Audio-Technica launches new entry-level VM95 cartridge series

Thank you so much for your write up!

 

I’ve also been using the AT-VM95ML (nude micro-line) for about a month now. It’s difficult for me to compare it with many other cartridges, since the Lyra Dorian (MC micro-ridge Lyra Dorian phono cartridge (English) ) I was using broke many years ago and I’ve made huge improvements to the pre-amp (and also now to the arm) since then. So I can only compare it directly with the AT95EX (bonded elliptical) I was using until recently as a stop gap. It’s running on a NA Hyperspace TT with a Hadcock GH242 arm.

I’d say that, with the original AT95EX, the deck sounded overall about as satisfying as my Rega DAC. With the new ML though, it’s leagues ahead, and so it should be given the price difference of those sources. At an obvious level, I agree that it tracks superbly and, in contrast to the Lyra, it does not emphasise surface noise (usually due to static charge on rock records which I can of course wet clean). This is important to me as the vast majority of my vinyl collection is second hand. That may just be because I’ve now optimised the load resistance and capacitance of the MM stage (100kOhm with no added capacitance). I certainly cannot easily tell if the cartridge is at the beginning or at the end of a record without looking. I think it’s just as musical as the AT95EX in that bass lines are tight and they do not swamp other frequencies. In fact, different instruments can be followed independently of each other, even when the mix is quite complex. Despite this greatly detailed sound I now hear, it is not in anyway clinical / mechanical (whatever the correct term may be). There is also sound-stage depth and width, though I think there are more important qualities to enjoy, so I’m not going to comment on those. One of the things I missed as my system improved was that raw excitement I used to get; it had become too sophisticated. But this cartridge will do equally well both with the monumentally raw (Pinball Wizard is on at the moment) as well as with the subtly overwhelming (e.g. a JS Bach cantata).

I doubt I’ll be changing to a different cartridge as I’m very satisfied. It’s a gem and I don’t think MCs have anything significantly better to offer (other than being easier to set up in terms of loading). I’m also pleased that it’s near to indestructible compared to the Lyra, whose boron rod cantilever, coming out as it did, was just asking to be bent to a great angle. And it succeeded inexorably.

 

Hi

A nice simple question for all you audiophile boys and girls.
I have a Thorens td 240-2.
This uses the old AT95 series of styli, I would like to try one of the new VM95 line.
Will this work with the current headshell that I have or do I have to change the headshell so that the new stylus will fit ?
I'm more of a snap on / snap off kind of chap.

Thanks

 

The cartridge is mounted to a headshell and the stylus snaps on and off of the cartridge. You can change out the stylus, but you'll need a stylus that works with the classic AT95 body.

If you want to try the new VM95, you'll need to mount and align it to a new heashell or buy one that is already aligned and mounted.

 

I read that the new VM stylus fits on the classic 95E body, but don't quote me.

 

It might. Doesn't look like it would.

 

I have now had my AT-VM 95C for 3 weeks. It performs very well for an entry level cartridge, tracks very well on the Pioneer PL 518 I use it with. Only shortcoming would be I want a bit more detail when playing LP discs, so a E stylus will be bought soon. I may consider a ML stylus at some point. It's overall a lot of cartridge for not a lot of money. Very competent. As good as the old AT 95E, the elliptical stylus I hope to have soon will add detail.

 

The $64,000 question.

 

Either stylus will fit either body (they just look odd). I know this because I've just tried it. This really isn't the way to go though (and please don’t ask me how they compare as I don’t want to try further ... I'm just saying they fit and nothing more!). Also, the dimensions of both cartridges are exactly the same. My head shell doesn't have slots to mount the cartridge. It has just holes, and so I have to adjust the arm length to change the tracking angle. Both cartridges fit without having to adjust the arm length.

 

I have no personal experience but people on Vinyl Engine say that VM540ML is brighter sounding.

 

My limited comparison is between two years of using an AT-91 (cheaper cart than the old AT-95, but I would assume very similar stylus to the conical of the new VM95C) and about an hour of listening to the MV95EN. Brand new, the new EN stylus clearly gave more detail than I have heard from the AT-91. This is not an apples to apples comparison for a few reasons, but I would imagine the E stylus has to move you in the direction you want to go. And if you're still not quite there, you can try one of the more expensive options until you are happy. I am thrilled they have made this so easy without going to aftermarket styli.

