• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Conicle vs Elipticle:A stupid question

HeadAlign

HeadAlign

Is it in phase?
I am currently using a Technics SL-3200 fitted w/a new Shure M-44-7 wich has a conicle stylus. I have noticed that used records that were played on poor quality TTs seem to have somewhat less distortion with this cart then they had with an elipticle.
Is this my imagination?Of course,well cared for discs would sound better with a higher quality cart,but my question is:
Is it better to play "used"records with a conicle or elipiticle stylus? And should I upgrade?
 
Register to hide this ad
Well, for starters, it's really not a stupid question. Only questions you don't ask are stupid.

The elliptical stylus will ride with much more surface contact area, which is probably the reason you hear more distortion with it than you do the conical. I am wondering what you consider distortion....is it hiss and scratches and surface noise?? That would be the most common types on worn or poorly cared for records.

The groove modulations themselves are very complex, and the elliptical will give you more information, and as such, much better sound, and focus. There's not much you can do about a worn record, though. If they are really bad, you may in fact be happier with the conical stylus.

The problem is, that it's hard to replace vinyl! There are a lot of newer re-mastered records out there, with more coming every day. But, they are expensive, and it is unlikely you will ever be able to replace all of them anyway. It is best to keep them in as good a condition as you can, and an elliptical stylus upgrade is a good move......You get what you pay for.

After all, in the battle between diamond (Hardest substance known to man!) and vinyl (One of the softest!) it's no secret which one is going to win.

If your conical is in good shape, use it....But you will probably enjoy the sound much better with an elliptical, and just deal with the record noise.

IMO

Rick
 
The best is to use a needle that is somewhat using other parts of the grooves than the previous needle. Normally this means that a fine-line or a Shibata stylus will normally sound much better on a used record than an elliptical, because it will ride deeper in the grooves.
It is also so that record wear with these better needles is much less than with an elliptical or conical stylus; the contact area is much larger.
The elliptical needle has the smallest contact area closely followed by conical, then there is a big step up to a much larger area with fine-line, Shibata and FritzGeiger.
The problem with conical needles, is that it cannot follow the inner grooves at higher frequences, and will cause wear, but when switching to a fine-line, it will ride deeper and pic up the high frquenses again, with less surface noise.
/gusten
 
Last edited:
gusten said:
The best is to use a needle that is somewhat using other parts of the grooves than the previous needle. Normally this means that a fine-line or a Shibata stylus will normally sound much better on a used record than an elliptic, because it will ride deeper in the grooves.
It is also so that record wear with these better needles is much less than with an elliptic or conical stylus; the contact area is much larger.
The elliptical needle has the smallest contact area closely followed by conical, then there is a big step up to a much larger area with fine-line, Shibata and FritzGeiger.
The problem with conical needle, is that it cannot follow the inner grooves at higher frequences, and will cause wear, but when switching to a fine-line, it will ride deeper and pic up the high frquenses again, with less surface noise.
/gusten
Click to expand...

Generally true. However, it should also be noticed that one of the best loved cartridges in the audio world, the venerable Denon DL-103, has a conical stylus.

The M44-7 is really aimed at the professional DJ world, and the cartridge is primarily designed to withstand rugged use and be skip-resistant in a club environment. It also somewhat emphasizes bass output, which might sound pleasing to some ears. Others might suggest that this introduces an unbalanced, artificial sound in the home environment. Depends on what your ear likes as to whether an cartridge upgrade will satisfy your listening tastes.
 
mhardy. excellent info on the whole subject. they're going into my library. leaves nothing to the imagination.
should be assigned reading for all vinyl users/lovers.
 
HeadAlign said:
I am currently using a Technics SL-3200 fitted w/a new Shure M-44-7 wich has a conicle stylus. I have noticed that used records that were played on poor quality TTs seem to have somewhat less distortion with this cart then they had with an elipticle.
Is this my imagination?Of course,well cared for discs would sound better with a higher quality cart,but my question is:
Is it better to play "used"records with a conicle or elipiticle stylus? And should I upgrade?
Click to expand...

My experience has been the same as yours; I find a conical stylus to generally give me less noise and distortion than other stylus types when playing those beat-up, bargain-bin albums; a Stanton 500.V3 cartridge is mounted up and working fine for me at a 3-gram downforce.

