advertisement


Goldring 2100 MM Cartridge

Yeah, the VM95s are. You might have compared like for like - a VM520SH to the VM95SH (or E, ML, etc.).

I did. I compared the 95E with the 520E - very similar stylus/cantilever/suspension types if not identical. The VM520E is about £100 and I find it more enjoyable than any 95, even the expensive ones, so I am suggesting that for me the 500 range are the obvious option under £200. I suspect I would even prefer the conical VM510CB which is only £85. They are every bit as upgradeable as the 95s, have much better stereo separation, and the 540ML stylus has a very pretty tapered (lower mass) cantilever which the 95ML lacks.

The stylus upgradability of both series is excellent, but the 500s are just a much better cartridge body, to my ear.

Although it has been many years since I listened to a Goldring 2500, by memory I suspect the Goldring 2000s have more in common with the AT 500s than with the AT 95s.
 
I did. I compared the 95E with the 520E - very similar stylus/cantilever/suspension types if not identical. The VM520E is about £100 and I find it more enjoyable than any 95, even the expensive ones, so I am suggesting that for me the 500 range are the obvious option under £200. I suspect I would even prefer the conical VM510CB which is only £85. They are every bit as upgradeable as the 95s, have much better stereo separation, and the 540ML stylus has a very pretty tapered (lower mass) cantilever which the 95ML lacks.

The stylus upgradability of both series is excellent, but the 500s are just a much better cartridge body, to my ear.

Although it has been many years since I listened to a Goldring 2500, by memory I suspect the Goldring 2000s have more in common with the AT 500s than with the AT 95s.

If they just were threaded..
 
If they just were threaded..

I would prefer threaded too, but when one cartridge sounds better than the other, traditional nuts and bolts are an inconvenience I'm willing to endure. I've decided to sell my VM95SH along with the extra 95EB stylus. They are very good, but I can afford the 500s.
 
I would prefer threaded too, but when one cartridge sounds better than the other, traditional nuts and bolts are an inconvenience I'm willing to endure. I've decided to sell my VM95SH along with the extra 95EB stylus. They are very good, but I can afford the 500s.

Did you ever compare the VM520EB with the Goldring 2100?
 
Did you ever compare the VM520EB with the Goldring 2100?

No, as I said I'm relying on memory from many years ago. I think I started with a 2300 or 2400 and then re-stylused it with a 2500. Certainly it was the metal bodied one. I'm reasonably familiar with the kind of differences one hears when going from elliptical bonded to nude to line contact and back, but basically my contribution here is worth what you paid for it. I think the comparison you moot could be well worth doing, but the result could be quite close.

I actually sold my 2500 in a system to a friend who barely ever used it and then managed to have the system fully submerged in a house flood. Amazingly it all seems to work fine and she would be happy to have a buyer for it because she was always too busy for vinyl, but I said that I could not sell it for her without describing what had happened to it so we have reached an impasse. If you want to make her an offer I'll put it under the microscope to make sure of fresh diamond condition.
 
I did. I compared the 95E with the 520E - very similar stylus/cantilever/suspension types if not identical.

That's not what you said in the bit I quoted earlier - you compared the 520E with the 95SH - rather different stylus profiles.

That said, I'm not surprised the higher end 500 series is preferred to the VM95 series.
 
Although the higher VM range is likely to have more care and attention paid to stylus/cantilever alignment and tie wire tension, another reason for their superior channel separation ability has to do with them having none crossed coil pairs per channel with shielding between either side. Of those MM designs that employ two series connected coils per channel, typically the axis of each pair crosses that of the other channel pair due to the 45º grooves being at 90º to one another. This just makes it simpler to arrange the pole extensions, especially so when these are often the same parallel rods upon which the coils are wound. Right from the start, with the development of their VM generator system, A-T decided to arrange each pair of coils L vs. R which also then allows for a sheet of permalloy to be placed between.

VM series generator:
vm_construction_01_1_4.png


Of course, they could just as easily have fitted such a shield between the two coils of the one coil per channel VM95 generator, however, that would likely have put the performance of these in more direct competition with their own dearer models.

VM95 series generator:
vm95_construction_01_2.png


Also, one should keep in mind that, other than an obvious change in coil inductance, the VM95 generator isn't really any different than that of AT3400/AT93/AT95E of yesteryear; a range of cartridges that started out at circa 'free' up to about $30, back then.

AT95E unboxing:
inside%20the%20AT95E.JPG
 
Last edited:


advertisement


Back
Top