 

How would you describe the sound of the VM95EN? Bright? Mellow? Neutral?

 

I need a lot more break-in before I would evaluate that, but I will be sure to report back once I have a chance to get it there (hopefully I will be able to get a lot of time in next week). Out of the box, what I can tell you is it sounds like it needs break-in. Bass is clean and articulated, but not very full sounding, which I would expect to change with break-in.

 

Not a great believer in this break in nonsense, a good cartridge should sound good right away.

 

You really don't think a mechanical part will loosen up or settle into place with use? OK. I think it's pretty broadly accepted that cartridges break in. Break-in or not, I still think I need more than one hour of listening to form a useful impression.

 

As good as what MC cartridge? Maybe a budget one.

 

Ya, "break in" is when it sounds good, then it sounds great.

 

The point I’m attempting to make is there was once a time (say in the late 1990s or perhaps earlier / later) when, I believe if you wanted decent sound quality from a turntable, you absolutely had to use a MC cartridge. I no longer think this is true. Plus the micro-line stylus most probably came to the MC sooner than it did to the MM.

MM cartridges also make much more sense in that they require a less than ridiculous amount of gain in the pre-amp stage. They fall down in their sensitivity to loading, which “less exotic” MM pre-amp stages rarely address. Let’s hope that changes.

Given a free choice between my original Lyra Dorian MC (£700) and the AT-VM95ML MM (£150), I would choose the AT. This is mainly because the Dorian loved to emphasize surface noise which the AT, when correctly loaded, minimises. I explained earlier how I chose to load it. But OK, the Dorian was perhaps better in other respects, it’s just that I no longer remember them, but that was ten years ago.

This is just my personal opinion and you are welcome to disagree. But please be a bit less bombastic, instead more considered and constructive, if you choose to do so.

Thank you.

 

I'm not being bombastic. Used an old AT95 for ages. Upgraded to goldring 1042 - that was the best MM I have owned but it was under £100 at the time. Price is now in MC territory! I am using an AT33SA and that does not emphasise surface noise. In fact a lot less surface noise than ATs with elliptical styli, so would suggest that AT ML and Shibata tips are good with surface noise whether MM or MC. My point is an AT MC at around £500 will be superior to any version of an AT95. Seems the Lyra did not perform as expected and I believe they are tipped up in the treble.

 

If you think the prices of Goldring cartridges in the UK are bad you should look at U.S. prices. Retail here on the 1042 is $675.

With any cart, there are trade offs. The biggest tradeoff with MC is that you need to jack up gain or use a step up device, which will cause your S/N ratio to drop. There is no getting around that. Better pre-amplification and step up devices will reduce the noise but they can't eliminate it. Some folks feel this tradeoff is worth it due to MC performance advantages in other areas.

RE: the ATVM95ML, the main disadvantage I see is the just okay stereo separation spec. Some people might not mind it but when you start listening to cartridges with 30db or more of stereo separation it can be difficult to go backwards. I like that AT is offering a mid-compliance cartridge with the ML tip. I wish they'd offer more cartridges like this.

 

Some thoughts on your comments re MC. Noise may well be an issue with valves and SUT for MC but a solid state active MC stage can be very quiet. Even rather cheap ones such as Musical Fidelity. The V90 LPS is actually quieter to my much more expensive and better sounding NVA. In practice a little extra hiss is not noticeable when playing music and a I can detect no audible effect. Of course MM stages are usually cheaper and amplifiers rarely have a built in (free) MM stage though a little more common of late.

 

I just use a High-Output MC cart, and don't worry about an MC pre-amp...

 

In practice people might not notice the increased noise as long as the S/N ratio remains above 50-55db. That said, all you have to do is look at manufacturers' specs and see that on solid state MM/MC compatible phono stages (that work with gain switches) , many of them have a drop in S/N as you jack up the gain settings.

 

Frankly quoted specs often mean nothing and you should go by listening. Buy a phono stage that will cope well with very low output cartridges. Some stages are stretching themselves with higher gain settings due to poor design.

 

Specs help narrow the field, listening narrows things down further. If I wanted to run LOMC, I would do just what you said in the second sentence. I would buy an MC-oriented phono stage, possibly one that can only run MC carts. As it stands I am committed to using high output MM/MI cartridges for the time being. It's not a decision I came to by accident either.