VM95ML Pre-Purchase Queries

This is all I know concerning the S shaped tonearm that is on the table:

A bi-directional servo mass arm and more specifically, according to Vinyl Engine:

Tonearm: static balance type with electronic damping mechanism

Effective length: 244mm

Overhang: 14mm

Stylus force range: 0 to 3g

Cartridge weight range: 4 to 15g (straight arm) 11 to 20g (s-shaped arm)

The cartridge loading is preset at 47K ohms with 150pF of capacitance.

 

The servo damping will help with the higher compliance of the 540ML, if you choose to run that cart. 150pf isn't horrible but little high. I would use the lowest capacitance cabling you can from the back of the turntable into the pre-amp input. If the cables are hardwired, not much you can do about it. Odds are they are fairly low capacitance from the factory. If you wanted to know for sure you can measure from the headshell socket to the male RCA connector using a capacitance meter.

 

Here are "pro" measurements of the SH and ML variant of the VM95. As you can see the difference between them is small, with the ML being more accurate. SH on the top and ML on the bottom graph.

People in YT land often get caught up in hype, listen with eyes not ears, carts not loaded or set up properly, don't know the history of the records, then everything gets destroyed by YT audio compression anyway.

SHIBATA



MICROLINE

 

The only 'break in' I noticed is the suspension, which like most carts will loosen up after time.
I was happy with it right off the bat.

 

You referring to the cart in my original query, C, the VM ML?

 

(VM95ML) :
The channel separation opens up, becomes greater, more separation, after 20 hours or so.
When you get your cart you will be in position to verify this. Play and record a record with high channel separation - then after 20 hours or so do it again with the same record.
It'll track and sound great from right out of the box, but after about 20 hours it gets where it should be, even better.

 

Thanks very much, John; I'll track the cart/stylus at 2 grams and wait for about 20 hours for break-in before I begin my recording sessions (which answered my questions in this thread).

Thanks again!

 

I was
As stated above you can give it a test right off and do a comparison later and see if you hear a difference! I couldn't detect any.
Enjoy, she's a beauty

 

I don’t know about break in period honestly I thought it sounds amazing right from the first drop.

I do have the 95ML and the 95SH, and I prefer the SH just because I favor a more laid back sound. That’s not to say the ML is bright. The SH is just smooth as butter to my ears. I almost want to say it’s my perfect cartridge.

 

Thanks brother!

I'll check back into this thread once I order her and get her screwed onto my 'table (that didn't sound that "clean"...but you know what I mean ); will ask any additional questions concerning setup.

 

Thanks aphex; I'll do a bit of listening, I suppose, once she's on the deck and then see if anything improves after a few hours or so, to split the difference in terms of opinions/suggestions here.

 

Hello fella just read your post with some interest as, most owners/user's tend to lean towards the ML as being the better stylus.
When I was choosing my own VM95 I went for the SH as it was my 3rd shibata tip & like you said,from the 1st drop it's great ,for it's price in fact Outstanding.
I only bought one as a backup cart but if it was being used I would've bought the ML too for a nice comparison,can you state how the VM95ML compares to the VM540ML which is on your profile?

Cheers
-evo777

 

I haven’t used my VM540ML since I got the VM95ML. As explained by @patient_ot the VM540 wants a lighter tonearm, my Technics tonearm is kind of borderline medium. So until I stop being lazy and install my fluid damper, I won’t listen to it again.

But i will make a comparison for what it would currently sound like compared to the VM95ML.

the 540 was my first line contact, I skipped over the cheaper option (Vm95ml) because I assumed it would be better off the bat. It brought so much detail from the same records I was listening to for years! Some of them were like a whole new experience. Detailed, dynamic, there’s was also this airy quality. It was mind blowing. But after the honeymoon period, and I was used to the sound, I wondered where all the low end went. I found myself having to turn the bass knob up a notch or 2 to get that oomph I was looking for. Shortly after that I saw @patient_ot explanation for compliance and it clicked with me. So I bought the VM95ML since it was more suited to my tonearm. It is definitely more well rounded. It could possibly be missing some of the depth of the 540 when it comes to certain elements, but that would require an a/b comparison. All I know is the low end came back and I still had that amazing detail. Sorry if that’s not the description you were hoping for, I’m terrible at explaining what I hear. I can just say what I like. I can tell you the VM95 series is extraordinary. I own the C/E as well and they’re awesome.
When I get my fluid damper installed I’ll compare and share the results with the 540.

