Clearaudio MM -- AT-95E and beyond

neobop · « **Reply #80 on:** 3 Sep 2011, 11:40 pm »

Scotty,
With your set-up it's impossible for me to quantify the improvement going from stock to boron. All I can do is relate the results I had in a more conventional set-up. The improvement in cantilever resonance is something you'll get regardless, and I suspect you'll have to increase the value of the load resistors. I went from alum - 32K, to beryllium - 47K. Something like 45K might have been perfect, but it was very close. Yes, it was more detailed and a lot more refined. The control exhibited by the cantilever was obvious. If it was less robust, I didn't notice. Acoustic bass sounded great and I thought it was a great improvement overall. The 150ML stylus is a direct replacement for the 440. I don't really understand your set-up and the load. Are there still load resistors in the preamp?

I never really saw the inside of the 95. There's a tiny screw in the top of the body that holds the plastic top on. I filled the hole with epoxy and glued the top back on. I'm glad you mentioned the mu-metal shield. It's things like that and having or lacking the better wire that make a cart what it is.
neo

*Scotty* · « **Reply #81 on:** 4 Sep 2011, 12:11 am »

The preamp has a FET input with an input impedance in the megohms and there are no loading resistors except the two 5kohm resistors. The resistors are in a Y configuration and the signal is taken from the junction.
Half of the signal is shunted to ground through the 5k ohm resistors that are in series with the inductors in the cartridge body.
Scotty

neobop · « **Reply #82 on:** 4 Sep 2011, 03:08 am »

OK, I just re-read your previous post and see the M-ohms at the input. With almost no inductance I was a little surprised to read 10K load. But I guess the inductance doesn't change cantilever resonance. If you get the stylus I suspect you'll be changing the value of those resistors. Please let us know what happens if you do get it.
neo

neobop · « **Reply #83 on:** 4 Sep 2011, 12:11 pm »

Quote from: krenzler on 3 Sep 2011, 06:48 am

Namiki & Ogura?

Hi Krenzler, welcome to the monkey house.
Thanks for your input. Phono stylus info on these companies is not readily available and both seem to have their primary focus elsewhere. Namiki Jewel co makes motors and scientific instruments. They also mount diamonds on cantilevers for microscopes, possibly electron type. They are named as the supplier for ZYX so maybe they are one of the supposedly 2 diamond cutters for styli, in Japan.
Similar story for Ogura. They are supposed to supply diamonds for Lyra. Whether or not either of them is involved in aftermarket styli isn't known. I suspect that they are the diamond cutters and other companies might be in the replacement stylus biz.

I think Jico is in the jewel biz but I don't know if they cut diamonds on a micro level. They probably do. Neither Namiki or Ogura look like companies that would make lesser quality styli than Jico, but you never know.
neo

glrickaby · « **Reply #84 on:** 4 Sep 2011, 05:08 pm »

Something not previously discussed: Pfanstiehl is obviously a large supplier of styli on the lower
cost side...Apparently swiss made. Do they make their own? Still in business or old stock? One
vendor(Saunders) has been selling V-15 III styli which are apparently equal to the original along
with several other Shure types. All apparently from Pfanstiehl? Could they be making the LP Gear
and Turntable Needle ATN95SA/3400 styli? I'm reasonably sure this model is from the same mfgr.,
wherever purchased...Same grey skirt. Same blue skirt on the HE. I've actually had good luck with
Pfanstiehl styli though my declining ears could simply be providing assurance that is not there..

neobop · « **Reply #85 on:** 4 Sep 2011, 09:44 pm »

GL,
The way I heard it Pfanstiehl is long out of biz. Many retailers like Needles have NOS or still use their model number system. I found them listed on Gear, but it was just a cross reference for their own styli. I don't think Pfanstiehl actually made anything. Apparently they had a hugh stock of orig replacement and aftermarket ones. So the quality was hit or miss. If you find a good quality one maybe you should buy an extra. It's probably an orig replacement. They also had poor quality aftermarket ones that hurt their reputation. I think you can scratch them off your list of possible Japanese manufacturers.

