Not loving my AT740MLx

[rwortman]

Got my Nagaoka MP-300 running today after some hours figuring out why one channel was humming. One channel’s ground side is connected to the cartridge body. My only other metal body carts either have an insulating layer on top or in the case of the 740ML the cart body is isolated from the mounting ears. So I had ground loop hum in one channel. Made a plastic spacer with some roughly 1mm plastic I had leftover from another project. No hum and pretty much phono bliss. Not a sexy stylus but it sure sounds nice.

 

[dlaloum]

Got my Nagaoka MP-300 running today after some hours figuring out why one channel was humming. One channel’s ground side is connected to the cartridge body. My only other metal body carts either have an insulating layer on top or in the case of the 740ML the cart body is isolated from the mounting ears. So I had ground loop hum in one channel. Made a plastic spacer with some roughly 1mm plastic I had leftover from another project. No hum and pretty much phono bliss. Not a sexy stylus but it sure sounds nice.

Shure used to always do that with their cartridges too ...

Although from memory they specifically advised that removing the ground connection to the body was unlikely to cause issues and was recommended for fixing ground loops...

 

[mike70]

2x price tag for some dbs less on highs ... I think I prefer the treble control in -2dB setting
Also the microline stylus have 3x lifespan ... mmm

 

[rwortman]

2x price tag for some dbs less on highs ... I think I prefer the treble control in -2dB setting
Also the microline stylus have 3x lifespan ... mmm

I’ve been around a while and done some live sound. I think I am familiar with what a bit of EQ can do. What I don’t like about the 740ML seems more than a few DB of EQ. Not sure frequency sweeps tell the whole story. Mixing frequencies in a mechanical system has to cause intermodulation effects. Musical instruments do. Somebody on this thread suggested the cantilever had a big effect. Maybe a quality elliptical on a boron cantilever sounds better than the world’s least expensive ML/aluminum cantilever. The folks at Nagaoka think so. That’s one of the fun things about vinyl. Things really do sound different.

 

[0bs3rv3r]

Maybe a quality elliptical on a boron cantilever sounds better than the world’s least expensive ML/aluminum cantilever.

I have often thought it might sound better, yes. However, the ML will still trace the groove better, so offer lower distortion, so the choice is between lower distortion, or better overall flavour of sound (which EQ might be able to reproduce from the ML/alum. combo)

 

[JP]

It’s about 95% or more the frequency response.

 

[USER]

Just so we don't go further down the rabbit hole of pure speculation, I just wanted to note that JP's comments are backed by actual testing. By Floyd Toole no less. While not perfect given the times, I don't know of anything else that is comparable or as legitimate.

Toole Blind Cartridge Comparison

From Audio Scene Canada August 1980, a blind screen comparison by Floyd Toole of 2 MCs and a MM which I decided to add under its own thread rather than at least 2 others to which I might have added it.

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[JP]

I should’ve said “all else being equal” - the more rudimentary tips will easily betray themselves on inner grooves, etc.

 

[mike70]

Maybe a quality elliptical on a boron cantilever sounds better than the world’s least expensive ML/aluminum cantilever.

In my opinion is audiophile nonsense ... the result is the frequency response, not the materials.
You can say that elliptical/boron is better, so the frequency response must be better, in other way ... is only marketing material.

Also remember that "sounds better" is different for everyone, the matter is a flat frequency response as a technical and comparable result for real hifi

"Sound better" for John Doe says nothing as a science based opinion.

 

[dlaloum]

2x price tag for some dbs less on highs ... I think I prefer the treble control in -2dB setting
Also the microline stylus have 3x lifespan ... mmm

Typically, the line contact designs cost a lot more, but for the price you also get a boron cantilever... and that means lower effective tip mass...

so a ML styus gives you (typically):
1) Reduced wear due to the longer vertical contact patch
2) improved performance (reduced distortion) at higher frequencies due to narrower horizontal contact patch (improved trackability)
3) Reduced wear due to improved trackability (mistracking is a major cause of wear... and the narrower horizontal patch improves tracking)
4) Improved tracking at level & frequency extremes due to reduced tip mass (also resulting in decreased wear)
5) Improved frequency response (flatness and extension) due to reduced tip mass, and raised cantilever resonant frequency

(obviously the cantilever/tip mass benefits only acrue if the needle is on an exotic cantilever, if it is on an ordinary aluminium cantilever then not so much!)

 

[rwortman]

The consensus here seems to be tip shape and frequency response is the whole story. Boron cantilever, aluminum cantilever, moving iron, moving magnet, moving coil… Any differences will be swamped by tip shape effects. Anything other than an AT95ML and an equalizer is audiophile silliness.

