Introducing the Phono Cartridge Measurement Library

[Balle Clorin]

Same on mine M10 could it be the internal weight- mine is glued in place but still have the bump…., no point in using OM series I think , Ortofon has better offerings.
Post in thread 'Introducing the Phono Cartridge Measurement Library'
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...tridge-measurement-library.46108/post-2247818

 

[wpbilderback]

Ortofon Concorde Music Bronze

I purchased this new at the end of August.

When I received it, the cantilever obviously had not been installed correctly.

I posted about this in another thread, but figured that I would also include it here.

View attachment 479902
View attachment 479903

I sent it over to Ortofon in New York, and they agreed. They replaced the stylus with one that had been inspected, and sent the cartridge back to me.

The following measurements were taken with the replacement stylus:

View attachment 479906
View attachment 479905
As you can see, at 50k ohm loading, it's nearly +4 dB at 10kHz and +6 dB at 15kHz. When loaded at 28.8k ohms, it presents a much flatter frequency response.

That being said, what on earth is that resonance at 300-400 Hz? It seems to show up in the previously posted measurements as well.

I'm pretty disappointed with Ortofon's QC, or lack thereof, and am therefore in the process of returning this cartridge.

Since I purchased it, MSRP has gone from $399 to $499, presumably due to actual or anticipated tariffs.

The third-order harmonic distortion is also pretty high. Between that and the +6 dB boost at 15kHz, I guess this is what those in the hi-fi press would call a "lively and insightful" cartridge. I don't think I've ever seen a bad review of it. Whether it is "bad" or not is subjective. But neutral it ain't.

 

[wpbilderback]

Stanton 680 cartridge with Jico (Pickering) D150DJ NUDE conical stylus

Notes: Although this is a Stanton cartridge, the stylus is made for a Pickering XV-15. It doesn't make any difference. It works in either a Pickering or Stanton body. This rolls off a little earlier than the Jico D6800EEE-S Shibata stylus that I posted a measurement for. It tracks well at 2.0 grams in my experience. These can be found relatively cheap from some sources in the U.S.

 

[wpbilderback]

Stanton 680 cartridge with Jico (Pickering) D625 NUDE elliptical stylus

Notes: You might expect Jico's nude elliptical stylus to outperform its nude conical stylus. I did not find that to be the case. There's a rising peak of about 4 dB from 5kHz to 12kHz that is absent with the conical stylus. This could probably be tamed somewhat by dropping the resistance. I haven't bothered. As with the Jico conical that I posted a measurement for, this stylus is meant for a Pickering XV-15 cartridge. I've measured it in two different Pickering bodies and they exhibit the same peak. This was a surprising disappointment from Jico, whose styli generally work well.

 

[wpbilderback]

Stanton 680 cartridge with BLISS (Pickering) D625 Shibata stylus

Notes: Another Pickering stylus on a Stanton cart. This measurement closely resembles the one I made of the Jico D6800EEE-S Shibata stylus, which is made for Stanton 680 cartridges. BLISS is the name that turntableneedles.com uses for their styli. Obviously, they don't make the styli themselves. They are made to spec for them. I would not be surprised to learn Jico made this one. Later, I will post a single measurement using a Pickering XV-15 body, so you don't have to take my word for it that these two carts perform similarly. I apologize if all these measurements for the Stanton 680 are annoying. The 680 and the Pickering XV-15 are relatively easy to find for a low price (I obtained a couple of bodies for free), and I thought it would be helpful for people to see how various aftermarket styli perform.

 

[wpbilderback]

Pickering XV-15 cartridge with BLISS (Pickering) D625 Shibata stylus

Notes: Here is a measurement using a BLISS Shibata stylus on a Pickering XV-15 1200e cartridge purchased from turntableneedles.com. As you can see, the results closely mirror the measurements I got when using the same stylus on a Stanton 680 cartridge. Stereo separation is slightly better on the Stanton, but I would attribute that to sample-to-sample variation. I've measured another Stanton 680, a 681, and three Pickering XV-15 625e's in the past*, and they all yielded the same results for frequency response with slight variations in stereo separation. As far as I can tell, though there might be some variations over the years (both these carts were manufactured for a long time), for all intents and purposes, the only thing that differentiates these cartridges is the stylus used.

*You might reasonably wonder why I've had so many Pickering XV-15 and Stanton 680s. The answer is that about 10 years ago, I came into a large stash of old cartridges without styli. A friend of mine runs a stereo shop, and they were pulled from the turntables he bought. He always puts new carts on them before selling, and he didn't want to mess with finding appropriate styli for the old ones. This stash also included a Shure V15 VMR.

