Sapphire vs. Ruby Stylus Cantilevers -- What's the SQ diff?

If you look at these JICO replacement stylii for the Shure V15xMR cartridge, you'll see the only difference is the cantilever, with the ruby priced US$200 more expensive than the sapphire.

Sapphire:
VN5xMR neoSAS/S (High Grade), JICO stylus | Online Shopping for Japanese Phonograph Needles »

Ruby:
VN5xMR neoSAS/R (High Grade), JICO stylus | Online Shopping for Japanese Phonograph Needles »

Is there someone who can explain the value of ruby over sapphire in terms of SQ or is it something else?
I'm not opposed to paying a premium for better SQ, but that ruby is now priced about the same as I paid for the cartridge in the first place.

Thanks in advance.

 

No takers?

Surely someone has some idea...it can't just be ruby is prettier or something or more expensive just because. Does it transmit the micro vibrations more efficiently than sapphire, is it more durable or ?

 

Phono Cartridges-shop.mapleshadestore.com »

"Solid ruby/sapphire cantilever: in listening tests this non-conventional material sounded notably better than the hollow boron cantilevers used in most megabuck cartridges."

Is this true? Didn't 'megabuck' cartridge manufacturers choose boron for SQ? And hasn't the move to other materials been the result of boron becoming hard to get and more expensive?

 

I had my Goldring Eroica H MC cartridge re-tipped by The Soundsmith with a nude contact line stylus and ruby cantilever and it sounded great. Beyond that I can't dispense any more info, but perhaps there's something helpful on The Soundsmith's site: Options for Cantilever and Stylus Shapes | Soundsmith »

 

There is no difference but the colour and dimensions. The mtrl properties are the same.

 

I wouldn´t pay too much attention. In the end it depends what we ourselves prefer, and if we really can hear differences. After all the design is much more than the mtrl in the cantilever.

 

Click on the Neo SAS link for the differences between the sapphire and ruby versions...

 

A quote from "Gem Society":

"Scientifically, rubies and sapphires are simply varieties of corundum, a crystalline form of aluminum oxide (Al2O3), with impurities or trace elements such as iron, titanium, or chromium. These impurities are what create the wide range of colors to be found in corundum crystals: grays, browns, yellows, greens, blues, purples, reds, … and pinks."

In short, ruby and sapphire are the same in terms of crystal structure, and the color difference is due solely to trace impurities, i.e - inclusions of other minerals.

Thus, by laws of physics, they must sound the same. Just buy the cheaper version and be done with it.

 

The Dynavector Karet 17 D3 use a diamond cantilever.

 

2. Sapphire/Ruby Cantilever Construction

Two different designs.
Ya gotta pay to play...

The neoSAS/S replaces the boron of the previous generation with crystalline sapphire cantilever. Having a hardness only one degree from that of diamond, the extreme stiffness of sapphire allows the cantilever to transmit vibrations from the record groove without damping the signal. In other words, the cantilever betrays virtually no emphasis, influence, or “coloration” on the original sound source.


Macro photo of sapphire cantilever and tip


Similarly the neoSAS/R enjoys all the benefits listed above with one crucial advantage:
The four facets of its crystalline ruby cantilever taper toward the diamond tip. This tapered ruby cantilever design allows for lower moving mass, giving the neoSAS/R even greater ability reproduce vibrations in the record groove with precision, accuracy, speed, and fidelity.

 

Over the past 7-8 years I've had 5 different retips done by two different retippers (Peter at Soundsmith and Andy at phonocartridgeretipping.com) with 3 different cantilever materials (ruby, boron and sapphire) with 3 different styli and two different methods of mounting/attaching the stylus to the cantilever.

The ruby cantilevers were all done by Peter on Denon 103r's (in ebony and aluminum bodies), while the boron and sapphire went onto Ortofon MC 20 Supers. Both of these cartridges originally featured aluminum cantilevers, the Denon with a high quality conical, and the Ortofons a Fritz Geiger.

For what it's worth (and a lot of this is anecdotal) as the ruby went on the Denons and the boron/sapphire on the Ortofons as I mentioned, my gut feeling is that the ruby seems to offer up a slightly different presentation than the boron or sapphire. I'd describe it as being more of a "front row" presentation vs. something akin to more mid hall with the boron or sapphire. As such, the ruby might actually seem to be a bit more detailed immediately but in long term listening (and I've spent in excess of 1000 hours with all of the above options) I don't think this is actually the case. But because the presentation is different, and more upfront with the ruby cantilevers I've had, I can see where someone might perceive the ruby (at least those I've used) to be more "detailed".

Ultimately, I don't necessarily think there is a "right" or "wrong" here; I think it goes more into an area in which very good cartridges can offer up subjectively different "presentations", some of which may appeal to one group of listeners more than they appeal to another.

FWIW, Peter's ruby cantilever and the sapphire offered by Andy, although both similar in size/diameter, have a very different appearance, so there may well be some significant differences in between the various ruby and sapphire options out there. Peter's ruby, for example seems to be almost translucent, while Andy's sapphire is much less so; by comparison I would say it is pretty much opaque.

Then you also have the issue of stylus profile and the manner in which the stylus is attached to the cantilever. I've had both Peter's standard line contact as well as his top of the line OCL (which I understand is very similar to the Ortofon Replicant which supposedly very strongly resembles the cutter head). Both attached to the stylus in a fairly traditional manner using what I would assume is some type of glue or adhesive.

The boron cantilever I have from Andy features a microridge, also attached with glue or adhesive in the traditional manner, while the sapphire I have from him has a laser drilled/mounted stylus (I see Peter is now offering a sapphire with laser drilled line contact option on his website as well) which appears to have either no adhesive or very little. The result (I think) is very low tip mass; I read a post on another forum in the past few days from someone who took a look at this option from Andy and thought it was quite a bit more impressive than the stock cantilever/stylus on his Ortofon Winfeld which was a $4000 cartridge a few years ago!

From what I can see, there is no laser drilled option on a boron cantilever out there, or at least one that can be sourced currently. Not sure if this is because of the seeming rarity of boron right now or because boron presents some kind of difficulty because of its physical properties in terms of using the laser mounting process.

In any event, after using all 3, my gut feeling is that the sapphire that I have here is closer in "character" to the boron than it is to the ruby. Apart from the front row vs. mid hall presentation that I outlined above I would also say that the boron is the quietest in the groove of the 3 options that I have in use here (making it clear that there may be "other" ruby and sapphire, or even boron cantilevers out there from different suppliers) with the sapphire being closer in that regard to the boron than the ruby. But the ruby is also very quiet and I'd place all of these options well ahead of the aluminum cantilevers that I've used previously on both of these cartridges in that regard.

Based on my latest experience, though, I do think that these new laser mounted styli are very good. A bit of information outside of the original question in the thread, but information that some might find interesting or useful.