Those advanced tip shapes are for tracing frequencies I can’t hear. I top out at about 10-12k these days. Inner groove wavelength at 10k is about 20 microns. A decent elliptical can trace that. Not much content above that anyway

p.s. Toole’s cartridge comparison proved that perceptions change when the blindfolds go on. That’s about it. He said in the text not to extrapolate. That the observations pertained only to the products tested. Even so, the MM cartridge that compare favorably with the top MC had a spherical stylus while the MC-30 had a fine line. That “obvious” inner groove distortion either wasn’t all that obvious or they didn’t listen to any cuts in there.

 

[USER]

Those advanced tip shapes are for tracing frequencies I can’t hear. I top out at about 10-12k these days. Inner groove wavelength at 10k is about 20 microns. A decent elliptical can trace that. Not much content above that anyway

Read the post above yours again.

 

[dlaloum]

The consensus here seems to be tip shape and frequency response is the whole story. Boron cantilever, aluminum cantilever, moving iron, moving magnet, moving coil… Any differences will be swamped by tip shape effects. Anything other than an AT95ML and an equalizer is audiophile silliness.

Those advanced tip shapes are for tracing frequencies I can’t hear. I top out at about 10-12k these days. Inner groove wavelength at 10k is about 20 microns. A decent elliptical can trace that. Not much content above that anyway

p.s. Toole’s cartridge comparison proved that perceptions change when the blindfolds go on. That’s about it. He said in the text not to extrapolate. That the observations pertained only to the products tested. Even so, the MM cartridge that compare favorably with the top MC had a spherical stylus while the MC-30 had a fine line. That “obvious” inner groove distortion either wasn’t all that obvious or they didn’t listen to any cuts in there.

No - the magnitude of the impact of cantilever mass (and therefore resonance) is substantially greater than the magnitude of the needle shape on frequency response (assuming the horizontal patch width is sufficiently small to fit between the grooves at the desired frequency)
So if you compare a fine elliptical with a microline - both quite capable of tracing 15kHz+ - the difference in needle shape driven f/r is nil.

(obviously if you take a coarse elliptical, or a fat conical stylus - then there are a bunch of other performance issues that will impinge)

The other concern with tracing high frequencies is misstracking.

If the horizontal contact patch isn't small enough to trace the sidewall - then it will begin to "jump" from one sidewall corrugation to the next, as it doesn't fit in - it will be misstracking.

One of the side effects of misstracking, is severe vinyl wear - not only at the frequencies it cannot track and which generate the misstracking - once it starts to misstrack, it affects all frequencies, and the wear is applicable across all frequencies - hence it is a fairly nasty side effect! (hence why older records played with more basic needles may have irreperable wear!)

The other nice thing about line contact needles, is because of the extended vertical contact patch, they make contact with the groove wall, above and below the areas where eliptical and conical stylis make contact, which means that on worn records, they often track/read "virgin" vinyl, above and below the areas where more basic needles have caused damage to the surface.

 

[Thomas_A]

An comparison I made at VE once (2016?). OM10, OM40 and Shure V15Vx/JICO/SAS/B. Two are the same.

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

The typical OM40 sound is there somewhere. Which one?

 

[Thomas_A]

I did a listen to my old files myself; and although I don't have the answers saved (long forgotten), it is quite easy to pick them. The Shure has a bit less treble, the OM40 has more HF noise, and the OM10 sounds similar to the OM40 but with less HF noise. This noise was one reason I don't recommend the OM40, but rather OM30...

 

[JP]

The consensus here seems to be tip shape and frequency response is the whole story. Boron cantilever, aluminum cantilever, moving iron, moving magnet, moving coil… Any differences will be swamped by tip shape effects. Anything other than an AT95ML and an equalizer is audiophile silliness.

Those advanced tip shapes are for tracing frequencies I can’t hear. I top out at about 10-12k these days. Inner groove wavelength at 10k is about 20 microns. A decent elliptical can trace that. Not much content above that anyway

p.s. Toole’s cartridge comparison proved that perceptions change when the blindfolds go on. That’s about it. He said in the text not to extrapolate. That the observations pertained only to the products tested. Even so, the MM cartridge that compare favorably with the top MC had a spherical stylus while the MC-30 had a fine line. That “obvious” inner groove distortion either wasn’t all that obvious or they didn’t listen to any cuts in there.

