AT VM 95ML vs AT 3600l

I would not judge all fine lines by the AT 440ML, I've never heard one but folks seem to run hot or cold in their opinion of that one.
And yes the tip is but one aspect, however by the conical's physical design - it just can't ride as deep in the groove as the other two family of cuts.
AT recommends 100-200pf total input capacitance. That's a hard target to hit, most phono stages alone are 100pf-200pf as a baseline. Add cables and you're at or over the maximum.
Too much capacitance makes the cartridge sound bright. I've run the AT440MLa and AT150MLx through Bottlehead Seduction with low capacitance cables and both carts sounded lush with no brightness.
If you have tone controls, you can turn the bass level up a bit--I set mine at the 1 o'clock position because with my current system the best I can do is about 300pf.
I have no idea why AT designs the carts to work with such low capacitance. Nobody else does, as far as I know.
The AT VM540ML doesn't seem to be as sensitive to input capacitance as the older ATs, so maybe AT changed the cart but not the spec sheet.
 
Never would I debate your preference, just question when someone just states it's better.

I'm not sure that is what is going on here.

The vm95ml is clearly the better more expenive cart but the 3600 makes you want to listen to another track.
Chris

What I read from the OP is that he is surprised that the "better" vm95ml is not as pleasing to him as the "inferior" 3600.

If anything, the assumption is often that the better tip is the more refined tip. That there are instances where one is surprised to prefer the sound of a simpler tip only shows the bias toward the more complex shapes.

I was just pointing out that sound preferences are what they are, they are subjective opinions. I really don't have a dog in this fight other than being aware of the bias for the more complex shapes. I say it's ok to like what you like. Discovering what tip/cart gets you to the sound you like is what being a vinyl enthusiast is to me.

Cheers :beerchug:
Mike
 
And yes the tip is but one aspect, however by the conical's physical design - it just can't ride as deep in the groove as the other two family of cuts.

This is a subject that has been discussed to death already, but my own conclusions based on my experience, is that any tip profile cannot guarantee trackability, by itself.

I am pretty sure that a well designed pickup, be it a conical or an elliptical, should be able to track way above the margin of audible error.

That is what my ears tell me at least.

I must have a look, out of curiosity, what official trackabiliity figures Shure gives for conical tips, in their brochures.
 
Last edited:
AT recommends 100-200pf total input capacitance. That's a hard target to hit, most phono stages alone are 100pf-200pf as a baseline. . . I have no idea why AT designs the carts to work with such low capacitance. Nobody else does, as far as I know.
The Sumiko moving magnet cartridge manual says, "Sumiko cartridges should be loaded with a value no higher than 200pf," so there's at least one other company that asks for a very low capacitance. My preamp is an AVA OmegaStar, and while the exact input capacitance of its phono stage isn't published, Frank Van Alstine told me that all of their phono stages over the years have been under 50pf (which is right where your Bottlehead Seduction is rated at). Unfortunately, Rega does not publish cable capacitance information, so I don't know how much my RP3 turntable adds to the total.
 
This is a subject that has been discussed to death already, but my own conclusions based on my experience, is that any tip profile cannot guarantee trackability, by itself.

I am pretty sure that a well designed pickup, be it a conical or an elliptical, should be able to track way above the margin of audible error.

That is what my ears tell me at least.

I must have a look, out of curiosity, what official trackabiliity figures Shure gives for conical tips, in their brochures.


Conical should be much less fussy about alignment due to it's shape.
 
The Sumiko moving magnet cartridge manual says, "Sumiko cartridges should be loaded with a value no higher than 200pf," so there's at least one other company that asks for a very low capacitance. My preamp is an AVA OmegaStar, and while the exact input capacitance of its phono stage isn't published, Frank Van Alstine told me that all of their phono stages over the years have been under 50pf (which is right where your Bottlehead Seduction is rated at). Unfortunately, Rega does not publish cable capacitance information, so I don't know how much my RP3 turntable adds to the total.
Rule of thumb is, add 100pf unless you get low capacitance cables. I think BJC has cabling that's 12pf per foot. Pretty low.
I have some of it here, in fact, but it's stiff enough to be an issue--it can actually push gear around--and the RCA jacks under the Dual turntables are too close together for the BJC terminations to fit side by side.
It's a mystery to me why a cartridge company would design the carts in such a way especially with AT already having a reputation for being too bright.
 