While currently a darling of the DJ crowd, your M44-7 was originally introduced as one of a pair of cartidges sitting at the top of Shure's audiophile product line-up (the other being the M44-5, later replaced by the M44G). Here's a brief history I had looked up several years ago:

Has any product gone from top-of-the-line to also-ran as quickly as the Shure M44 series cartridge? In looking at older issues of High Fidelity yesterday, I found that the M44 (the first Shure designed to track at 15 degrees) replaced the M33 as top dog in their advertising in the Dec. '63 issue. Priced at $49.50 (.5 mil stylus, .75-1.5 VTF) or $44.50 (.7 mil, 1.5-3.0), it was lauded as "awesome in its vitality and clarity," "a night-and-day difference," and "the new standard in distortion-free hi-fi cartridges."
By April of '64, the Shure V-15, with its elliptical stylus, was introduced, relegating the M44 to second-tier status. In September of '64, the M44 was being advertised as the modestly-priced alternative to the "professional grade" M55E and V-15, and the price had dropped to less than $25.00.

And now, 40 years later, it's said to be engineered for DJ's and turntablists. But we should not forget that this was once the flagship of the Shure line, an audiophile's dream, even if only for a few months.
 
Is your cartridge aligned properly? The conicals being symmetrical are much more forgiving with poor alignment. Any elongated stylus will be much more sensitive to incorrect alignment and the result would be more distortion.
 
Thanks for all your help,I'm gonna check those links now. Sorry for my bad spelling.
Hakaplan: It is aligned correctly,as far as I can tell.
 
G'day all, feeling somewhat tired today...too much exercise yesterday and diabetes does that! I hope I'm making reasonable sense as a consequence.

Yes the DL103 and its conical stylus is a curious thing isn't it! It is a highly regarded cart yet with its conical stylus it should be deemed as less so perhaps.

A hi fi friend of mine who is quite knowledgeable has a policy that he won't consider 'any' cartridge worthly of being capable of true hi fi unless it has at the very least, an elliptical stylus. I think he has a point. DL103 owners (and lovers) probably wouldn't agree! Regards, Felix aka catman.
 
catman said:
A hi fi friend of mine who is quite knowledgeable has a policy that he won't consider 'any' cartridge worthly of being capable of true hi fi unless it has at the very least, an elliptical stylus. I think he has a point. DL103 owners (and lovers) probably wouldn't agree!
Click to expand...

Not everyone thinks elliptical styli make an appreciable improvement:

http://www.wavecor.co.uk/oldtopics.htm#Topic 4
All the early types were conical which present the same width from any angle. However, as the cutting stylus is chisel shaped (it is wider head on), the lateral cut will be slightly less wide when it cuts a high modulation groove. For this reason, it was thought that an elliptical shape would improve tracking by maintaining better overall contact with the groove. In practice the benefits are very small and offset by increased record wear and a tendency to collect dust from the record surface.
 
This post is not going to change common beliefs.

Records are designed to use the standard conical, spherical, styluses. Reality is, conical shapes are unappreciated for their versatility, consistency, low cost, quietness, plus they sound amazingly good. They are wonderful compromises between great sounding music and cost.

The conical was king, a standard, long before the elliptical’s showed up. Records are designed to be played by lowest common denominator be it turntable, tonearm, cartridge, ham-fisted owner, or inexpensive, common, and standard conical styluses.

Conical slight performance reduction gives it a lot less worries; the conical does the job about 98% of the time yet is easy to set up. An elliptical is like a car that can do 200 MPH in rough and sharp curves at the home stretch but needs precision alignment or the distortion goes up everywhere in the groove. The cheaper conical can do 180, costs less, and the round shape gives little worries about alignments getting wacky. A smart record pressing would put a slower song, less rough curves, at the end of the groove so we do not have a problem.

Save the money and stock up on spares. In the unlikely event of wearing out the record with a conical, we can go always lower in the groove with more exotic designs but the reverse isn’t true. The conical was the hit for the consumer in price, low maintenance, strength, and sound. Today, we ignore its worth.
 
Conicals sound wonderful on old mono LPs and, especially, mono 45s! Well-respected mastering guru Steve Hoffman uses a Shure 44 on his home stereo for playing back vintage 45s.

I use a Stanton 500AL-II for my 45s and (scratchy) mono LPs, set at 3.75 grams. It does a remarkable job of suppressing distortion and crackle on work-out records.
 
