The life of a cartridge

[silviajulieta]

Raul,
In the MD statement, the article also reads.." It happens so slowly you probably haven't noticed it. The coils, contacts and connections inside the generator degrade from airborne dust and debris. A new cartridge will make listening even more exciting. You'll be shocked how much detail and dynamics you've been missing."
Now, I'm fairly sure that this is a little piece of marketing, BUT the question remains as to how much truth there is in that statement. Your cartridge is what, 20+years old? I wander how much of the original performance it has left? To your ears it still performs well...which IMHO is the most important aspect, however,I wander what you would think if AB'ed against a new cartridge of the same make and type.( assuming that was possible of course). Alternatively, have you tried your set-up with a new/newer design so that you can compare? If you still prefer your older cartridge, so be it-- although I then would wander if you are preferring the colorations that possibly have grown on you over all those years Just a thought

Dear DaveyF: IMHO there is no scientific evidence that support the MD statement, it is only their opinion that they even don't said if at least made some cartridge tests about.

I own several cartridges and some of them over 30+ years old and yes I have today cartridge too or tested it like the latest Ortofon A-90 and many more. You can read here about, please read all the review ( including links. ), in this link/thread you can find out what other meber posted where you can have a second answer to your questions the post comes from " Turntable ":

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1260-Best-Phono-Cartridges-Ever-Made


Now, we all now that at least there is cartridge suspension degradation due to the pass of years/time and what we don't know for sure is how that cartridge suspension degradation ( or any other cartridge degradation but the stylus one. ) shows in the overall cartridge quality performance.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[DaveyF]

Raul, I pretty much agree with you that it seems unlikely that MD has any scientific evidence of their statement. It does seem to me, upon reflection, that the general aging of a cartridge shouldn't really be that great due to cartridge suspension degradation, over only a period of 5 years! A much longer period would make more sense. Wear on the stylus from record debris and overall use, makes more sense in that time period.
As I said before, I do kind of think that MD is trying to sell product and that this is a piece of marketing on their behalf..or at least let's hope that is the case

 

[karma]

HI All,
This is all very interesting but most of it is not in the slightest scientific. The best way to find if your "10 year old" cartridge is any good is with a stylus microscope. Shure used to make a good one but they are very rare and when found, expensive. The last one I saw on ebay went for over $500.

As an alternative, I suggest that you check out my sticky on Audio Karma. Follow the link:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=225960

Of course, the microscope will not help with internal issues. For that, we have our ears.

Sparky

 

[rockitman]

For cleaning, I generally use the Magic Eraser and or the zero-dust gel. The hard stylus brush is also used. Every now and then I use the Clearaudio Liquid cleaner as they say it's safe for all carts as it uses very little isopropyl alcohol.

http://clearaudio.de/_en/zi_Elixier of Sound.php

manual: http://clearaudio.de/download/zubehoer/elixierofsound_de_en.pdf

 

[microstrip]

HI All,
This is all very interesting but most of it is not in the slightest scientific. The best way to find if your "10 year old" cartridge is any good is with a stylus microscope. Shure used to make a good one but they are very rare and when found, expensive. The last one I saw on ebay went for over $500.

As an alternative, I suggest that you check out my sticky on Audio Karma. Follow the link:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=225960

Of course, the microscope will not help with internal issues. For that, we have our ears.

Sparky

If you are lucky you can get a 20-25 year old Nikon Optiphot binocular Inspection Microscope at eBay for the same price of the Shure and it is a much better unit. The illumination is made through the lenses and if you had the chance of getting one with a light polarization system you will get perfect views of your cartridge stylus. The optics for x100 and x200 magnification are not expensive (x10 eye pieces and x10 or x20 objective) and are easy to find - but for higher magnifications the cost can be higher than that of the microscope body. The attached picture is from a current auction at eBay (usd 599 without objective).

 

[karma]

HI micro,
I'm sure the Nikon is a fine microscope. But a question must be asked that deals with adequate quality verses cost. The Shure SEK-2 stylus microscope is plenty good enough to show any degree of stylus wear. Unfortunately, the SEK-2 has become rare and when it shows up it usually is expensive. The Shure is purpose designed for stylus examination. The Nikon is not. Could the Nikon be made to work? Sure. But I don't think it is a given that it is better for the job than the SEK-2. There are many good microscopes out there that can be made to work and will do a fine job.

Personally, I have used the SEK-2 for 30 years both professionally and for my personal styli. I must tell you that it's plenty good enough. I also have built the DIY microscope outlined in my sticky on Audio Karma. It also works well. So, I have two stylus microscopes; the Shure SEK-2 and the DIY scope. Either one will fill the need for a good stylus microscope.

The most important thing is to have a good way to examine styli. A stylus microscope is an important piece of kit.

Sparky

 

[microstrip]

HI micro,
I'm sure the Nikon is a fine microscope. But a question must be asked that
deals with adequate quality verses cost. The Shure SEK-2 stylus microscope
is plenty good enough to show any degree of stylus wear. Unfortunately, the
SEK-2 has become rare and when it shows up it usually is expensive. The
Shure is purpose designed for stylus examination. The Nikon is not. Could
the Nikon be made to work? Sure. But I don't think it is a given that it is
better for the job than the SEK-2. There are many good microscopes out there
that can be made to work and will do a fine job.

Personally, I have used the SEK-2 for 30 years both professionally and for
my personal styli. I must tell you that it's plenty good enough. I also have
built the DIY microscope outlined in my sticky on Audio Karma. It also works
well. So, I have two stylus microscopes; the Shure SEK-2 and the DIY scope.
Either one will fill the need for a good stylus microscope.

The most important thing is to have a good way to examine styli. A stylus
microscope is an important piece of kit.

Sparky

I have used this particular type of Nikon microscope to examine samples in micro-cristalography, you can believe it is adequate for stylus inspection. But as you say it is over-kill...

I will also highlight one point you refer in the audiokarma thread - the importance of the expertise and experience of the user. Also, the excellent examples of the Shure manual are mandatory - as the link you provide is not working any more, I supply a new one and an example from this manual

http://www.shure.com/idc/groups/tech_pubs/@global_managed/documents/webcontent/us_pro_sek-2_ug.pdf

 

[karma]

HI micro,
Thanks for the new link. When I found that old link no longer worked a few months ago, I searched for a new one and came up empty. I will take your new link and insert it into the article. It's an important reference as you pointed out.

Thanks a bunch,

Sparky