conical vs. elliptical stylus...

[jdm56]

I just replaced a twenty-plus year old Sony PS-LX510 tangential-tracking turntable with a new Technics SL-BD20D (belt-drive / pivoted arm). --yeah, I know - old junk to new junk-- My question is this: The new table came with a VERY cheap Audio-Technica cartridge installed. I think they are like, $20 retail. It has a conical stylus. I still have the cartridge I had used on the Sony table, a better (but still cheap -about $60) A-T cartridge with an elliptical stylus. I am thinking the new turntable/cartridge set-up doesn't sound nearly as good as the older cartridge on the same table. So, do I need a better cartridge, and do I need to make sure it has an elliptical stylus? Or does it not matter about stylus shape? Also, could my 20+ year old cartridge (w/ original stylus) still be OK? It hasn't been used much really, since the mid eighties.

Thanks

[dragonfyr]

For 33rpm 'modern/contemporary' recordings I would use only an eleptical stylus, and ideally one of the microline variants.

[Ray Garrison]

Are you saying that the older cartridge itself is on the order of 20 years old? If so, and if you've used it on any sort of regular basis, it is bound to be significantly worn. Diamond is hard, and vinyl is soft, but the stylus will eventually begin to wear over time, resulting in an increase in distortion, a reduction in the ability of the cartridge to properly track, and an increase in wear to the records you are playing.

Stylus shape - a conical (aka spherical) stylus will not track high frequencies as well as other shapes, and the contact patch with the grove walls (area where the diamond actually touches the vinyl) will be smaller than with other shapes, resulting in faster record wear. Advantages - since the stylus radii are the same in every direction, alignment of the cartridge in the arm is of much lower importance than with other shapes.

Elliptical - reduced radius along contact patch provides better high frequency tracking, lower distortion, larger contact patch and reduced wear. However, it is more important that the alignment is done properly, as a mis-oriented elliptical will not have the proper alignment in the grove, and you will get phase variences between channels (not too big a deal) and you won't be getting the full advantage of the stylus shape.

More exotic shapes (Shibata, micro-line, etc.) - most "high end" cartridges have a complex shape, with the portion of the stylus that actually touches the grove walls being very narrow from front to back, and very long from top to bottom. This allows the maximum high frequency response, best tracking and lowest wear. But it demands a very, very careful alignment. A microline stylus that is not aligned properly will have a poorer response than a (much) cheaper spherical or elliptical stylus.

I'd give the guys at the Needle Doctor a call, tell them about your turntable and your background, and ask them what they'd recommend. I've dealt with them many times over the years, and they've always been very helpful and very up front with me. They carry a very large line of cartriges, and know what they're talking about.

[colterphoto1]

One of the significant aging factors in phono cartridges is the elastomeric material that hold/dampens the movement of the cantilever arm/stylus assembly. This will age just due to contact with atmosphere. You might take the AT cartidge to a local hifi shop for inspection, but if you value your vinyl, I'd purchase and entirely new cartridge.

Michael

[djk]

Worn records will sound better with a conical stylus, an elliptical will have better highs. Micro-ridge types are great with new records, but unlistenable with worn and/or dirty records.

Some of the Shure are available with interchangeable styli (buy an elliptical cartridge and a conical replacement styli), 78's take a special size also available from Shure.

Colter is right about the elastomer bushings being shot after a few years.

[homemade]

I always had better luck setting the tracking weight near the heaviest that the cartridge said worked well. Less distortion particularly in the inner grooves. Record wear from a heavier weight was probably negligable. I found this out with several cartridges and was fighting distortion when set at the lightest suggested tracking weight. Increased the weight and distortion went away for the most part except some pressings still had some innter distortion. My Mobile Fidelity pressing was perhaps the best for distortion free inner grooves. FYI I don't even have my turntable hooked up right now. Can't stand the pops and clicks, etc. and yes I do clean them (discwasher) before I play them.

[jdm56]

OK, y'all have convinced me to spring for a new cartridge. Considering the table was only $120 on sale and that I haven't bought ANY vinyl since the mid-eighties, I of course, don't want to spend much. Would a $50-$75 dollar mm with an elliptical stylus be sufficient?

Set-up is practically nil on this table as it's arm is made for P-mount cartridges, and even anti-skating and tracking force are both pre-set. I don't even know that the tracking weight CAN be changed, although there is a visible screw on the back of the counterweight, that may offer some adjustability. I guess a person is just supposed to trust that ll the factory settings are spot-on. So maybe in light of that, the conical stylus might be the best choice after all?

[steve732]

Most of our vinyl collections are 30-50 yrs old now. LP's and boxes of treasured 45's. All have at least a minimal amount of wear at this point in time. I keep a few conical stylus and cartridge setups in ready to plug and play headshells and use them quite often as they DO make quite a difference when playing older vinyl and the 45 rpm collection. Always keep a tried and true Staunton 500 on hand as they were THE standard at radio stations across the country. Having been a radio DJ, many hundreds of hours were logged with those Staunton's and the record collection never would have withstood the usage with anything else. So I'm a firm believer in Conical Stylus and proper tracking for those discs from the 90's back. For pristine albums of course I use an elliptical Shure M97XE. On a budget here so the $500 plus setups are out of the question. 

[Marvel]

Welcome to the forums.

 

Do you mean Stanton?

[pauln]

Something else to keep in mind...

 

Expensive stylus diamonds are polished before being mounted to the cantilever; inexpensive ones are not.

The first hours of play with a new inexpensive diamond is not going to sound as good until it gets polished from playing.

 

"Real serious" audiophiles use non-critical records with a new diamond because even the pre-polished ones get a much finer polish with playing, but this initial polishing by record play is a higher wear playing than after, when the polish has become very fine. The prime component of stylus wear is the powdered diamond dust in the groove... after a diamond is finely polished with some play hours there is little subsequent accumulation of this (if you clean the record well), but in the first hours, especially with an inexpensive diamond, both the diamond and record get worn, the diamond achieving its final fine polish at the expense of the record suffering marginally more wear.

 

So, some people use a "lessor" importance record to break in a new diamond. And, some people make an evaluation of a new diamond too early. Worse case is using a new diamond on a new record, then having second thoughts about how it sounds and subsequently wondering how the new record got messed up so fast...