...the conical stylus couldn't trace difficult passages as well as ellipticals or microlines could. Too much sibilance when the mix was "hot," too much detail lost on the difficult inner grooves on classical LPs..

I looked at one of Shure's brochures (year 1976).
It seems that the official data from Shure, corroborate my observations.

That is, trackability of a pickup is not affected and/or dependent on the actual tip profile, given all other variables are constant. The three cartridges on the following graph, are of one conical 0.6mil (M91GD) and two fine ellipticals 0.2x0.7mil (M95/75 ED).

Interestingly, the M91GD(nude 0.6mil tip) and M91ED(nude 0.2x0.7mil tip) are the exact same pickup body, with a different stylus.
And they all share the exact same tracking performance.

upload_2018-12-9_19-26-26.png
 
Last edited:
I looked at one of Shure's brochures (year 1976).
It seems that the official data from Shure, corroborate my observations.

That is, trackability of a pickup is not affected and/or dependent on the actual tip profile, given all other variables are constant.

The three cartridges on the following graph, are of one conical 0.6mil (M91GD) and two fine ellipticals 0.2x0.7mil (M95/75 ED).

Interestingly, the M91GD and M91ED are the exact same pickup body, with a different stylus.

View attachment 1351848
The spec sheet says one thing, but I guarantee you...get a V15III, line up the conical, elliptical, and HE styli and they aren't going to sound the same. Which one you prefer is up to you, but they're not going to sound the same.
The finer the stylus profile, the better it is at tracing, not tracking, the groove wall.
 
The spec sheet says one thing, but I guarantee you...get a V15III, line up the conical, elliptical, and HE styli and they aren't going to sound the same.

I never said they would sound the same.
I was clear in saying that conicals usually sound better to my ears.

Don't get confused.

My post was a response to your previous comment regarding the supposed 'inferior' tracking abilities of a given conical, compared to more 'exotic' tips.

And I just wanted to validate the point that they can track/trace/follow the grooves, equally well.
 
Last edited:
I never said they would sound the same.
I was the first to point out that conicals usually sound better to my ears.

Don't get confused.

My post was a response to your previous comment regarding the inherent 'inferior' tracking ability of a given conical, compared to more 'exotic' tips.

And I just wanted to validate the point that they can track/trace/follow the grooves equally well.

But they can't. My ears tell me they can't. The stylus engineers know they can't. It's the whole reason other stylus shapes exist. It's why the cheapest cartridges usually come with conical styli.
What does Shure even mean by "trackability?" I don't know and I'll bet you don't either.

Now, none of that means anything if you prefer the sound of a conical. If the conical floats your boat, then what do you care about which type of stylus is best? You've already made up your mind the best for you is conical.
And I'll say it again--the 3600 is a steal at the price. I like it just fine. So what's the problem?
 
Last edited:
What does Shure even mean by "trackability?"

I don't know and I'll bet you don't either.

An friendly advice - ease back with your assumptions.
About other people and about yourself.

Below there is also an explanation of the term 'trackabilty' by Shure:
Box-22-LPs_DSC3022.jpg
 
An friendly advice - ease back with your assumptions.
About other people and about yourself.

Below there is also an explanation of the term 'trackabilty' by Shure:
Box-22-LPs_DSC3022.jpg
Looks to me like Shure is asking the listener to make subjective judgements, which is what this is all about anyway. You like the sound of the conical more than you like the sound of the ML. I don't. So?
I've got two of the Shure Audio Obstacle course records and they just make my point. Conicals don't perform as well as styli with more exotic shapes. I've tried them.
But that really doesn't make much difference. Test records aren't the real world, we don't sit around listening to them for fun.
Isn't that supposed to be what this is all about? If you're having fun with your 3600, good for you. I prefer a different cup of coffee.
And by the way, if you've got an arm/cart mismatch it's going to fail those "trackability" tests regardless of what kind of stylus you're using.
 
