Spinning a Stanton 680 with a D65 cart.

Very clean overall in midbass and bass- and tight. Midrange- jury's still out. Highs? A touch hot.

Yet overall the stylus retains a definitively analogous sound....

A bit more fiddling with tracking weight and VTA before I can make any more statements....


Oh- but I must say, it tracks like a champion- especially with that equestrian tail looking brush built in....

Well, a bit more time on it.

I'm finding midrange, or at least upper midrange a tad recessed than what I'm used to. For the most part, midbass and bass remains authorative and tight, with only one record sounding a tad muddy.

Detail is excellent. Resolution however is a bit veiled to me.

I'm wondering if I still need to fiddle with settings or give the stylus a better cleaning or better lead wires than the cheapo ones currently on it...

Curious what you're running the 680 on? I've got the same combo going on a BIC 980 at the moment and I'm finding it to be a pretty mellow cartridge. I'd probably agree that the lower treble/upper mid is a bit relaxed compared to some carts, but that's not a bad thing always. I think I'm seeing it as a nice one for sippin' and listening to records with a lot of things being plucked that that might get a bit aggressive on some carts, say Bluegrass or Renaissance lute?

680 is nice and recessed in the midrange. Get thee a 681 EEE-S III stylus upgrade and really see what the Stanton mystique is all about. That's a cartridge and a half. The 681 midrange is nicer.

Extended listening proved to be, as noted, polite in the midrange. I experienced some sibilance which I need to attribute to setup, but will stick to my initial thoughts the highs are a tad bright. I admit this could very well be in relation to how the rest of the cart sounds but I'm leaning to it being inherent to it's nature.

The Stanton tracks as if Dale Ernhardt was piloting it and the design is a work of art.

Straightforward to set up but requiring your attention to get it right.

Oh- table is a Technics SL-1710 MK II.

Has anyone ever determined definitively if there's a difference between the 680 and 681 cartridge bodies? My hunch is that it's like the Grados, where certain ones measure a little better on the test equipment and therefore get the different designation.

Has anyone ever determined definitively if there's a difference between the 680 and 681 cartridge bodies? My hunch is that it's like the Grados, where certain ones measure a little better on the test equipment and therefore get the different designation.

All I've heard is one is calibrated (681), one isn't (680).

Mine doesn't have the side sticker on it.

Has anyone ever determined definitively if there's a difference between the 680 and 681 cartridge bodies? My hunch is that it's like the Grados, where certain ones measure a little better on the test equipment and therefore get the different designation.

Yes there is, biggest difference is the 680 has a higher output and the original 680 stylus is a a 0.03X0.07 elliptical. Plus the 681 has a higher frequency response and is calibrated per each cartridge. plus a few other things

plus a few other things

What might these other things be?

Yes there is, biggest difference is the 680 has a higher output and the original 680 stylus is a a 0.03X0.07 elliptical. Plus the 681 has a higher frequency response and is calibrated per each cartridge. plus a few other thingsYes but - different styli contribute to the differences in output. I can easily tell this just by listening.

The question is about the cartridge bodies, NOT the styli.

And I'm still not sure what "calibrated" means in this context.

Calibrated- I am taking a wild guess here, but probably nothing more than what Grado does with it's cart- the more "balanced", or better spec'd 5 or 10% of grado Silvers become "gold" and also get a price increase.


This is speculation and I've no factual basis for this statement.

Well, a bit more listening and here's what I'm thnking...

The strength of the 680 is very clear midbass and bass. Only one recording sounded poor in this area, sounding muddled at the extremes and dulling the detail, and the reason could very well be the recording. I'm not sure if the LP is a bit worn, or the recording never was good or it just Overwhelmed the cart- but I expect the former two, and not the latter.

Midrange still felt a bit recessed to me- but I primarily listen, or at least have been listening, to vocals. Jazz, classical or dance/electronic music it would not be an issue.

I need to stress I like a warm, plump midrange.

The highs remained difficult for me to tame- a bit bright in my lively room, and although details were excellent, I felt the presentation not as dynamic or clear as I'd want.

This last part puzzles me, and it's out of charactor I feel for this cart.

I have to stress this up to either an issue with the vinyl (yet to hit the RCM) or, humbly, user error in regards to user setup.


Regarding tracking- the praises are high. The cart is an over-achiever, and this is ideal for playing beat up records, or on a bouncy floor or vibrating dance hall.

Overall, if I could extract a bit more midrange and could tame a bit of brightness, this cart would be an excellent choice regarding moving iron carts, and I understand the reason it gets, and deserves respect.

I'm told a better stylus match will achieve just that...

Yes but - different styli contribute to the differences in output. I can easily tell this just by listening.

The question is about the cartridge bodies, NOT the styli.

And I'm still not sure what "calibrated" means in this context.

depends on what stylus it is, and as i noted somewhere on here about these the newer styluses just don't play as loud and full as the older ones do.
With the 681EE and EEE each cartridge was tested individually and the test results are then noted on a card that came shipped with each cartridge so you knew the tested specs for your particular EE or EEE unfortunately lots of those were not saved buy the original owners.