Thanks----- http://korfaudio.com/calculator
I'm interested in the head! Which has a compliance of 9-10 with a price of $ 100-200 the table doesn't show it! I have the calculation in the first post
1-on the first picture - the cartridge with compliance is not suitable - 20 (it left the zone)
2-in the second picture - this is good! (but that's not true)
I tend to trust the company SME
I'm interested in the head! Which has a compliance of 9-10 with a price of $ 100-200 the table doesn't show it! I have the calculation in the first post
1-on the first picture - the cartridge with compliance is not suitable - 20 (it left the zone)
2-in the second picture - this is good! (but that's not true)
I tend to trust the company SME
Attachments
Last edited:
So far I have not found anything - according to my requirement
(I want to buy 100-200$ a good MM cartridge with low compliance)
(I want to buy 100-200$ a good MM cartridge with low compliance)
Vinyl Engine has a really handy cartridge database, searchable by compliance:
https://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_database.php
https://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_database.php
Hi, Only cartridge I know of with a low compliance is the MI Nagaoka Mp30 or Mp300. I have not heard one but reputedly they are very, very good sounding cartridges with a Boron cantilever & Elliptical stylus, so no complicated SRA set up. Also the replacement stylus assembly are unbelievably cheap considering the Boron cantilever. However they are exceedingly hard to find S/H. I know I have been looking.
Cheers.
Cheers.
Nagaoka MP-300 has stated static compliance of 20 x 10-6 cm/dyne, dynamic compliance of 7.2 x 10-6 cm/dyne.
The widely available Audio Technica AT-VM95EN has stated static compliance of 20 x 10-6 cm/dyne, dynamic compliance of 7 x 10-6 cm/dyne.
That looks really close to the same to me. Am I missing something?
The widely available Audio Technica AT-VM95EN has stated static compliance of 20 x 10-6 cm/dyne, dynamic compliance of 7 x 10-6 cm/dyne.
That looks really close to the same to me. Am I missing something?
Yes, it does....but no, it doesn't! It's only a ballpark-estimate for 10Hz. Japanese compliance is usually stated for 100Hz - nobody seems to know a direct conversion between the two of them.
Absolutely true.
I've seen some posts stating that if you have the static compliance specs taken at 100Hz, you can make a ballpark estimate of what they'd be at 10Hz. There's no real conversion factor, just "guesstimates".
I found this from vinylengine -- https://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=46919
A post there suggests using a rough conversion factor of Compliance at 100Hz(1.75) = Compliance at 10Hz (very roughly)
The Denon DL103 is stated to be 5 x 10-6 cm/dyne at 100Hz. Using the above, that would be 8.75, or roughly 9. Is that on the high side of 'low' compliance, or is that on the low side of 'medium' compliance?
According to a different post on vinylengine, https://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=24692,
So there goes that idea...
If the AT-VM95EN has a stated static compliance of 7 x 10-6 cm/dyne at 100Hz, that should be roughly 12 at 10Hz, but maybe up to 15? I'm pretty sure that is 'medium' compliance. That's what those Nagaoka cartridges would be defined as too.
The Denon DL110 has a quoted static compliance of 8 x 10-6 cm/dyne at 100Hz, so roughly 14 at 10Hz, but possibly more like 17 or 18, which is getting into 'high compliance' territory, although on the low side of that.
Grado Prestige series cartridges have a quoted static compliance of 20 x 10-6 cm/dyne at 10Hz, so they are truly 'high compliance'.
Generally speaking, a low compliance cart/stylus would need heavier vertical tracking force than a high compliance setup.
Also, the low compliance setup will work better in a heavier (higher effective mass) tonearm.
That's a 'rule of thumb' but I hear there are some people who would object to that as being overly simplistic. Some high compliance carts/styli can work very well with heavier arms, apparently. Unfortunately, I don't know exactly what the justification is for that claim.
I guess it's complicated.
I use an Audio Technica AT-VM95ML (Microline stylus) on a humble Sparta 220 tonearm, which is on the heavier side. The cartridge works fine as long as the record's not too badly warped. That leads me to think that the cart/stylus is a bit too high compliance for that tonearm. But it sounds good, so I deal with it.
Indeed it is.
Even if one knows the right compliance to feed the equation, there's still effective mass - the mass moment of inertia is a linear function of mass, the distance affects it by the power of 2 (twice the mass - twice the moment, twice the distance - four times the moment). So...effective mass of a tonearm, if stated by the manufacturer, is only relevant with the counterweight at a specific position, which is...???