The conical is by far the cheapest and easiest to manufacture. There are "bonded" styli and "nude" styli. Bonded are cheapest, and is a process where a diamond is attached to a steel pin. It sounds complicated and unreliable, but it is a well known and highly developed low cost process. It is cheap, because one does not have to shape or form a whole diamond completely, or carefully, to allow bonding it to the cantilever. The process requires mounting the diamond to the steel pin and then grinding the diamond down to a conical shape. The steel pin is then pressed or swaged into the cantilever and glued in place. The drawback?? MASS - (The enemy of performance). Steel is HEAVY. Advantage?? LOW COST - certainly when compared to a nude stylus.

Elliptical styli come in various designs, from what is referred to a "faux" or "fake" elliptical (one not ground so well from conicals) to Hyper-Ellipticals, which are precision ground and are actually often closer to Contact Line than most ellipticals. There are of course bonded elliptical and "nude" ellipticals, the latter being lower in mass.

Then, there are the "fine line" styli, including standard Contact Line, as well as the more esoteric evolutions such as Shibata, Micro Line or Ridge, Optimized Contour Contact Line (Soundsmith) and so on. These are almost always nudes, for lowest possible mass. These designs have a sharper edge (radius) that play the record groove walls, which allows better high frequency reproduction (especially at the inner grooves where it is more difficult) resulting in lower distortion, better imaging, depth, and many other aspects of fine analog listening that are lost when the high frequencies are not resolved as well - usually by lower quality stylus shapes.

The higher end designs, however, require far more precise alignment than the lower quality shapes, for what should be obvious reasons. It is easier to align a rounded end to a groove than a V shaped end. Alignment issues for both rotating off a vertical imaginary line in the groove looking end on, as well as tilting front to back along the groove become far more critical for proper tracing of the groove.

Then there are noise and wear issues. Conicals statistically trace less surface area of the groove wall, so can theoretically pick up less record damage (unless they trace an area where there HAS been lots of wear or damage) and can pick up fewer sonic bursts from defects or noise from dirt or other foreign objects in the groove. But the wear factor is higher (faster) for both the record and styli. Alignment considerations however, are much easier to achieve. But far poorer high frequency response. For analog, that's bad.

Conversely, the fine line designs require records that are in better condition and cleaner to be played mainly noise free. But the reward for playing a good clean undamaged record with a properly aligned fine line diamond and quality cartridge cannot be overly described in terms of enjoyment.
 
Methods do vary.
Point is to get as close to unbiased judgement, as possible.

In that context, a blind A/B test is always a better way to go.

I can't ignore what i hear, just because it is a cheap product, or because it has a non-exotic tip.
My missus was a blind test and it took her no time to choose and why and her reason was the same as mine just more musical. Faults were for me I could hear more surface noise with the AT3600, but it was fuller and just nicer. The recent Hi Fi World review interestingly said the new VM series was a little cold and lacking in lower mids. This IMO just might be the difference the AT3600 is nicer as it does not have this thinner cold presentation. Yes the ML is more precise, yes it has less surface noise but it to me sounds rather like a cd. The AT3600 has good high no sibilance and decent mids and great lows, no it is not perfect, I have some serious carts which do everything right, but some cost upwards of 1.5k. Honestly love the sound of the humble AT3600 faults and all. Admitted I am giving it the best chance to sound good, set up in a 9mx8m listening room with 186wpc mosfets heavily biased into class A or my Conrad Johnson pre and power valve amp and a DNM preamp with ATC SCM 100 speakers and a few nice turntables too. IMO demonstrates how good the cart is set up on a system it would not normally be set up on true, but it shows this little cart is well balanced despite its limitations.
CHris
 
. . . Then there are noise and wear issues. Conicals statistically trace less surface area of the groove wall, so can theoretically pick up less record damage (unless they trace an area where there HAS been lots of wear or damage) and can pick up fewer sonic bursts from defects or noise from dirt or other foreign objects in the groove. But the wear factor is higher (faster) for both the record and styli. Alignment considerations however, are much easier to achieve. But far poorer high frequency response. For analog, that's bad. . .
Conicals do have less contact area than line contact styli, but more than ellipticals. Record wear tests in the past have shown that a .7 mil conical tracking at 3 grams wears records at about the same rate as an elliptical with a side radius of .2 mil tracking at 1.5 grams.

