Audiokarma.org
Audiokarma Featured Sponsor

Go Back   AudioKarma.org Home Audio Stereo Discussion Forums > Turntables


We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-11-2010, 12:00 PM
Phototone's Avatar
Phototone Phototone is offline
AK Subscriber
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Van Buren, AR
Posts: 1,795
Yamaha MC-9 cartridge, any opinions?

In my stash of phono carts I found a Yamaha MC-9 cart. I have never mounted it (it is used), and my current favorite is a Shure V15vXMR. I have several head amps, so I could easily use the Yamaha.

Has anyone ever used this cart? Opinions? Where does this fall in the Yamaha cartridge line-up?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-11-2010, 01:47 PM
REDone REDone is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,315
Quite high I think, but check on the cartridge database on Vinyl Engine

No personal experience from me here (unfortunately)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-11-2010, 02:58 PM
junkaudio's Avatar
junkaudio junkaudio is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bavaria (germany) home of beer
Posts: 2,283
i used mc 9 (about 100 $ in 1990 ) and mc 11 (70$ ) on a technics sl 1210 mkII with very good results
__________________
Don┤t you boys know any nice songs ?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-11-2010, 03:19 PM
theophile's Avatar
theophile theophile is offline
Pheasant Plucker.
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Posts: 10,235
Whilst I hope that you get an answer to your questions,I also hope that you will try using the cartridge.Please remember that some of the highest regarded cartridges in the world are made in Japan.The Yamaha will sound distinctly different to the Shure.

Have a listen to it,then get-back to us and tell us how the Shure and the Yamaha campare.
__________________
Turntable: Yamaha GT-2000
Cartridge: Soundsmith 'The Voice'
Phono stage: Simaudio Moon LP 5.3
Preamp: Hornshoppe 'The Truth'
Speakers: KRK Expose E8B Active Studio Monitors
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-11-2010, 03:56 PM
lini's Avatar
lini lini is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,184
PT: The MC-9 was the model above the base LOMC model MC-11. Yahama classified it as upper middle class model, which for my taste seemed pretty much spot-on. In fact it was very good for the price and measured pretty well, too. I never had one of these myself, though - but I had an MC-505, which was the successor of the MC-3 and MC-5 and sounded excellent to my ears. It's really a pity these thingies are hardly available anymore. If I knew a NOS source for these, I'd be happy...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
Reply With Quote
Audiokarma
  #6  
Old 03-11-2010, 07:06 PM
the-real-mandak's Avatar
the-real-mandak the-real-mandak is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 3,449
The MC-9 was the 5. out of 6 carts in the line up (they never did low-end carts), MC-1000, MC-3, MC-5, MC-7, MC-9 and MC-11 (the MC-21 is a high output version of the MC-11).

Yamaha did not manufactur the carts themself, this was done by Audio Technica and some of the Yamaha carts are relabled AT carts. So expect an open sound with a good amount of treble.

BTW. The cart can be quite old, the MC-9 was the longest running in the Yamaha lineup. It came with the 2. generation in 1981 and ran until the end of Yamaha carts in 1998.
__________________
Watson CD7501 :-)
Main: Yamaha PX-3; PF-1000; Thorens TD-166MKII; T-85; CDX-993; C-2x; M-85; TDL RTL3II
Computer: Yamaha; TX-900; CDX-870; CX-1000; A100; White Van Speakers and SoundBlaster Live

Last edited by the-real-mandak; 03-11-2010 at 07:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-11-2010, 07:45 PM
lini's Avatar
lini lini is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,184
t-m-r: The 21 had a different enclosure and was a good bit lighter than the 11, though...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-11-2010, 09:07 PM
Nat's Avatar
Nat Nat is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,317
I went through two MC 7s with genuine appreciation -- tidy, neutral sound with good tracking. I suppose a bit more calling attention to itself might have made more of a vivid impression, but that's not what I wanted from it. On the other hand, the one MC 9 I picked up as NOS I never liked -- it just didn't track well, and when it distorted it was pretty noticeable. Now I suspect the damper was dried up, but a decade ago, I wasn't so aware of the effects of aging. But of course, age is an issue for all older cartridges, and so if it sounds good, then you've lucked out.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-12-2010, 03:52 AM
the-real-mandak's Avatar
the-real-mandak the-real-mandak is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 3,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by lini View Post
t-m-r: The 21 had a different enclosure and was a good bit lighter than the 11, though...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
Yes true, but try take a look at the specs. You will find the only difference is the body and output, the body was properly changed to eliminate problems due to the high output.
__________________
Watson CD7501 :-)
Main: Yamaha PX-3; PF-1000; Thorens TD-166MKII; T-85; CDX-993; C-2x; M-85; TDL RTL3II
Computer: Yamaha; TX-900; CDX-870; CX-1000; A100; White Van Speakers and SoundBlaster Live
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-12-2010, 05:08 PM
lini's Avatar
lini lini is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,184
t-m-r: Well, I did look at the specs: Another difference is that the 21s use sendust coil cores like some of the more expensive LOMC models, whereas the 11s use permalloy cores. So, if you'd ask me, I'd rather say that all of the Yamaha MCs are technically related to some degree - whereas I don't see enough specific parallels to call the 21 the high output version of the 11...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
Reply With Quote
Audiokarma
  #11  
Old 03-12-2010, 08:16 PM
the-real-mandak's Avatar
the-real-mandak the-real-mandak is offline
AK Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 3,449
Yes they have to make the high output somehow, but look at all the other data. The 2 carts are the only one's shareing all data execpte output and weight (I even think the price was the same) and then there is the funny thing with the 21 name, why that number and not another one?

But enough about this, the talk was about the MC-9; Phototone let us hear what you think about it.
__________________
Watson CD7501 :-)
Main: Yamaha PX-3; PF-1000; Thorens TD-166MKII; T-85; CDX-993; C-2x; M-85; TDL RTL3II
Computer: Yamaha; TX-900; CDX-870; CX-1000; A100; White Van Speakers and SoundBlaster Live

Last edited by the-real-mandak; 03-12-2010 at 08:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:10 AM.



Friends of Audiokarma
We appreciate your help in keeping this site going.
Black Swamp Audio
Organ Donor Parts
Sonneteer
 
Sound Stage Direct
Parts Connexion
AudioClassics
Atlantic Systems
AV Solutions
Take Five Audio
Tone Arm Audio
Audio Salon
Musical Paradise
Audience AV
Classic Sound Repair
Simply Speakers
McIntosh Cabinets
BD Enterprise
Cabledyne
Howard Products
BOI Audio Works
FM DX Antenna
Amplifiedparts
Siliconray
RSL Speakers
Vinyl Magic Record Cleaner
Salk Sound
Grant Fidelity
Urban Antigue Radio
Yesterday's Audio
Many Moons Audio
DeWick Repairs
The Tube Store
Vintage Electronics Repair
Audio Doctor
Politicalchat.org
MCM Electronics
Antique Radio Classifieds
Herbies Audio Lab
Videokarma.org
   
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ęCopyright 2002-2014 AudioKarma.org, All rights reserved.