Introducing the Phono Cartridge Measurement Library

[DSJR]

Ortofon VMS 20E MKII

This example was purchased from Japan a number of years ago. I would have thought this is an NOS or lightly used example, but what would explain the high distortion?

It came with the CAP 210 capacitor, but I did not use it for these measurements.

I have one more cartridge body and 2 more styli, although both cantilevers appear to be slightly rotated.


View attachment 446906
View attachment 446905
View attachment 446904
View attachment 446903

Subjectively by the late 80s, the Cap210 was the one thing that lept this old stalwart going, as the extreme hf (when 'we' were young enough to hear it) was rough and 'tinkly' in tone, made worse I suspect by poorer tweeter performance back then... The Cap 210 subjectively cleaned up the hf no end on these old bodies and I have a couple here still, one on am M20FL Super and another on a sadly worn VMS30, which with a new stylus sounds a bit 'limp and soggy' these days, whatever the loading.


A quick question please regarding the V15V plots near the top of this page - many of them appear to have much lower loading than the 'usual' 47 - 50k. Was this an attempt to get the flattest response from these Jico styli? I'm not able to change the load from the 50k or so my old preamp offers (capacitance unknown), although a V15III with original elliptical tip, sounds fine and pretty neutral (i try not to use it too much). My VMR stylus was damaged (cantilever is fractured at the hinge point and I don't think it can be repaired by internally splinting it. My turntable, system and ears loved it when it was working (maybe not as 'expansive' in tone as a higher end player, but it was all there, just in a slightly 'smaller' package. The question is if you can find time to answer (maybe addressed earlier), is how do the Jico SAS replacements for the VMR fare into a standard 47k load with moderate capacitance?

 

[Thomas_A]

Subjectively by the late 80s, the Cap210 was the one thing that lept this old stalwart going, as the extreme hf (when 'we' were young enough to hear it) was rough and 'tinkly' in tone, made worse I suspect by poorer tweeter performance back then... The Cap 210 subjectively cleaned up the hf no end on these old bodies and I have a couple here still, one on am M20FL Super and another on a sadly worn VMS30, which with a new stylus sounds a bit 'limp and soggy' these days, whatever the loading.


A quick question please regarding the V15V plots near the top of this page - many of them appear to have much lower loading than the 'usual' 47 - 50k. Was this an attempt to get the flattest response from these Jico styli? I'm not able to change the load from the 50k or so my old preamp offers (capacitance unknown), although a V15III with original elliptical tip, sounds fine and pretty neutral (i try not to use it too much). My VMR stylus was damaged (cantilever is fractured at the hinge point and I don't think it can be repaired by internally splinting it. My turntable, system and ears loved it when it was working (maybe not as 'expansive' in tone as a higher end player, but it was all there, just in a slightly 'smaller' package. The question is if you can find time to answer (maybe addressed earlier), is how do the Jico SAS replacements for the VMR fare into a standard 47k load with moderate capacitance?

The V-MR with JICO SAS/B is quite bright with high peaking 10-20 kHz. There are some variation between stylii but generally you should load it with lower R. Can be accomplished with by soldering connections outisde the phono pre.

 

[mackat]

SAE 1000E

I've read that the Hana SH uses the same generator (don't quote me on that, though).

 

[RoA]

Without going through 85 pages, what is the conclusion here and what are the best measuring and still available new cartridges under £300 for a Technics SL100C (same as 1500C)?

I also assume that sample variations are probably a very real factor as most are hand assembled/wound.

Thanks

 

[JP]

The index at the beginning of the thread is handy.

 

[VinyLuke]

Shure V15 IV & Shure VN45MR

Notes:

• Stylus is used, hours unknown
• Turntable: Technics SL-1210GR with KAB Fluid Damper
• VTF: 1.50gr
• Phono stage: HusaRIAA v2 (http://tinyurl.com/45ke55cx)
  • Capacitance: ~95pF (total capacitance)
  • Loading: 48kΩ
  • A/D: ASUS PRIME B660M-A Line In and Audacity
• Test record: Clearaudio CA-TRS-1007 side A

 

[Geogeo]

Shure V15 IV & Shure VN45MR

View attachment 449178

Notes:

• Stylus is used, hours unknown
• Turntable: Technics SL-1210GR with KAB Fluid Damper
• VTF: 1.50gr
• Phono stage: HusaRIAA v2 (http://tinyurl.com/45ke55cx)
  • Capacitance: ~95pF (total capacitance)
  • Loading: 48kΩ
  • A/D: ASUS PRIME B660M-A Line In and Audacity
• Test record: Clearaudio CA-TRS-1007 side A

Sometimes it's better not to know

The measurement shows that in the range of 1 kHz - 10 kHz There is a very big problem with crosstalk.

 

[Thomas_A]

Sometimes it's better not to know

The measurement shows that in the range of 1 kHz - 10 kHz There is a very big problem with crosstalk.

There are much worse crosstalk figures in many cartridges. Below -30 dB at 1 kHz and below -20 dB at 10 kHz is fine.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Sometimes it's better not to know

The measurement shows that in the range of 1 kHz - 10 kHz There is a very big problem with crosstalk.

If you want to minimize crosstalk, LP playback is not for you!

 

[Geogeo]

There are much worse crosstalk figures in many cartridges. Below -30 dB at 1 kHz and below -20 dB at 10 kHz is fine.

The apparent crosstalk difference between channels in the given range is unacceptable. There is a problem.

 

[Thomas_A]

The apparent crosstalk difference between channels in the given range is unacceptable. There is a problem.

And what is the problem, audibly? Note that this is a stylus with unknown condition as well.

 

[Geogeo]

And what is the problem, audibly? Note that this is a stylus with unknown condition as well.