One needs to remember that the shape of the groove is comprised by frequency AND amplitude, and both/(either) lead to curvature overload at the inner grooves. As a gross illustration, this is 20kHz with a MicroRidge (2.5µm) vs. an 0.4 x 08 elliptical (10µm). Notice on the elliptical that even the outer groove sine is distorted from curvature overload. Also note that there is no evidence of any mistracking.

To bring a it closer to real-world, the Tacet test record has couple fricative test tracks. The below sample were all done on the far-inner track. The "fairest" comparison of tip types will be AT-95s, as they were all done with same cartridge body and armwand. There are some suspension and possible cantilever difference, though they're all AU. In these you will hear mistracking, as this is a "destructive test", if you will.

I'd also note that of the MR/ML types, the ETM doesn't necessarily make a meaningful difference (@dlaloum). For clarity, the 100CMK4 is a MicroRidge.

AT-95ML
AT-95SH
AT-95EN
AT-95E
AT-95CB
AT-150MLX
AT-150Sa
Shure V15-V
Victor MC-L1000
Technics EPC-P100CMK4
Sony XL-88D
Victor X-1IIE

And closer yet, this is actual program material. These first four sets are an Ortofon 2M Blue vs. a Lyra Kleos (outer grooves):

Bill Evans
Norah Jones
Steely Dan
Smashing Pumpkins

And this is the same two cartridges on the last track of the record. You should easily hear the difference in the first three words.

Norah Jones IG

Re: Toole's article, I've not read it in quite awhile, but in general you'd not want to extrapolate from such a small sample size, or take such a test and try to prove a negative. I would encourage you to do your own testing though, as it's so easy to do today. I've yet to meet someone who's done proper testing after EQing out response differences that could hear a difference when there are no confounders in the mix, such as inner grooves.

 

[Thomas_A]

One needs to remember that the shape of the groove is comprised by frequency AND amplitude, and both/(either) lead to curvature overload at the inner grooves. As a gross illustration, this is 20kHz with a MicroRidge (2.5µm) vs. an 0.4 x 08 elliptical (10µm). Notice on the elliptical that even the outer groove sine is distorted from curvature overload. Also note that there is no evidence of any mistracking.

View attachment 402964
View attachment 402965

To bring a it closer to real-world, the Tacet test record has couple fricative test tracks. The below sample were all done on the far-inner track. The "fairest" comparison of tip types will be AT-95s, as they were all done with same cartridge body and armwand. There are some suspension and possible cantilever difference, though they're all AU. In these you will hear mistracking, as this is a "destructive test", if you will.

I'd also note that of the MR/ML types, the ETM doesn't necessarily make a meaningful difference (@dlaloum). For clarity, the 100CMK4 is a MicroRidge.

AT-95ML
AT-95SH
AT-95EN
AT-95E
AT-95CB
AT-150MLX
AT-150Sa
Shure V15-V
Victor MC-L1000
Technics EPC-P100CMK4
Sony XL-88D
Victor X-1IIE

And closer yet, this is actual program material. These first four sets are an Ortofon 2M Blue vs. a Lyra Kleos (outer grooves):

Bill Evans
Norah Jones
Steely Dan
Smashing Pumpkins

And this is the same two cartridges on the last track of the record. You should easily hear the difference in the first three words.

Norah Jones IG

Re: Toole's article, I've not read it in quite awhile, but in general you'd not want to extrapolate from such a small sample size, or take such a test and try to prove a negative. I would encourage you to do your own testing though, as it's so easy to do today. I've yet to meet someone who's done proper testing after EQing out response differences that could hear a difference when there are no confounders in the mix, such as inner grooves.

As a note though and it goes especially for the OM40 where both I and a friend with the same cartridge heard more high frequent noise, like static, when this cartridge/stylus was used. Nothing though on other micro ridge stylii used by AT or JICO. This was not inner groove, but something to do with the stylus friction being high or poor polishing. Above track 2=OM40, track 3=OM10.

 

[JP]

As a note though and it goes especially for the OM40 where both I and a friend with the same cartridge heard more high frequent noise, like static, when this cartridge/stylus was used. Nothing though on other micro ridge stylii used by AT or JICO. This was not inner groove, but something to do with the stylus friction being high or poor polishing. Above track 2=OM40, track 3=OM10.

Ya, the "all else equal" part. Lots of variability, and lots that can be wrong.

 

[Thomas_A]

Ya, the "all else equal" part. Lots of variability, and lots that can be wrong.

That is always difficult to asses. If there is a general problem with the FG stylus profile, or just batch problems.

 

[JP]

That is always difficult to asses. If there is a general problem with the FG stylus profile, or just batch problems.

Let me know