[JCC]

What is the difference in the Megabuck cartridges that makes them special. Based upon a recent modification experience, I am under the impression that the stylus and diamond make a huge difference. Could it be cartridge modification will achieve outstanding results and save thousands over a new megabuck cartridge.  With a little research, I have developed the following list which seems to have a lot to do with overall quality of cartridge:

1.   Technology – moving magnet, moving coil, moving iron, etc.
2.   Coil – material, gauge, winding
3.   Cantilever Material – aluminum, boron, ruby, diamond
4.   Stylus shape – elliptical, contact line, optimized contact line, microridge
5.   Cryo treatment
6.   Tracking force
7.   Other??

I recently had my ZYX RS-10 modified and the results are amazing. Reviewing the specs below for multiple cartridges leads me to some interesting conclusions:

Cartridge Frequency Response Frequency Response +_ 1DB Channel Separation Recommended Tracking Force Tracking force range Cantilever Material Stylus Stylus Contact Radius Coil Wire Cryo Treated Weight

ZYX RS-10 10-40khz 20-20khz >25DB 1.8g 1.5g - 2.0 g Aluminum Elliptical Diamond iµm x 15µm No 4.2g

ZYX RS-20 10-55khz 20-20khz >30DB 1.8g 1.5g - 2.0 g Sapphire Tube Line-Contact Diamond 0.07 sq.mm 6µm x 35µm No 4.2g

ZYX RS-30 10-75khz 20-20khz >30DB 1.8g 1.5g - 2.0 g Boron Rod Microridge Diamond 0.07 sq.mm 3µm x 60µm No 4.2g

ZYX Bloom 10-40khz 20-20khz >25DB 2.0g 1.8g -2.5g Aluminum Line-Contact Diamond 6um x 35um No 5.0g

ZYX R-100 10-80khz 20-20khz >30DB 2.0g 1.7g -2.5g Boron Rod Microridge Diamond 0.07 sq.mm 3µm x 60µm .03mm Copper No 5.0g

ZYX R-1000 10-100khz 20-20khz >30DB 2.0g 1.7g -2.5g Diamond Square Rod Microridge Diamond 0.07 sq.mm 3µm x 60µm .035mm Copper Yes 5.0g

Note:  Various stylus types including elliptical, line-contact and microridge have been used for years.  The diamond stylus has been in use since 1912. The line-contact/elliptical stylus started in 1966 with the Shure V15. Shure produced it first microridge stylus in 1975. As far as I can tell, the optimized line-contact seems to have appeared a few years ago.

Reviewing the chart above, you can see that the frequency response goes up to an amazing 100 kHz for the R-1000, whereas it only goes to 40 kHz for the RS-10 and the Bloom. Technical differences that stand out are the cantilever and the stylus. So I arranged to change the cantilever and the stylus on my RS-10. It now has a ruby cantilever and an optimized contour diamond. This new Nude "Optimized Contour" Contact Line Diamond is supposed to closely match the cutting stylus used to make the master record, and as such would have 3 times the contact area in the vertical direction of the groove wall, thus lowering the "force per unit area" on both the diamond as well as the record groove. The obvious result would be better tracking, and therefore better sound.

When the cartridge came back from the modification, I noticed an immediate improvement, but things still would get better. In studying the specs further, I noticed that the R-100 and R-1000 had a higher tracking force than the RS-10, RS-20 and the RS-30. After considering this anomaly and thinking about the sound, I thought that the extended frequency response might require more tracking force. So I increased my tracking force from 1.8 grams to 2.0 grams. After a few days, I noticed that cymbals sounded poor, so I experimented with the tracking force again. I experimented with 1.0 gram, and then to 1.3 gram, but after continued listening I lowered it down to 1 gram. Voila the sound quality took a massive jump and the cymbals sounded exceptional.