As for frequency response, perhaps it depends on how high a frequency you can hear. One report I read years ago said that if you have the frequency range of 60-8000 Hz, you would hear 90% of what an orchestra has to offer; 40-14,000 Hz was considered "virtual perfection." The AT3600 variant sold by Music Hall as the Music Hall Melody, with its .6 mil conical, was tested by Newport Test Labs and found to have pretty flat, extended highs up to about 15 or 16 kHz (plus or minus 1 dB or 1.5 dB depending on test method), then things began to roll off rapidly. My M97xE with its .2 X .7 mil elliptical begins its plunge in the high end at 16 kHz. Since I no longer hear much of anything above 13 kHz, maybe these roll-offs don't matter.
 
Last edited:
Looks to me like Shure is asking the listener to make subjective judgements, which is what this is all about anyway. You like the sound of the conical more than you like the sound of the ML. I don't. So?
I've got two of the Shure Audio Obstacle course records and they just make my point. Conicals don't perform as well as styli with more exotic shapes. I've tried them.
But that really doesn't make much difference. Test records aren't the real world, we don't sit around listening to them for fun.
Isn't that supposed to be what this is all about? If you're having fun with your 3600, good for you. I prefer a different cup of coffee.
And by the way, if you've got an arm/cart mismatch it's going to fail those "trackability" tests regardless of what kind of stylus you're using.
NO I like the sound of the AT3600 more than I like the ML OR the VM95 conical, both leave me cold, BOTH have the same thin sound. So nothing to do with the stylus clearly it is the cart or maybe the different cantilever and less so the conical making the difference.
And compliance is perfect, I have 5 turntables to choose from and loads of headshells.
Chris
 
Last edited:
. . . The AT3600 has good high no sibilance and decent mids and great lows, no it is not perfect, I have some serious carts which do everything right, but some cost upwards of 1.5k. Honestly love the sound of the humble AT3600 faults and all. . .
Just so I'm clear on the model, when you say AT3600 you do mean the AT3600L, right? There was also an AT3600 that I believe had the same specs as the AT91, a .6 mil conical tracking at 1.5-2.5 grams with the carbon fiber-reinforced ABS cantilever.
 
Conicals do have less contact area than line contact styli, but more than ellipticals. Record wear tests in the past have shown that a .7 mil conical tracking at 3 grams wears records at about the same rate as an elliptical with a side radius of .2 mil tracking at 1.5 grams.

As for frequency response, perhaps it depends on how high a frequency you can hear. One report I read years ago said that if you have the frequency range of 60-8000 Hz, you would hear 90% of what an orchestra has to offer; 40-14,000 Hz was considered "virtual perfection." The AT3600 variant sold by Music Hall as the Music Hall Melody, with its .6 mil elliptical, was tested by Newport Test Labs and found to have pretty flat, extended highs up to about 15 or 16 kHz (plus or minus 1 dB or 1.5 dB depending on test method), then things began to roll off rapidly. My M97xE with its .2 X .7 mil elliptical begins its plunge in the high end at 16 kHz. Since I no longer hear much of anything above 13 kHz, maybe these roll-offs don't matter.
My hearing is very good for my age and flat to 16 kHz, but very little after that which is amazing hearing for a 47 year old. Most over 20 are already down to 18 kHz and by 30 just about everyone is down to 16 kHz. There is always someone on forums who insist they are 40 or older and can hear up to 23 kHz or something but this is honestly rubbish for a few reasons. Anyway point is high frequency response is not everything.
Chris
 
Just so I'm clear on the model, when you say AT3600 you do mean the AT3600L, right? There was also an AT3600 that I believe had the same specs as the AT91, a .6 mil conical tracking at 1.5-2.5 grams with the carbon fiber-reinforced ABS cantilever.
Yes mean the L, I intend to get the 3600 too to try, but the 3600l will track perfectly at 2.5g as most have found out on the at3600 thread. I also have the elliptical stylus for it which to be honest sounds very similar and tracking weight is the same.
Chris
 
My hearing is very good for my age and flat to 16 kHz, but very little after that which is amazing hearing for a 47 year old. Most over 20 are already down to 18 kHz and by 30 just about everyone is down to 16 kHz. There is always someone on forums who insist they are 40 or older and can hear up to 23 kHz or something but this is honestly rubbish for a few reasons. Anyway point is high frequency response is not everything.
Chris
It wasn't until reading your reply that I noticed I had made an error in the post you responded to. The Music Hall Melody has a .6 mil conical, not an elliptical.
 
Back
Top Bottom