 

I've got an AT-LP120XUSB.

I liked the E that came with it, but the vm95ml I've now got is just wonderful.

 

After you get your new damper installed makes sure capacitance is as low as you can practically get it with the phono preamp and cabling out the back of the TT.

 

Curious about this cartridge, both the VM95ML and the SH. How do they compare against the Ortofon 2M Blue? TT right now is the Uturn Orbit, Acrylic platter, Moon 110LPv2 phono.

 

I Actually find the VM95SH a better listen than the OC9ML II MC in the Technics arm. Maybe it's because the later has many hours on it or that I find Shibata tips produce more bass than ML. The 95 is in a heavier Ortofon headshell while the OC9 currently on stock 1200G Technics headshell.

 

I've listened to 2M Blues for several hours on various decks, Pro-jects and a Technics at least, haven't done a direct comparison, but I've always found the Blue nothing special, I never felt it was better than my OM10, I find the VM95ML brilliant, only my opinion, but I think the AT rivals the 2M Bronze which I really like and which costs a lot more money.

 

Thank you. I like the 2MBlue enough, but haven't had enough experience to compare it to anything else directly. I would spend much more in any event give the lower end of my TT, but my phono is decent. So the 95ML might be a great upgrade in the near future when it's needed.

 

I also have a 2m red and 2m blue. The red s good for what it is at it’s price I think. The blue is definitely an upgrade, but it it’s price you can do WAY better. I bought because it was dirt cheap in the for sale section here. And I’m in the currently in the discovery stage of cartridges, I want to try everything. I think I have all the carts I have currently, and so far my favorite is the VM95SH.

 

Thank you for the reply.

-evo777

 

I stumbled across this and wanted to know if anyone had any thoughts about it:

The Mighty AT95E Becomes The AT-VM95E -

Unless I'm reading it wrong, the following section details the author's utter distain for the VM95ML (and the SH):

Then there is the "E" version. It offers nothing over the "conical" stylus except less splashy cymbals. In fact, the conical stylus has better stereo separation and depth.

How about the "EN" version? Hmmmm. Very good. But see the bottom paragraph concerning stylus life and value.

Micro Line* you ask? Mega **** is more like it.

AT-VM95SH Shibata? I already used the poop word above and was thinking this one is just plain $H1T. How about IWMDMB; for I Want My Damn Money Back? This stylus profile has a little more detail than the Micro Line and the stereo separation is wider than the conical. The music just falls apart though.

Why would he call the MicroLine "mega ****" when it's so highly praised here and elsewhere?

 

The guy is using a Linn Naim system and not a great spec LP 12 at that, but I will resist the temptation to denigrate his judgement based on that alone, all I can tell you is that I thought the previous low end AT 95s were cheap and horrible, the closest I got to a higher end one was a Linn K9 which actually worked rather well on my Ariston RD90/Alphason Delta, not the best cart in the world, but pretty good. Twenty Five years later and I stumbled on the new VMs because I fitted an E on a Rega for my nephew, now I've been an Ortofon MM guy for nearly 40 years, but for it's price the VM95E beats a 2M Red or an OM5 hands down, I then fitted a VM95ML on a Technics for my niece, I was seriously impressed so much so I bought one and replaced an Ortofon MC 3000 with it on a Roksan Xerxes 10/Artemiz. I've owned and used pretty much every Ortofon MM from the last forty years, I've also used many Shures, Regas, Pickerings/Stantons, Nagoakas and some older Goldrings although not the 1042, taking it's price into account the VM95ML is hands down the best MM cart I've owned, the 2M Bronze and Black are likely better for a lot more money and there may be other more expensive rivals including higher end ATs, but I genuinely believe that the only cart under £200 that may even come close is the VM95SH. I was discussing the ML with another forum member and he suggested that it will likely go down as a classic component, I think he's correct, AT have produced a genuinely great cart at an untouchable price, sure it may no be at it's best on certain decks, through certain phono stages or if badly set up, which is actually hard to do, that's fair comment, but for some one to call it s*** totally undermines any credibility they may have had, the fact there is more praise for the ML on here than any other component I can think of with the possible exception of Rega and Technics decks drives home the point that this reviewer is plain wrong.

 

Well everyone has an opinion I guess. I only comment on things I’ve used or heard, and I absolutely love the VM line. The ML and SH I think are outstanding. I think they sound so much better than the cost.

 

Drunk?