If there are more Japanese companies making replacement styli, I have no idea who they are. The Needles 95SA looked just like Gears. That doesn't prove anything though. It could be a knock-off. I dismissed that notion at first, but they go for quite a bit of money. Even at wholesale prices it could add up to a lot. It could also be that the ones I tried were both Jico. The 980 has a short cantilever. Maybe it turned out better or maybe all samples aren't equal quality.
neo

BaMorin · « **Reply #86 on:** 6 Sep 2011, 04:31 pm »

Quote from: glrickaby on 4 Sep 2011, 05:08 pm

Something not previously discussed: Pfanstiehl is obviously a large supplier of styli on the lower
cost side...Apparently swiss made. Do they make their own? Still in business or old stock? One
vendor(Saunders) has been selling V-15 III styli which are apparently equal to the original along
with several other Shure types. All apparently from Pfanstiehl? Could they be making the LP Gear
and Turntable Needle ATN95SA/3400 styli? I'm reasonably sure this model is from the same mfgr.,
wherever purchased...Same grey skirt. Same blue skirt on the HE. I've actually had good luck with
Pfanstiehl styli though my declining ears could simply be providing assurance that is not there..

Chiming in a second.....not trying to hi-jack the thread. I'm not sure who or where Ed Saunders gets his styli from, or if they are made to his specs or not. Comparing a NOS N91ED to Eds version was a tie. Although the Shure M91ED cart is not really a micro detail one to begin with. Comparing the orignal V15-V (roughly 200 hours over a very long time), to Ed's replacement stylus was a draw as well. Neither were compared to a Jico SAS.

dlaloum · « **Reply #87 on:** 6 Sep 2011, 04:41 pm »

I had a chat with Ed about his V15V stylus...

I specifically asked him about cantilever resonance, he stated that his version has a slight resonance at around 11kHz...

So not on a par with either the original or the Jico SAS, the SAS version for VxMR has its resonance around 21kHz, which is very good, but nowhere near the original at 35kHz....
So the original NOS versions are still be best you can get for a V15V (if/when you can get them) - but I think in terms of value for money, both the Ed Saunders version and the Jico version(s) are excellent.

neobop · « **Reply #88 on:** 6 Sep 2011, 11:00 pm »

David, that doesn't make sense. What's a slight resonance around 11K?

Isn't that a boron or beryllium cantilever? If Ed's replacement is one of those materials, chances are it's an original. I seriously doubt if anyone else made replacement styli with exotic cantilevers. Maybe the brush is rattling.

neo

dlaloum · « **Reply #89 on:** 7 Sep 2011, 01:13 am »

Ed's replacement is aluminium - and yes he states he has a slight (1db) cantilever resonance at 11kHz.

Which is not that unusual for an aluminium cantilever.

neobop · « **Reply #90 on:** 7 Sep 2011, 02:30 pm »

Quote from: neobop on 8 Dec 2010, 03:35 pm

The first pic is a Virtuoso on top and the stylus assembly from a 150MLX. The plug near the 150 stylus is from a 440. As I found out, the plug doesn't fit. Even trimmed down to fit, the cantilever is at the wrong angle. That's why it must be transplanted into a 95 plug. To complicate matters further, the Clearaudio plug has no screw, just a fitting. I've been meaning to see if I can get that out in one piece. I think Soundsmith does it, but I'm no soundsmith.

Pic #2 is my AT collection illustrating the different plugs - styles.
Top is a 15SS with stylus right behind it. It has a round plug with severe angle.
Next is a 440ML OCC. Notice the front is angled, as opposed to the Virtuoso just below. The styli are interchangeable on a 440/120/150. Matter of fact, the bodies of the 120 and 440MLa are the same.
The bottom cart is my AT95 modded. It's potted internally and has an aluminum top plate epoxied on the top. Sounds good with the Jico shibata.
neo

I wanted to post these pics again from page 1, for those contemplating buying a Clearaudio MM. I believe the generators are identical on all the CA MMs. The differences appears to be in the stylus assemblies. If they had different generators, they would have different specs. Because of the difference in cantilever angle between the different plugs, I recommend against using a boron or beryllium cantilevered stylus from a different series for transplant. It will probably break. A modern 440/120 series alum cantilever can be successfully transplanted. After it is transplanted and the magnets are perfectly aligned, the cantilever must be bent down slightly to correct the discrepancy between the plugs. This can only be bent once, so first make sure that it is aligned properly. If you bend the cantilever and it's not right, bending it back and trying to correct, will break it.