Setting vertical tracking force, means moving the counterweight, hence affecting mass moment of inertia/effective mass/resonant frequency.
Then there is the matter of prosuming the mass-center of cartridge+screws+shims+headshell+lifter+what not sits at the tip of the stylus - at the effective lenght. This is false also, althought the difference is probably negligible.
Resident physicists can explain it better - looking forward to that.
PS (edit): @kuly it would be a good idea for you to state which tonearm you are reffering to - folks might recommend a cartridge based upon experience with said tonearm.
Last edited:
Hi Kurly, It what is quoted on there Korf curve above, you do not have a heavy tone-arm., but a medium mass one. Heavey arms start from 22 grams Eff mass. The 2nd Picture you of the Korf curve is also no good. You need to read more, the Arm /Cart resonance is below 5, so the combination is not a good match.
Any of the Denon's H/O MC's will match & work with a MM input. Also the Denon DL-109 MM cart will work, but this (unless you are very luck) is outside your price range.Cheers
Missed that.
Nope, static compliance is reffered to 0Hz. For the above cartridge 7 is the dynamic compliance (at 100Hz), static is 20.
Quote: "When the compliance is measured in a static way, the mean value is approximately the double of the value we would measure at 10 Hz and the quadruple of the value at 100 Hz."
Thank you for the clarifications! From that article:
If static compliance (at 0Hz) is 20, then "the double of the value" of the static compliance means the dynamic compliance at 10 Hz = 10 cu?
That would agree with a ballpark guesstimate of cu at 10Hz = cu at 100Hz(1.5).
This yields different results... If the compliance of the Nagaoka MP-300 is 7.2 cu at 100Hz, then according to the above, its dynamic compliance at 10Hz is about 14 cu.
But if its static compliance is 20 cu, then its dynamic compliance at 10Hz should be 10 cu.
Take the average of the two and call it a day? That means the dynamic compliance can be approximated at 12 cu, which is dynamic compliance at 100Hz(1.67).
Which means the posters in the previously linked threads saying to multiply the 100Hz compliance by about 1.7 or so is actually as good an approximation as any. No?
If static compliance (at 0Hz) is 20, then "the double of the value" of the static compliance means the dynamic compliance at 10 Hz = 10 cu?
That would agree with a ballpark guesstimate of cu at 10Hz = cu at 100Hz(1.5).
This yields different results... If the compliance of the Nagaoka MP-300 is 7.2 cu at 100Hz, then according to the above, its dynamic compliance at 10Hz is about 14 cu.
But if its static compliance is 20 cu, then its dynamic compliance at 10Hz should be 10 cu.
Take the average of the two and call it a day? That means the dynamic compliance can be approximated at 12 cu, which is dynamic compliance at 100Hz(1.67).
Which means the posters in the previously linked threads saying to multiply the 100Hz compliance by about 1.7 or so is actually as good an approximation as any. No?
Putting this to the test...
Sticking to Japanese cartridges that quote their dynamic compliance in cu at 100Hz:
If we take the static compliance of a Nagaoka MP-300 quoted at 20 cu, that could approximate the dynamic cu as 10 cu at 10Hz.
If we take the dynamic compliance of that same MP-300 quoted at 7.2 cu 100Hz, that could approximate to 14 cu at 10Hz.
The above two approximations do not agree, so we can take the average of the two, or approx 12 cu at 10Hz.
The MP-300 weighs 8g, and we should add 1.5g for mounting screws.
We should also add 10g for the headshell.
Let's see if we can figure out the resonant frequency (RF) of this cartridge in a tonearm of 20g effective mass.
RF = A ÷ √ M × C
Where:
A = 1.000 ÷ 2 π = 159, 23 (you can also use the fixed value of 159)
M = sum of all masses (arm, screws and cartridge)
C = compliance (at 10 Hz)
so,
A = 159.2
M = 20g + 8g + 1.5g + 10g = 39.5g
C = 12 cu
M x C = 39.5g x 12 cu = 474
√ M × C = √ 474 = 21.77
159.2/21.77 = 8.69Hz
That's just within the 8 to 12 Hz window, but is outside of the more optimal 9 to 11 Hz window. In other words, just okay, but not great.