 

[Thomas_A]

What happens if you use around 250 pF?

 

[Thomas_A]

Ortofon Concorde Music Bronze

I purchased this new at the end of August.

When I received it, the cantilever obviously had not been installed correctly.

I posted about this in another thread, but figured that I would also include it here.

View attachment 479902
View attachment 479903

I sent it over to Ortofon in New York, and they agreed. They replaced the stylus with one that had been inspected, and sent the cartridge back to me.

The following measurements were taken with the replacement stylus:

View attachment 479906
View attachment 479905
As you can see, at 50k ohm loading, it's nearly +4 dB at 10kHz and +6 dB at 15kHz. When loaded at 28.8k ohms, it presents a much flatter frequency response.

That being said, what on earth is that resonance at 300-400 Hz? It seems to show up in the previously posted measurements as well.

I'm pretty disappointed with Ortofon's QC, or lack thereof, and am therefore in the process of returning this cartridge.

Since I purchased it, MSRP has gone from $399 to $499, presumably due to actual or anticipated tariffs.

Resonance is there with the OM as well. Something to do with their body resonance.

 

[wpbilderback]

What happens if you use around 250 pF?

I get a slight depression between 2kHz and 10kHz, bottoming out at approximately -2 dB at 5kHz, followed by a peak of around +4dB at 15kHz, and then a steep rolloff. I haven't been able to get these carts to be flat out to 20kHz. There's always some trade-off. And there's always a steep drop-off around 15kHz. This may not have been the case with the original Stanton/Pickering styli, but it's been that way with every aftermarket one I've used (Jico, EVG, Pfanstiehl). Unfortunately, I have not had much luck with Stanton or Pickering NOS styli. The suspensions were always dried out.

 

[DSJR]

From memory, those Stanton bodies are all identical...

Late reply - The 681EEE used to be calibrated and I seem to remember a response plot enclosed with each cartridge. I don't know if this selection applied to the body as well, but as I'd retained a good EEE stylus from the late 70s, stashed away in a components drawer, i found a cheap 680AL body and mated the two together. Sounds fine to me and over these parts, we always ditched the brush to stop it 'playing' the record too! Mine tracks at 1.25g still with grace and a laid back vibe I admit I went against my old programming and used the little plastic mounts on the fixing 'lugs' to screw into from above. Rigidity be damned as th ebody can be flexed laterally on the mounting lugs anyway.

 

[dlaloum]

Late reply - The 681EEE used to be calibrated and I seem to remember a response plot enclosed with each cartridge. I don't know if this selection applied to the body as well, but as I'd retained a good EEE stylus from the late 70s, stashed away in a components drawer, i found a cheap 680AL body and mated the two together. Sounds fine to me and over these parts, we always ditched the brush to stop it 'playing' the record too! Mine tracks at 1.25g still with grace and a laid back vibe I admit I went against my old programming and used the little plastic mounts on the fixing 'lugs' to screw into from above. Rigidity be damned as th ebody can be flexed laterally on the mounting lugs anyway.

View attachment 483833

I used to run a 681EEE on my Revox Linatrack... it is a high compliance design... and worked very well on the Revox ultra-light arm.

The flexing of the mount is not so much of an issue when running high compliance and a low mass arm, as the forces and masses involved are an order of magnitude lower than what you get with the currently fashionable mid to low compliance setups with mid to high mass arms.

In the overall scheme of things, when running low mass / high compliance, there is more to be gained from mass reduction than there is from rigidity... (and yes it is always a balancing act!)

The Revox Linatrack arm is a Delrin construct on a linear tracking mechanism - it is a rigid form of plastic... but no girder like super rigid - its mount to the linear tracking mechanism is a unipivot with a dab of damping grease.

What arm are you running with?

(and yes my original 681EEE came with an individual calibration measurement in its box - from memory... that was in the late 1980's)

 

[DSJR]

I used to run a 681EEE on my Revox Linatrack... it is a high compliance design... and worked very well on the Revox ultra-light arm.

The flexing of the mount is not so much of an issue when running high compliance and a low mass arm, as the forces and masses involved are an order of magnitude lower than what you get with the currently fashionable mid to low compliance setups with mid to high mass arms.

In the overall scheme of things, when running low mass / high compliance, there is more to be gained from mass reduction than there is from rigidity... (and yes it is always a balancing act!)

The Revox Linatrack arm is a Delrin construct on a linear tracking mechanism - it is a rigid form of plastic... but no girder like super rigid - its mount to the linear tracking mechanism is a unipivot with a dab of damping grease.