IMO one of the best stylus transplant candidates is the 7V. It is a .2 x .7 nude tip on a tapered alum cantilever. The cu is similar to the CA and it will be good on med/heavy arms. If you want a line contact, the 140LC is probably your best bet. It is nude/tapered but much more compliant, and will probably work best on light arms. VTF is 1.5g. IMO, both these styli are superior to the stock Virtuoso stylus. Any other alum cantilevered stylus from this series (compatible), like the 440 or 120 will work.

There are Jico styli made for the 95 that will plug right in once the plastic wings are removed. Besides the SA - shibata, there's a VL - vivid line (LC), and the SE -.3 x .7. I think the SE is the same as a stock Virtuoso. I never had the stock stylus and I'm going by what others described, including Soundsmith. The beauty shots of these carts show a straight cantilever.

Even though the generators appear to be the same, the separation specs are different. Whether they actually are different or CA makes them look worse for the cheaper ones, is unknown. From the Beta S on up, the separation is 30dB! The Beta is 24dB and the Classic is 20. How much of this is due to stylus and how much is due to internal differences, is also unknown.
neo

*Scotty* · « **Reply #91 on:** 7 Sep 2011, 04:18 pm »

neobop, when you potted your AT 95 did you see a MU metal separator between the coils to lower the cross talk between them. This could be source of the better channel separation specs that are given on the AT 150MLX. If you recall the AT 150MLX is rated at 30dB of separation at 1kHz as is the AT 440ML, the 30dB figure may be a result of the MU metal shield between the generator coils.
Scotty

glrickaby · « **Reply #92 on:** 7 Sep 2011, 04:47 pm »

Actually, the skirt does not have to be trimmed on the AT95E/SA styli and will simply snap on the CA but look a little funny with the gap in front because the CA case is a little shorter, similar to the
Linn KT body..... I have an AT 125LC body and have been using a AT120 skirt with a transplanted
generic. If I buy a 440MLA stylus, will it be similar to the 440 or to a 120 since I'm not sure what,if any, difference there is in the 125LC body?

neobop · « **Reply #93 on:** 7 Sep 2011, 09:15 pm »

GL,
The 440 and 120 are the same body. Those styli fit right on with no modification. Here's a chart with groupings. Group K and L are interchangeable.
http://stereoneedles.com/audio-technica.html

The 140 has a nude LC on a tapered. I believe the 125 was bonded. The 130E is a little hard to find. It's a nude/tapered elliptical. I believe Wm Thakker has it. Best price for the 440 or 120 is probably in the US.
neo

neobop · « **Reply #94 on:** 7 Sep 2011, 09:36 pm »

Quote from: neobop on 3 Sep 2011, 11:40 pm

Scotty,
I never really saw the inside of the 95. There's a tiny screw in the top of the body that holds the plastic top on. I filled the hole with epoxy and glued the top back on. I'm glad you mentioned the mu-metal shield. It's things like that and having or lacking the better wire that make a cart what it is.
neo

Scotty,
There's a threaded insert in the top, all the way in the back, that receives the screw for the top plate. I did look down in there, but I couldn't see much, just a nylon or teflon rectangular piece.

I'm glad you asked about this again. This could very well be the difference in specs between the models. Tracking ratings are probably due to different styli. I think the new Concept, Classic, and Alpha might be w/o the shield, if indeed the others have one. That's a big discrepancy - 10dB.
neo

dlaloum · « **Reply #95 on:** 8 Sep 2011, 03:38 am »

Guys, I sincerely doubt it...

The AT120e and the AT150 both have the shield - at substantially different prices!

The additional manufacturing cost of having two models one with and one without shield would be far greater than the added cost of the shield on the top model.