Continuing my listening over a few weeks, I noticed that my medium thickness records (150 gram) sounded great, but my 200 Gram records sounded bass heavy. Well since I have VTAF (VTA on the Fly) I started adjusting. With minor adjustment (less than 10 seconds), I am now able to dial in VTA for each individual record. The difference is significant and the sound has taken an additional leap. I understand that anyone with a line contact stylus should be able to hear the difference with a minor adjustment of VTA. 

My new cantilever/stylus combination (ruby/diamond) has very low mass (0.33 milligrams) and exceptional stiffness. Much stiffer than aluminum or boron, and with the optimized contour diamond should also dramatically increase the frequency response.

I wonder what the frequency and low level recovery capability are with the new optimized stylus. While I don’t have ability to measure the frequency response of the rebuilt cartridge, I can certainly hear the difference, which is nothing short of amazing.

So the discussion that follows should talk about what it takes to make a superior phono cartridge? Did this change make my cartridge equal to the R-100 or the R-1000? As you can see, there are a few additional differences in coil wire and cryo-treatment. 

By the way, in case you are wondering, the modification was done by The Soundsmith!

Repeating, the following list shows the various technical approaches that seem to make a difference:

1.   Technology – moving magnet, moving coil, moving iron, etc.
2.   Coil – material, gauge, winding
3.   Cantilever Material – aluminum, boron, ruby, diamond
4.   Stylus shape – elliptical, contact line, microridge, optimized contact line
5.   Cryo treatment
6.   Tracking force
7.   Other??

What do you think?

[TheChairGuy]

Stylus makes a HUGE difference...shape, grain orientation...then there's the cantilever (material and length, too).

Above all...it's just great to see someone excited about their vinyl rig to make a long, well thought thru, thought provoking post

Enjoy, John

[JCC]

Last night as I was listening to a the 1972 recording by Roberta Flack and Donny Hathaway (Atlantic SD 7216), I was floored by the improvement in the sound. This was one my old favorites, but in recent listening this recording sounded poor. Now it is outstanding, and is even better than my memory from the 70's.

I also listened to Orchestrations Astromatic (RCA RDCE-6) and Song of the Nightingale (RCA LSC-2150 both recommended by Arthur Salvatore. Again the difference was astounding, as I heard low level detail that I had not heard before.

I could go on and on through many recordings. Finally I have the vinyl sound that I could only imagine. I am shocked by the difference. So now, I'm listening to record after record, and loving every minute.

[twitch54]

JCC, interesting read, thanks !

[slbender]

It sounds like you have a superior cartridge; .33 micrograms, really?

How much did your RS-10 cartridge cost when new; was that the list price? 

How much for the SS ruby/diamond/cryo modifications?

To me it sounds like a nearly impossible item, this 0.33 micrograms of mass on the diamond, seems to me you couldn't even see that diamond with a 10x jewelers loup. Unless they are fudging the numbers, that is on the order of 500 times lower tip mass (the stone alone) than the lowest figures that I am familiar with.  How would that diamond ride properly in the groove if it was so small?  In comparison, on expensive vintage cartridges back in the day when innovation and one's-up-manship in cartridges was literally "war" between companies, tip mass was on the order of 0.14 to 0.30 milligrams, which is about five hundred to one thousand times larger.

Now back in the 1970's, Micro-Acoustics made almost all of the cutting stylii used to cut the Mothers" for hundreds of millions of LP records. The MA product was the Micro-Point Styli for cutter heads. They also made relatively expensive Electret based cartridges back in the day, probably more than the five that I know about or have: the QDC-1e, QDC-1qb, the 2002-e, the 282-e, and the 3002.

Circa 1975, and the MA QDC-1qb using a Quadra-Point diamond for CD-4 had a price of $150., about equal to $750. today. It featured a frequency response of -3dB at 5Hz. and 50,000 Hz.  I suspect the MA QDC-1e is simply the CD-4 cartridge with an elliptical diamond, instead of the Quadra-Point but again I can't find data to support or disclaim that.