And what is the problem, audibly? Note that this is a stylus with unknown condition as well.

If there is a difference, you would have to compare it with a copy that doesn't have this problem.
Yes, it's an antique needle

 

[Thomas_A]

If there is a difference, you would have to compare it with a copy that doesn't have this problem.
Yes, it's an antique needle

And if there is no difference, the "problem" is moot. So until it is settled, there can be no claim other than crosstalk measures different.

 

[Geogeo]

And if there is no difference, the "problem" is moot. So until it is settled, there can be no claim other than crosstalk measures different.

There is some problem, I don't know what, which manifests itself in the fact that crosstalk between channels is incorrect.

 

[Thomas_A]

There is some problem, I don't know what, which manifests itself in the fact that crosstalk between channels is incorrect.

The V15IV was released 47 years ago. Just saying.

 

[Geogeo]

The V15IV was released 47 years ago. Just saying.

What will we learn from such a measurement about the cartridge that was measured? We will learn that it does not work properly
Such a measurement may be useful to the person who made such a measurement, that the needle needs to be replaced
We will not learn anything interesting from such a measurement about this model, when it was new, it was functional, etc.

 

[Jimi Floyd]

What will we learn from such a measurement about the cartridge that was measured? We will learn that it does not work properly
Such a measurement may be useful to the person who made such a measurement, that the needle needs to be replaced
We will not learn anything interesting from such a measurement about this model, when it was new, it was functional, etc.

We could learn instead that the cartridge is OK and just needs some azimuth setup. More data needed.

 

[USER]

What will we learn from such a measurement about the cartridge that was measured? We will learn that it does not work properly
Such a measurement may be useful to the person who made such a measurement, that the needle needs to be replaced
We will not learn anything interesting from such a measurement about this model, when it was new, it was functional, etc.

We have gone through this with you again and again. Please do not make such dismissive declarations of things you do not understand. All you do is create confusion. There is nowhere near enough information to make such conclusions. All these records have issues with crosstalk. Simple as that. This all could well be the record. (They also seem to have thresholds that when passed show more issues so one cartridge could look near perfect while another does not.) It could even be the turntable/tonearm not allowing proper azimuth adjustment. To me the graph shows a well-set up cartridge within a very reasonable margin of error. @VinyLuke has done nothing but given us tremendous measurements. If measured with a better crosstalk record the channels could be even more balanced. Some here do not use CA-TRS-1007 for crosstalk setup and prefer to use DIN 45 543 or the Ortofon test record if I remember correctly. Regardless, these results tell us enough to know that crosstalk performance is rather good. (I even mention in the notes that it isn't a bad idea to think of an imaginary line running between the left and right channel results to get a glimpse of the potential result on that particular test record.) It seems that the 1kHz measurement could be around -32dB in perfect conditions, and that is with a record that consistently performs -5dB worse than my good crosstalk record (DIN 45 543). I don't understand how anyone would think that measurement is not useful or say that that it gives any evidence of the cartridge not being "functional." And think about actual records to be played. If these test records have such issues and come in different thicknesses and with warping and centering issues do you really think you are going to get consistent crosstalk results in real playback? The best we can do is the best we can do with this medium.

Just in case anyone is wondering, this is the member formally known as Quando and Aero. He does not understand the measurements and refuses to put any effort to understand them or listen to responses so do not take him seriously. We've already covered this with him. Perhaps he does not remember.

He usually gets himself kicked out rather quickly so best to ignore him.

 

[Geogeo]

We have gone through this with you again and again. Please do not make such dismissive declarations of things you do not understand. All you do is create confusion. There is nowhere near enough information to make such conclusions. All these records have issues with crosstalk. Simple as that. This all could well be the record. (They also seem to have thresholds that when passed show more issues so one cartridge could look near perfect while another does not.) It could even be the turntable/tonearm not allowing proper azimuth adjustment. To me the graph shows a well-set up cartridge within a very reasonable margin of error. @VinyLuke has done nothing but given us tremendous measurements. If measured with a better crosstalk record the channels could be even more balanced. Some here do not use CA-TRS-1007 for crosstalk setup and prefer to use DIN 45 543 or the Ortofon test record if I remember correctly. Regardless, these results tell us enough to know that crosstalk performance is rather good. (I even mention in the notes that it isn't a bad idea to think of an imaginary line running between the left and right channel results to get a glimpse of the potential result on that particular test record.) It seems that the 1kHz measurement could be around -32dB in perfect conditions, and that is with a record that consistently performs -5dB worse than my good crosstalk record (DIN 45 543). I don't understand how anyone would think that measurement is not useful or say that that it gives any evidence of the cartridge not being "functional." And think about actual records to be played. If these test records have such issues and come in different thicknesses and with warping and centering issues do you really think you are going to get consistent crosstalk results in real playback? The best we can do is the best we can do with this medium.

Just in case anyone is wondering, this is the member formally known as Quando and Aero. He does not understand the measurements and refuses to put any effort to understand them or listen to responses so do not take him seriously. We've already covered this with him. Perhaps he does not remember.

He usually gets himself kicked out rather quickly so best to ignore him.

You are creating an ideology for a simple measurement.
It is obvious that there is a problem with crosstalk, in the range of 500 Hz- 10 kHz. Crosstalk between channels is not equal.
Conclusion, buy a new needle and throw the old needle in the trash.
Drawing any conclusions about the Shure V15 type IV cartridge when the measurement is made with a faulty, old, stylus makes no sense.

 

[Thomas_A]

What will we learn from such a measurement about the cartridge that was measured? We will learn that it does not work properly
Such a measurement may be useful to the person who made such a measurement, that the needle needs to be replaced
We will not learn anything interesting from such a measurement about this model, when it was new, it was functional, etc.

This is not a thread to discuss this topic so better create another.