I'll toss in a couple of typically biased thoughts, too :-)

Conical styli are, as intimated above, probably more forgiving of slight misalignment than ellipticals or the more esoteric "line contact" styli.

Consider that the "inexpensive" (it's all relative) Denon MC cartridges use conical styli; they sound awfully good.

Conicals do generally have limited HF response compared to ellipticals.

A line contact stylus may ride in the groove of a damaged (mistracked) record in such a way as to "rescue" good sound from an otherwise unplayable record (i.e., unplayable with a conical stylus).

Always track at the high end of a manufacturer's suggested VTF range. More likely to do harm by tracking too light, I think.

Finally, think about the physics of a diamond stylus with a small, sharp point riding in the groove of a record made of polyvinylchloride. There is INCREDIBLE pressure being exerted on the groove at the point of contact twixt stylus and groove. The more esoteric cartridges concentrate that pressure on even less surface area. You can understand why alignment is so critical, and why mistracking is usually forever :-(
 
so, as a concerned vinyl owner with elips doing all the duty in the grooves, should I replace them all with cones? Or just watch for signes of record wear? I think I have one cone in my stable somewhere in a box. Mite be a Stanton something or other. Not discarded. But all my actives and others are elips. What's a guy to do?
 
beatcomber said:
Conicals sound wonderful on old mono LPs and, especially, mono 45s! Well-respected mastering guru Steve Hoffman uses a Shure 44 on his home stereo for playing back vintage 45s.

I use a Stanton 500AL-II for my 45s and (scratchy) mono LPs, set at 3.75 grams. It does a remarkable job of suppressing distortion and crackle on work-out records.
Click to expand...

I use a Sonus Green for mono 33's and 45's. I second Beachcomer's remarks.
 
just checked the Stanton and it's a 600EE elip, not a cone. So looks like I'm stuck with elips for the duration. Oh well they do sound good. Think I'll give a listen just for fun with phones at the 'Audio Obsticle Course' for any tell-tale signs of shennagens.
 
oldhifiguy said:
so, as a concerned vinyl owner with elips doing all the duty in the grooves, should I replace them all with cones? Or just watch for signes of record wear? I think I have one cone in my stable somewhere in a box. Mite be a Stanton something or other. Not discarded. But all my actives and others are elips. What's a guy to do?
Click to expand...

Definitely don't dump your elipticals for conicals on a wholesale basis. While conicals have some relative merits, they don't reach down and grab the detail from the grooves on stereo LP's like elipticals do, generally speaking. This is why the majority of the cartridges made today for hifi home use are not conicals. They are some kind of eliptical or hybrid, such as hyper-eliptical, shibata, line contact, etc.
 
catman said:
G'day all, feeling somewhat tired today...too much exercise yesterday and diabetes does that! I hope I'm making reasonable sense as a consequence.

Yes the DL103 and its conical stylus is a curious thing isn't it! It is a highly regarded cart yet with its conical stylus it should be deemed as less so perhaps.

A hi fi friend of mine who is quite knowledgeable has a policy that he won't consider 'any' cartridge worthly of being capable of true hi fi unless it has at the very least, an elliptical stylus. I think he has a point. DL103 owners (and lovers) probably wouldn't agree! Regards, Felix aka catman.
Click to expand...



The DL-103 is highly regarded for very good reason: it sounds great.

While it is true that the DL-103 has a conical stylus, it should not be dismissed merely by that fact. Its sound quality very much speaks for itself.

Of course, with the stylus being conical, it is more suited to a medium mass tonearm and heavier tracking force would be required. That, along with the fact that the cartridge is also fairly low compliance. The vtf range for the cartridge is 2.3-2.8 grams, with the recommended tracking force being 2.5 grams.
 
whell said:
Definitely don't dump your elipticals for conicals on a wholesale basis. While conicals have some relative merits, they don't reach down and grab the detail from the grooves on stereo LP's like elipticals do, generally speaking. This is why the majority of the cartridges made today for hifi home use are not conicals. They are some kind of eliptical or hybrid, such as hyper-eliptical, shibata, line contact, etc.
Click to expand...

NO WAY whell. Not gonna dump my elips. Was just kinda makin a point is all. But if a guy had only 1 or 2 carts , a case could be made if a replacement was due to go conical on at least one and not be worried about loss of sound quality by doing so. As for me, I'm keepin what I got.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom