P-Mount Cartridges

If I could find a cross over between the brilliant AT 92 E and Nagaoka MP-110, with the punchy bass and sobriety of the 92 cart and timbre and micro details of the MP-110. Then I would be in cart heaven. Maybe a JICO SAS stylus is the road to sonic bliss. The 92E drives eights around the 95 IMO.

 

Is this the shibata stylus for AT92E? ATS8008 Type Shibata Stylus for Audio-Technica AT8008 - our Needle 213-Dshibata »

 

LP Gear ATN3472SA

LP Gear ATN3472SA stylus »

...or, if you wanted to get crazy with it, you could have a lower cost elliptical or conical retipped by SoundSmith, Expert Stylus, etc.

 

This should fit the AT92E. This appears to not be identical to the ATS8008, but could be a good replacement.

 

Thank you. Good to know. The numbering system for AT cartridges and replacement styli is very confusing.

 

Thank you so much.

 

Yes it is. Actually, scroll down a bit and that model is listed in the description section. Just a few weeks ago, LP Gear was selling the cartridge with the Shibata stylus for around $140. Recently they jacked the price up to $219. I am kicking myself right in the family jewels for not picking it up when it was at the lower price. However, regardless of how great the stylus shape is, if it does not conform to T4P spec it is useless. You would be surprised how many Pmount cartridges + aftermarket replacement styli do not conform to T4P spec. I am speaking specifically about the required 20mm span from the back of the cartridge to the center of the diamond. I am tempted to email Lp Gear with that exact question but they have been inconsistent returning emails - even with simple requests.

 

Thanks, and wow another set of variables to factor in on the road to audio nirvana. ~200 USD is quite expensive for an aftermarket stylus that may or may not conform to the T4P specification.

For that kind of money there are plenty of options. A NOS Ortofon Super OM 30 or 40, or a 2M Blue. William Thakker sells a shibata stylus for the AT-95 for 170 €.

 

Yeah, be careful with styli that are not OEM. There is a great thread over at another forum and people are posting measurements of Pmount carts + Styli and some conform and some do not. Not just the length of the cantilever, but the weight (of the cartridge) and angle of the cantilever as well. For example, the Jico SAS for the Technics P23, P24, P28 etc. cartridge is 1mm forward as compared to the OEM.

 

Could you please post a link to the thread, or PM me the link?

Maybe this is a stupid question. Obviously conforming to specifications is important if you own a P-mounted turn table, but what difference does not conforming to T4P spec's make, if you own a regular SME-mounted table?

 

For mounting in a tonearm/headshell with all the normal adjustments deviations from the T4P spec make no difference at all!

 

I bought a Shure M92E with the intention of upgrading the stylus with a Jico/SAS. When I inquired with Jico, they told me they do make an SAS stylus for that cart but they don't recommend using it on a linear tracking tonearm. Is that true with all Jico/SAS p-mount styli?

 

I've used a Jico SAS with a Technics P22 cartridge on my SL-QL1 with brilliant results. I can't see a reason why an SAS on an M92 would be any different, TBH . . .

 

I recently purchased an Audio Technica AT90 with no stylus from eBay for $5! There are lots of stylusless p-mount carts on ebay to be found. Add your choice of stylus for an instant upgrade. My new backup has an elliptical which was a big upgrade from the conical it came with and it sounds just fine.

 

Here is the latest response I've received from JICO:

Due to the characteristics of the material and limitations on manufacturing, all the cantilevers for our neoSAS products are of fixed length.


This means they do not conform to the T4P standard. Specifically, the distance from the neoSAS stylus tip to the point at which the P mount cartridge is mated to the tonearm is longer than the 20 mm allowed by the strict tolerance of the T4P standard. Generally speaking, the neoSAS cantilevers are too long. In a system in which the cartridge cannot be aligned (as with nearly all linear tracking turntables), the result is permanent overhang which can cause tracking errors and especially undesired inner groove distortion.


Of course the neoSAS styli that are intended to be used with P mount cartridges can be fitted to them. If the cartridge is used with a 1/2” mount adapter and mounted on a tangential arm, the cartridge can usually be aligned as with any other. If a neoSAS is installed on a P mount cartridge that is mounted directly to a compatible tonearm which does not allow for alignment adjustment, but that tonearm is tangential the overhang and IGD may be less of an issue (though still not recommended) due to the trigonometry involved.


However, on a linear tracking tonearm which is designed to eliminate the alignment compromises imposed by the trigonometry inherent in a tangential tonearm, the stylus, cartridge and arm must all conform to the strict dimensional tolerances of the T4P standard. If not, tracking error is certain to occur.


Therefor I would not recommend a neoSAS stylus to anyone using such a system. If you’re going to invest in a neoSAS, it might as well be used in a system which allows for optimum performance. Anything less is rather a waste of your investment, as I’m sure you’d agree.

 

Yup. I've read this elsewhere. When I got an aftermarket replacement stylus for my T4P the first thing I did was get the microscope out and compare the dimensions against the OEM Audio Technica part. In my case the Pfansteihl hypereliptical looked to be the same, but it sounds like the neoSAS would not be. Important detail!!

 

Why would Jico produce a non-T4P compliant stylus for a T4P cartridge?

 

And this....is really pissing me off

I sent an inquiry to Jico today about the same thing and received the same information that @Lymbo posted above. They offer direct replacements for styli that are only mated to a Pmount/T4P cartridge. All along knowing they are not compatible.

This is just plain wrong on Jico's part. That information (not compliant with T4P) should be splashed all over their website as an alert. They know damn well that the SAS is constantly suggested and recommended for Pmount carts, all over the internet, on the various forums. And these things are not cheap.

But here is the rub.....

I own the (original pre NEO) SAS for the Shure M92E- boron cantilever. It sounds flippin' fantastic. It tracks everything - there is not a hint of any mistracking at all. I measured the distance from the back of the cart to the tip of the stylus and it is 20MM which is T4P compliant. I don't know if the angle differs from OEM, but visually it looks the same. So what is going on here?

By way of comparison, many people have reported that the SAS for Technics P23, P24, P28 etc. cartridges are 1MM forward as compared to OEM i.e. not T4p compliant.

AND - this is not limited to JUST the SAS. I ordered 4 ellipticals direct from Jico Japan for the aforementioned Technics PXX line and they measure 23MM from the back of the cart to the stylus tip - way off!!!

I have been saying this for years. When dealing with aftermarket styli for Pmount - "compatibility" simply means it will plug into the cartridge and play records. As far as T4P compliance? All bets are off.........................

 

T4p mount is an obsolete system. Replacement market the new production left, and it's 6 grams mass, 1.25 gram tracking force to be strictly compliant. Aftermarket is "Close enough engineering" enough to play records, not exactly correct. T4p mount didn't allow enough leeway for real world needs often. Get an Audio-Technica AT 92e and be done with it.

 

What you say is indeed correct (although I would dispute the At92E comment) and I think we all realize that. NOS supply is drying up and even what is left is sometimes in compromised condition (skewed cantilevers, stiffened suspension etc.) The lack of a fully adjustable arm makes it impossible to compensate for any deviation from the T4P standard (again, to your point.) This makes it difficult/tricky to "upgrade" current production to a better quality aftermarket stylus.

"Close enough" to me is perhaps a cantilever that is at a slightly different angle that may not even be audible. "Close enough" is a cartridge/stylus combo that weights 5.5 grams when many linear trackers offer VTF adjustments or the user can use blu tack on the arm. However, cantilevers 1 to up to 3 MM too long - you do not even stand a chance in a T4p system - that thing will mistrack to all hell. Vendors like Jico have to know this, yet they market their SAS as direct, esoteric AND expensive replacements for select T4p only cartridges. That is what is sticking in my craw in a big way.

Ok - rant over.

 

And I agree with what you have to say johnny q! I disliked the T4p concept when new, especially outside of the linear tracking models. Jico needs to get their T4p compliance house in order so those users aren't left out in the cold (the current T4p situation is little better than when Bang & Olufsen discontinued support for their proprietary cartridge/arm system)

 

Amen brother

I am now on a mad tear to measure the cantilever length on all my Pmount cart/Styli combos. Right now, I can tell you that the LP Gear Vs with Shibata is a compliant 20MM from back of cart to stylus tip as is the Ortofon OMP10 and Shure M92e. Wanna laugh? The M92E with the SAS (boron cantlilever) measures a compliant 20MM!! Color me confused

WAY the hell off are the hyperelliptical styli from either Jico Japan or Turntableneedles for the Technics PXX line of carts (e.g. P23, 24, 28 etc.) These measure 21MM to 23MM! No wonder they sound like crap.

 

Another incompatibility is tracking force. I have an LP Gear replacement elliptical stylus that I purchased, LPGear's site says it is for the Pickering TL-2 cart that I have. From appearance under a microscope it looks like the dimensions are fine comparing to the OEM D74S I have for my Stanton L737-E- (same body as the TL-2). However, when I play back the LP Gear stylus at 1.25G tracking force the sibilance distortion is unlistenable. It sounds absolutely terrible. On my Realistic turntable where I have the Stanton L737-E- mounted with an adapter if I crank the tracking force to 2.25G it sounds wonderful. Very little distortion and crisp clear sound. The ability for the stylus to track at 1.25G is another aspect of the P-mount system that is important to meet for stylus manufacturers.

At the time of this writing that LP Gear stylus is pictured in my avatar and it sounds very very nice indeed on a standard mount turntable.

 

I had the exact same issue with LP Gear styli, in particular a VividLine styli for the Stanton/Pickering carts - similar to yours. I emailed them asking for tracking force ranges and what is considered optimum and it was out of T4P range. I don't have the specifics handy, but the best I could do is track it towards the bottom point of the range. Sibilance out the wazoo.

I even had issues with OEM Pmount Stanton cartridges, particularly the latter day ones and specifically the L720EE (D71EE stylus) which is (I believe) the last Pmount they ever made. I believe strongly that it is utter BS this tracks optimally at 1.25 because the sibilance was beyond an occasional nuisance - it made most records unlistenable. I added some blu-tack to the tonearm and added enough weight that forced it to track a bit higher, roughly 2.0 and all tracking issues disappeared. So yeah - buyer beware indeed.

 

I like the P Mount standard enough that I would not shy away from using it. The information on the other website is useful, however. 20MM overhang is critical, especially for linear tracking. I'm sure Jico simply rationalizes supplying noncompliant P Mount styli since many people will still use P Mount carts with adapters on conventional arms--either way, I don't believe this is the full story. If they can't get a sapphire cantilevered stylus together that will comply with the 20MM spec, then they are lacking in talent and/or ability. It's probably most likely that they ran the numbers and figured that they didn't sell enough P Mount compliant styli to justify the cost--however, unless they ask their customers specifically what application they are using the stylus for, how would they have accurate numbers for which styli they sell are actually being used in T4P compliant decks?

In any event, I've had to put up with Jico not making SAS for my favorite cartridges, Pickering and Stanton, for years. I finally made my own Pickering moving magnet SAS stylus by inserting the cantilever from a Shure M97xE SAS into the broken open cantilever tube of a Pickering D3000 and it sounds phenomenal, even on my P Mount deck.

Back to the OP:

Have you tried an Ortofon P Mount? Ortofon quit offering them a couple years back, but they can still be found online. I think the microdetails you hear from you MP-110 are much due in part to the moving iron (really "Moving Permalloy," hence "MP"). Ortofon describes their own cartridges these days as 2M for "Moving Magnet," but they are no different than their old "Variable Magnetic Shunt" VMS cartridges, which are in essence "moving iron" or "induced magnet."

You ought to be able to find a used or, perhaps, even a new Ortofon OMP or OMB cartridge. If you want to upgrade, the styli from the OM Super line will fit all the way up to STY 40, which is a Fritz Gyger.

Or, you might be able to find an Ortofon 320U, 310U or 305U. These are the same generators, just in a different style body. The 320U is a bonded fine line and can still be found if you look hard enough (I think--it's been a while since I searched for one).