What arm are you running with?

(and yes my original 681EEE came with an individual calibration measurement in its box - from memory... that was in the late 1980's)

We had the early Revox decks with swing-out tonearm, assembly. is this what you're referring to? I seem to recall Ortofon pickups being used - VMS20 II comes to mind (after the M15 but before the OM models). Not sure, but some may have had AKG P8ES cartridges fitted but it's so darned long ago now.

I used my 681EEE in Duals (before and after my Linn LP12 sojourns). Early deck was a much loved and much missed 1229 (I lent it to a friend's son and never got it back) and in the picture, my main-rig spinner 701, which keeps it all in perspective, just a 'smaller' picture than a proper higher end deck - I can't describe it any better, but when finances allow, I need to see about a stylus for the V15VMR, which sounded so good in this player, but which was accidentally damaged and not by me either!!! I can't hear response rises over 10kHz (the well loaded MR as 'HiFi Choice' tested rolled off 5dB from 10 - 20kHz), so an SAS may well be good to go here.

 

[dlaloum]

We had the early Revox decks with swing-out tonearm, assembly. is this what you're referring to? I seem to recall Ortofon pickups being used - VMS20 II comes to mind (after the M15 but before the OM models). Not sure, but some may have had AKG P8ES cartridges fitted but it's so darned long ago now.

Yes, that's the one - the swing out arm... and yes I ran a VMS20 at one point and then a VMS30

I used my 681EEE in Duals (before and after my Linn LP12 sojourns). Early deck was a much loved and much missed 1229 (I lent it to a friend's son and never got it back) and in the picture, my main-rig spinner 701, which keeps it all in perspective, just a 'smaller' picture than a proper higher end deck - I can't describe it any better, but when finances allow, I need to see about a stylus for the V15VMR, which sounded so good in this player, but which was accidentally damaged and not by me either!!! I can't hear response rises over 10kHz (the well loaded MR as 'HiFi Choice' tested rolled off 5dB from 10 - 20kHz), so an SAS may well be good to go here.

I always had a fondness for the Duals...

And yes get the SAS stylus for your V15VMR - from all accounts the current SAS is improved on the version that I have which is from about 15 years ago... and although I do grumble about it not being a match for the original, it is an excellent stylus - and although I rarely use my TT now, when in use has always been excellent. (mounted to a p-mount V15C...)

 

[Thomas_A]

Ortofon MC-X40

Updated without SUT below

Comments

• Published on behalf of user Rotelfan on SHF
• Equipment: SL1oooR, ST 70 SUT, McIntosh C53, Focusrite 4i4

Updated graph below. Without the SUT the dip dissappeared and it was better in the high end as well. Currently I do not know what setting the SUT had (A or B configuration).

 

[Thomas_A]

Ortofon Verismo

Comments:

• Published on behalf of user Rotelfan at SHF
• Equipment: SL1oooR, ST 70 SUT, McIntosh C53, Focusrite 4i4

Updated graph below. Without the SUT the dip dissappeared and it had more energy in the high end as well. Currently I do not know what setting the SUT had (A or B configuration).

 

[Bland_username42069]

The Verismo does not look up to much especially at $6,000

 

[mglobe]

The Verismo does not look up to much especially at $6,000

X40 with some EQ would be better given the Verismo distortion results

 

[wpbilderback]

The Verismo does not look up to much especially at $6,000

In the U.S., the current price is actually $7,350. I hardly know what to say. I Googled it and found it's the recipient of many glowing write-ups from golden-eared reviewers.

 

[Balle Clorin]

Ortofon Verismo
View attachment 486205
Comments:

• Published on behalf of user Rotelfan at SHF
• Equipment: SL1oooR, ST 70 SUT, McIntosh C53, Focusrite 4i4
• Dip below 50 Hz is due to a parametric EQ of the preamp that was not disabled

To bad Rotalfan was using a SUT so we cannot know if the drop in the top is the SUT or cartridge , but I guess it is the SUT since all Ortofons rise up towards 20k . This does not seem like an ideal SUT cartridge combo, maybe try another tap?
High distortion as many Ortofons have….

 

[Thomas_A]

To bad Rotalfan was using a SUT so we cannot know if the drop in the top is the SUT or cartridge , but I guess it is the SUT since all Ortofons rise up towards 20k . This does not seem like an ideal SUT cartridge combo, maybe try another tap?
High distortion as many Ortofons have….

Since he has the C53 he could try for the MC input as well and skip the SUT for comparison. I'll ask him if he want to do that while disconnecting the EQ at 35 Hz.