The MA 2002-e was a popular Stereo elliptical was +/-1.5dB between 5 Hz. and 20,000 Hz. The 2002e's tip mass was given as 0.14 milligrams and it used a .0002 x .0007 diamond on a Beryllium cantilever direct coupled to an electret transducer. The output was laser trimmed down to a 3.5mV level on a small passive circuit, each cartridge was adjusted by hand so the channels matched to within 1%.  Price was $115. in 1975 dollars about $500. today.

The lowest end MA cartridge that I know of was the 282e. at $89.95 in 1975 dollars, about $400. today it was a .0002 x .0007 on an aluminum cantilever, and 0.19 milligrams of tip mass, its likely the 2002-e body was identical as the 2002-e stylus fits, and works just fine on the 282-e body. The primary difference it would seem was the cantilever and the price.

The MA 3002 appears to have the thinnest diameter cantilever of all the known MA cartridges, but I rarely see and data about that unit, so I really can't say anything about it at all.  In side by side comparisons, physically, the MA-3002 cantilever rather looks like the B&O MMC-20CL, which uses a tiny mass nude diamond on a ruby cantilever.  In comparison, to these two, most moving magnet cartridges seem to have rather massive cantilevers. The only other cartridges I have which seem to give the appearance of maybe being as thin diameter are a Signet MR-5.0ME and the Shure V-15 type III. I've only got about a dozen vintage cartridges, so this won't be inclusive for all types, models, or brands. YMMV.

Common to all the MA Electret cartridges, the advances evident, beyond the Electret elements, are use of solid gold wires, 8 critical damping blocks internally, the passive IC, having about half the tip mass of other costly cartridges, and so on.  As a result, the frequency response would be unaffected by cable capacitances between 100pF to 1000pF, a rather wide range, and since the cartridge output was almost entirely resistive, and lacking magnets, and lacking coils, I suspect all these electret cartridges was also highly immune to magnetically induced hum from motors, transformers, and external sources.

Here's hoping the above info sparks some interesting discussions,


-Steven L. Bender, Designer of Vintage Audio Equipment

My new cantilever/stylus combination (ruby/diamond) has very low mass (0.33 micrograms) and exceptional stiffness. Much stiffer than aluminum or boron, and with the optimized contour diamond should also dramatically increase the frequency response.

I wonder what the frequency and low level recovery capability are with the new optimized stylus. While I don’t have ability to measure the frequency response of the rebuilt cartridge, I can certainly hear the difference, which is nothing short of amazing.

1.   Technology – moving magnet, moving coil, moving iron, etc.
2.   Coil – material, gauge, winding
3.   Cantilever Material – aluminum, boron, ruby, diamond
4.   Stylus shape – elliptical, contact line, microridge, optimized contact line
5.   Cryo treatment
6.   Tracking force
7.   Other??
What do you think?

[JCC]

It sounds like you have a superior cartridge; .33 micrograms, really?

How much did your RS-10 cartridge cost when new; was that the list price? 

How much for the SS ruby/diamond/cryo modifications?

To me it sounds like a nearly impossible item, this 0.33 micrograms of mass on the diamond, seems to me you couldn't even see that diamond with a 10x jewelers loup. Unless they are fudging the numbers, that is on the order of 500 times lower tip mass (the stone alone) than the lowest figures that I am familiar with.  How would that diamond ride properly in the groove if it was so small?  In comparison, on expensive vintage cartridges back in the day when innovation and one's-up-manship in cartridges was literally "war" between companies, tip mass was on the order of 0.14 to 0.30 milligrams, which is about five hundred to one thousand times larger.

Steven - Thanks for the input. For the record, the price for the ZYX RS-10 was about $500. The cost for the Soundsmith modification was a $350. All of the data that I provided came from information that I found on The Soundsmith site. I think that the tip mass information was incorrect, and reviewing it I have changed the post to read milligrams.

Your impressive knowledge on cartridge and record cutting history raises some interesting questions, which I will forward your post to Peter Ledermann owner of The Soundsmith for his comments.

[JCC]

It took quite a while, but I have finally zeroed in on a good VTA. What a pain - I did it through trial and error, with my ears.

