much in the last 40 years beyond a few tweaks of materials and manufacture. I expect the 103 to be around a long time, still.

I certainly agree. I don't think there's been any really 'modern' cartridge advances. It's an old and mature technology. The only thing I can think of is possibly the AT cartridge that has the coils around the tip of the stylus assembly (see below). That is clever, and I don't ever recall encountering anything like it. I guess it works OK. Other exotic deisngs--FET, strain gauge, optical etc. have been around for years.

I think a lot of what you see is simply cosmetic. Putting the internals in semi-precious jewels, or exotic woods and so forth, and then selling the item as something special.

I suppose the Denon 103 will last as long as the tooling remains serviceable, and as long as their trained workers don't retire. FWIW there's a guy at the on-line marketplace that replaces the ball point pen with a more 'modern' elliptical diamond. He retipped my 160 and as far as I can tell it's as good as new. If one of my 103 goes south I'd send it to him for an upgrade. But I hardly use those anymore. Denon used to offer cartridge trade ins, but they stopped that program.

 

[TimW]

I just bought my first DL-103 for $229. Going to swap between it and my Nagaoka MP-150 for comparison. I also have a an AT-VMN95C because I wanted an affordable reference to compare to. I work part time at a place that's an AT dealer and have listened to a few of their carts, but only a couple in my own system. The 95C sounds a bit bright to me but so do all of the AT carts I've heard. @anmpr1 what MM AT cart would you recommend? Are there any somewhat modern ones you know of that aren't that bright?