Let's do that again, but this time with a Denon DL103:
The DL103's quoted Cdynamic at 100Hz is 5cu, and Cstatic is not given. We'll need to approximate it as Cdynamic(1.7), which gives us 8.5 cu 10Hz. Let's go with that.
The DL103 weighs 8.5g.
A = 159.2
M = 20g + 8.5g + 1.5g + 10g = 40g
C = 8.5 cu
M x C = 40g x 8.5 cu = 340
√ M × C = √ 340 = 18.44
159.2/18.44 = 8.6Hz
The RF stayed the same??
Reducing the total mass by using a lighter headshell, let's say of 7g...
A = 159.2
M = 20g + 8.5g + 1.5g + 7g = 37g
C = 8.5 cu
M x C = 37g x 8.5 cu = 314.5
√ M × C = √ 314.5 = 17.7
159.2/17.7 = 9Hz
Okay, now we're getting somewhere -- but not very quickly, right?
The solution is obvious: Even with a supposedly 'low-compliance' cartridge like the DL103, keep the total mass as low as you can. Use a lighter headshell (which means you may not be able to use one with adjustable azimuth, as the mechanism inevitably adds mass). Use the lightest mounting nuts/screws you can find. As you get into higher compliance cartridges, the need to reduce tonearm+headshell+mounting hardware mass intensifies.
I believe the effective mass of an Audio Technica AT1501 tonearm is closer to 25g. Even a DL103's 'low' 8.5 cu compliance is too high to keep the tonearm RF between 9 to 11 Hz. Bummer!
Sticking to Japanese cartridges that quote their dynamic compliance in cu at 100Hz:
If we take the static compliance of a Nagaoka MP-300 quoted at 20 cu, that could approximate the dynamic cu as 10 cu at 10Hz.
If we take the dynamic compliance of that same MP-300 quoted at 7.2 cu 100Hz, that could approximate to 14 cu at 10Hz.
The above two approximations do not agree, so we can take the average of the two, or approx 12 cu at 10Hz.
The MP-300 weighs 8g, and we should add 1.5g for mounting screws.
We should also add 10g for the headshell.
Let's see if we can figure out the resonant frequency (RF) of this cartridge in a tonearm of 20g effective mass.
RF = A ÷ √ M × C
Where:
A = 1.000 ÷ 2 π = 159, 23 (you can also use the fixed value of 159)
M = sum of all masses (arm, screws and cartridge)
C = compliance (at 10 Hz)
so,
A = 159.2
M = 20g + 8g + 1.5g + 10g = 39.5g
C = 12 cu
M x C = 39.5g x 12 cu = 474
√ M × C = √ 474 = 21.77
159.2/21.77 = 8.69Hz
That's just within the 8 to 12 Hz window, but is outside of the more optimal 9 to 11 Hz window. In other words, just okay, but not great.
Let's do that again, but this time with a Denon DL103:
The DL103's quoted Cdynamic at 100Hz is 5cu, and Cstatic is not given. We'll need to approximate it as Cdynamic(1.7), which gives us 8.5 cu 10Hz. Let's go with that.
The DL103 weighs 8.5g.
A = 159.2
M = 20g + 8.5g + 1.5g + 10g = 40g
C = 8.5 cu
M x C = 40g x 8.5 cu = 340
√ M × C = √ 340 = 18.44
159.2/18.44 = 8.6Hz
The RF stayed the same??
Reducing the total mass by using a lighter headshell, let's say of 7g...
A = 159.2
M = 20g + 8.5g + 1.5g + 7g = 37g
C = 8.5 cu
M x C = 37g x 8.5 cu = 314.5
√ M × C = √ 314.5 = 17.7
159.2/17.7 = 9Hz
Okay, now we're getting somewhere -- but not very quickly, right?
The solution is obvious: Even with a supposedly 'low-compliance' cartridge like the DL103, keep the total mass as low as you can. Use a lighter headshell (which means you may not be able to use one with adjustable azimuth, as the mechanism inevitably adds mass). Use the lightest mounting nuts/screws you can find. As you get into higher compliance cartridges, the need to reduce tonearm+headshell+mounting hardware mass intensifies.
I believe the effective mass of an Audio Technica AT1501 tonearm is closer to 25g. Even a DL103's 'low' 8.5 cu compliance is too high to keep the tonearm RF between 9 to 11 Hz. Bummer!