The sound is now better than ever! I haven't started adjusting for varying record thicknesses. That would be a pain. Any advice?

[ohenry]

JCC, I had an Adcom cross-coil cartridge done last year at the same rebuild level.  It took a a while for the high frequency response on mine to settle, but now it's absolutely beautiful with perfect bass.  This cartridge was always a good tracker, and it continues to be pretty bullet-proof.  Also, it seems to be a very quiet piece where my other carts are noticeably a little noisy.  I was a skeptical that Soundsmith would be worth the gamble, but I've been pleasantly surprised and I'd highly recommend it for others to try.

I, too, have struggled a bit to find the right VTA compromise for the various record thicknesses, but I did.  I know of no short cuts to easy VTA determination, other than having one of those VTA adjustment on-the-fly gizmos.  Enjoy. 

[JCC]

I, too, have struggled a bit to find the right VTA compromise for the various record thicknesses, but I did.  I know of no short cuts to easy VTA determination, other than having one of those VTA adjustment on-the-fly gizmos.  Enjoy. 

I have VTAF (VTA on the Fly), and have learned that I can adjust VTA while playing. With this capability, I can zero in from record to record in a few seconds. When I go from a 150G to a 200G record, I need to turn the dial about 3/4th of a revolution.

So while I certainly struggled, I now have a good solution. If I don't like the sound, I move the VTAF dial a little and use my ear to zero-in. So after learning how to use it, I can highly recommend Pete Riggles VTAF.

[BobM]

For those of us who don't have a VTA on the fly capability on our arms it makes sense to get a cartridge that is less sensitive to this. Moving magnets generally fall into this category as do some high output moving coils. Once you get into the high priced exotica it seems that small adjustments make large differences.

All in all, a real PITA. For gods sake, the thickness of different records is rather small and shouldn't require a change for each record. Cetrainly more work than I want to put into it every time I put one on. Hell, even a periphery ring would be a pain.

Bob

[lcrim]

My Benz Micro Ruby 3H is quite sensitive to VTA but mostly w/ regard to surface noise.  If I change record thicknesses the increase in surface noise lets me know that the angle needs to put back in the range where it is happy.  I don't change it for every record.
The fact that VTA changes are quite easy is a factor in this.

[JCC]

For those of us who don't have a VTA on the fly capability on our arms it makes sense to get a cartridge that is less sensitive to this. Moving magnets generally fall into this category as do some high output moving coils. Once you get into the high priced exotica it seems that small adjustments make large differences.

All in all, a real PITA. For gods sake, the thickness of different records is rather small and shouldn't require a change for each record. Certainly more work than I want to put into it every time I put one on. Hell, even a periphery ring would be a pain.

Bob

Sensitively to VTA is generally a result of the stylus shape. If you have a line contact shape, it is sensitive to VTA. If you have a contoured line contact shape (which I have) it is even more sensitive. If you have an elliptical stylus shape, you probably won't notice the difference.

When you have a stylus that can benefit from VTA adjustment, I have found that an adjustment of less than one revolution (probably 2/3rd) will make the difference. You almost need to be an audio tecno bigot to go to this extreme, but the sound difference will knock your socks off.

I'm listening to Quincy Jones "You've Got it Bad Girl," MFSL. This recording is particularly sensitive to VTA. Someone owned it and let it go for a song because of sound quality. When I first played it I said yuucchh, but now! I adjust VTA and this recording is unbelievable, one of my very best.

Is it worth it to adjust VTA? Yes for me, but after all I'm and Audio Techno Bigot.

[JCC]

Well I have continued to evolve with my Soundsmith modded ZYX. I am now tracking at 1 gram - that's one gram! This was the recommended weight for Soundsmith cartridges. As the cartridge broke in, I found that heavier weights muffled the sounds, particularly on cymbals.
 

So in my insane push for perfection, I adjusted the stylus tracking force. I now have been tracking at one gram for two days and can hear much more low level detail. Listening to Indian Summer, I have learned that it has an amazing amount of low level detail, that I did not know about. This system is really sounding great.