Audio Technica's new VM cartridge series

Shibata is a linear contact which gets more blunt as it wears, unlike the Microcline which maintain their narrow profile for a long life.

 

The VMN 40 ML is a microline stylus but it is not a boron cantilever.

 

Right, I rounded up.

 

Right, that's on the 740ML and 540ML cartridges. Their standard MM microline hasn't had a boron cantilever in a long time, going back to the 440ML.

I think @VinylSoul is referring to the 150MLX, which IIRC had a boron cantilever.

 

Shibata is really it's own thing, as is Microline. I think people online tend to throw around certain terms and generecize them, but the reality is many of these shapes are patented and refer to a specific geometric profile. The microline has a peak at the tip of the profile which the Shibata and many other designs do not.

If the Microline is set up right it should wear evenly, but eventually you will wear off that peak. Worse case it wears unevenly or chips - only a microscope at high power can confirm this though.

 

How much are the replacement Styli for the top line MM looked at LP gear could not find?

 

Yes, I suppose line contact is a more accurate term for the Shibata than microline.

 

Looks like $529 for a VMN760SLC stylus.

https://www.amazon.com/Audio-Technica-VMN60SLC-Special-Contact-Stylus/dp/B01M6ZUWNP

 

If Microline is a more advanced stylus, why is it cheaper than the VMN750SH and the 760SLC?

 

I was always impressed with the value AT offered with their cartridges. I could never understand why they completely discontinued the ML140-150-170-180 I can understand the beryllium and boron tube but the ML 140 had an aluminum cantilever. I am happy to have new examples of the ML150- ML170occ and replacement Styli. It's not like they were limited production or anything just seems no one paid attention to them. It's sad Because they were excellent reasonably priced and the only really new designs from AT. The Styli are not interchangeable with any other AT cartridges.

 

That's something that's always been a mystery to me. Other companies do the same thing. Ortofon charges more for the 2M Black Stylus (Shibata) vs. the technically superior OM40 Stylus (FG70).

I think "Shibata" or "Special Line Contact" sounds more exotic from a marketing perspective than "Microline". It could also be that AT's supplier for those diamonds simply charges more for those shapes than the Microline. The vast majority of cartridge manufacturers are not mounting loose diamonds on the end of cantilever at their factory. They get the diamond and cantilever pre-mounted from a large supplier like FG or Namiki.

I tried to get more details on the SLC from AT but didn't get a response.

 

Hey, they said it was "Special", what more do you want ? That alone has to be worth another $350 --- do you know how much manpower the marketing department put into coming up with that?

 

I believe the Shibata sound better and don't compromise on bass as ML do. They are different profiles and not just marketing as you put it. ML are an in house design (type of line contact) but don't think AT could cut the diamonds. Shibata are obviously more expensive to purchase from outside source. I have a 33SA still in it's box so will be able to comment more when I get round to fitting it.

 

AT most likely get their ML diamonds from Namiki. What sounds better is a matter of opinion. If you like Shibata better, that's fine. All stylus designs have pros and cons IMHO.

As far as bass performance, that is something that can be measured, provided you have the same cartridge body, same loading, and the styli are identical (including magnet strength for MM carts) save for the cut of the diamond.

 

How would you compare them?

 

Does that apply for other manufacturers as well? I mean, would a AT ML have less bass than a 2M Black shibata?

 

Please do let us know how you like the 33Sa, especially compared to a ML

 

Very interesting. I assume that you mean records pressed in the 1950s and up to the mid 1960s have a different groove profile than the same records repressed later.

I use (among others) a 440Mlb and 103 and I enjoy them although they do sound different. The AT is very clean and clear all the way through the record but the 103 does have a bit of IGD.

 

I can only comment on AT cartridges. So far I can be confident that an elliptical will do better bass (AT actually mention this in their online catalogue in their descriptions for the At33EV and 33PTG.) ML have a more extended treble. I wasn't aware the 3M Black was a Shibata? People do complain about it being too forensic.

 

Forensic ?

 

Maybe this will help:

 

The review linked above tests the VM540ML and finds out its not flat, higher frequencies up 8kHz are louder, while it is flatter than the 440MLa and less sensitive to capacitance:

"This first figure is the most significant for the VM540ML reflecting an improvement over the predecessor AT440MLa. The AT440MLa had a rising high end starting at 2kHz and culmination in a 6dB peak above 10kHz. You only got that result if you terminated it at the low side of the recommended capacitive 100pf which is impossible to achieve unless your preamp allowed you to change the input capacitance. With a typical 250pf load, the peak became larger to about 15kHz when it started to roll off. The LRC resonance frequency was moving into the passband.

Without external equalization this resulted in a bright cartridge. Some say the AT440MLa burns in with use and becomes less bright. It is the other way around. The user gets accustomed to the high-end push.

Audio-Technica can do flat when it wants to. Stereo Review reported that the ML170 (Stereo Review June 1989) produced “one of the flattest frequency responses we have seen” at +/-0.5dB 40Hz – 20kHz using the same CBS STR100 we use. But for some reason, achieving a textbook flat response is not always the goal for Audio-Technica. In the 80’s, the company had similar priced cartridges to the ML170 with a frequency response like the AT440MLa (the model was an Audio-Technica Signet brand MR5.0ML) tested by Stereo Review January 1988. That is within a year and a half of the ML170 test, where the same CBS STR 100 LP was used for both tests. Pricing of the cartridges was similar. The ML170 was $345.00 in 1989.The VM540ML is flatter than the AT440MLb and it can do it with the 250pf loading which is typical of the combination of the cable and preamp capacitance. ML170 level flatness unfortunately is not achieved.

For the left-channel-only groove or right-channel-only groove, the frequency response fits in a strip +0.9dB/-0.4dB from 40Hz – 6kHz with excellent matching between channels to 8kHz. Below 40Hz arm – cartridge resonance effects can enter the measurement for any cartridge. The cartridge then starts to work its way up starting at 8kHz when it is +2dB for both channels. The left channel finally moves up +4.3dB at 12kHz dropping back to -0.5dB at 20kHz. The right +2.6dB at 14kHz dropping back to -1.5dB at 20kHz. Note it is only the 7kHz – 14kHz octave that is problematic. The mismatch above 8kHz in the frequency response and channel separation may be manufacturing tolerance but it could also be that the mono (lateral) response differs from left only and right only".

 

Happy VM750SH owner here. It rides on my SL-1210GR, and does a great job. It did a great job on my vintage Kenwood KD-2070, too. About as easy to set up as my Shure V15 Type III, and only slightly more difficult than an Ortofon 2M Red. Tracks well, no distortion to my ears, and produces a nice signature with good highs, smooth mids, and enough weight in the low-end to make me turn my sub down. What a bargain for a Shibata stylus!

 

Glad to know it mates well with the GR. I want to get one of those when I can, probably looking at 2019 at this point.

Right now I'm running an old JVC as my main table and was concerned that the 740ML and 740SH might be too high compliance for the tonearm mass (21g). I ended up getting a Goldring 1042 as my last cart instead. I'll probably try one of these ATs at some point once I get the new turntable.

 

Do any current carts use a boron cantilever?