My take on the specs differences is that we are looking at tolerances - on the body also but especially on the stylus and the precision of its mounting.

A wide tolerance, or another way of saying it, a low level of quality assurance - requires a wide spec to ensure all production (or whatever is the desire %) - meets the spec.
Tight tolerances, along with a high level of checks and tests allows for a narrower spec range....

Two devices can be identical (from a manufacturing perspective) and have substantially varying specs based on cherry picking and QC.

For good classic examples of this process look at the AT12/14/15/20 family...

The generators are the same - 370mh / 500 ohm

But seperations specs (1k/10k):
AT12Sa 26/20
AT14sa 27/20
AT15XE 28/23
AT15Sa 30/23
AT20SLa 30/25
(AT20SS 35/25) - in brackets as the later models had a slightly different generator 450mH/500ohm

I will admit that the variance is far greater 10db is a lot(!) - but I still can't believe they would have a substantial manufacturing variance... not for a machine made body.(if it was a hand made body, the proposition would be quite different!)

The implication of my take on it, is that Neo's proposal of taking the bottom body and fitting something like the ATN7V to it would effectively provide something very very close to the TOTL CA cartridge...

bye for now

David

glrickaby · « **Reply #96 on:** 8 Sep 2011, 05:02 am »

Putting the AT7V stylus on the AT125LC body seems to give me noticably better sound. Though
the AT7V body has a higher level gold finish, the AT125LC is 29db separation vs 27 and 28,000 Hz response vs 25,000 for the AT7V. Don't know if these figures would be right with the switch. Have
a new 125LC ordered and will try a further comparison then. Believe the 125 stylus is higher compliance. Present AT7V/125LC combination is on a ULM (Dual arm). Really quite nice. More
presence and depth-No high end AT brightness but still fine detail. Having sold my CA, am reluctant
to try an AT7V transplant to the AT95 body. Doesn't really make sense as the 95 seems lower on
the food chain compared to the 7V and 125LC.

dlaloum · « **Reply #97 on:** 8 Sep 2011, 07:48 am »

I wouldn't have thought the lower compliance AT7V would be a good match for the ULM arm... In fact keeping it on the lighter AT125 body would exacerbate the problems (related to the resonant frequency being too high... the result would be an expected resonance and its harmonics within the audible range...)

With a ULM I would definitely opt for the higher compliance styli...

neobop · « **Reply #98 on:** 8 Sep 2011, 01:36 pm »

David,
I think you're right about the shield and the stylus. I also suspect the specs are tighter on the top models. Separation is measured at 1K, so 20dB is poor. I guess it's really higher, even with the cheap-ass stylus provided.

If someone owns one of these carts, and the the stylus is different from what I read, please let us know. The cantilever appears to be straight on all of them. If indeed, the Virtuoso has a bonded tip, what kind of stylus does the Classic have? One other thing, the output is 3.6 mV on the top models. It's 3.3mV on the bottom models. This could only be one of two things. Either the spec is made to look worse than it is, so there's more difference between models, or the magnets are different like the AT-440ML OCC and the 440MLa. LOL, I seriously doubt if they have different magnets.
neo

*Scotty* · « **Reply #99 on:** 8 Sep 2011, 02:45 pm »

David's comments regarding cherry picking, QC and production tolerances have reminded me of a factoid I hadn't thought about in awhile.
Joe Grado flat out tells you that you are paying more money for cartridges that meet a tighter production tolerance when you move upwards in his product line.
In the case of the cartridge body in the AT line there are a lot of precision parts inside that have to be very closely aligned and positioned in order to produce the best results. Slight variations that are invisible to the naked eye could account for the differences in specifications between models with no change in the basic design at all.
In fact though, mis-alignment of the internal parts would amount to a change in the design specs
which explains the different levels of performance observed. We are also paying for the rejects that fail QC and are unusable. In the case of the stylus assemblies this could be a fair amount of the price differential seen in the more expensive cartridges. One has to wonder if it is cheaper to throw a reject out or re-manufacture it and salvage the diamond if possible.
Scotty