Recently, the launch of Audio-Technica’s affordable VM95 moving magnet cartridges have piqued the interest of customers and reviewers alike. In this article, I take a close look at A-T’s upper-end models sporting advanced styli. All six models incorporate the same body/motor system and differ only by stylus design. The series starts with a simple conical stylus, graduating to bonded and nude ellipticals, followed by the more complex and intriguing Micro-Line (ML) and Shibata profiles.

All VM95 versions are shown below. Our review only includes the ML (red) and Shibata (brown) styli as highlighted. The entire line has interchangeable styli mated with the VM95 ‘universal’ generator/body. They can also be purchased pre-mounted to a high-quality detachable head-shell for further convenience. In addition, replacing styli does not require any adjustment in VTA, VTF, or anti-skate – they are literally ‘plug and play.’ For a reviewer, this allows almost real-time A-B testing crucial for delineating fine details between models.

A motivation behind this cartridge/stylus review is hyperbole like this, “Your turntable’s stylus accelerates at up to 20,000g. Your records’ groove walls are not so much caressed as pummeled like a jackhammer.” No, that’s not me talking, but a seller of expensive aftermarket platter mats. If that quote is even half-correct, then perhaps an investigation is in order to examine styli that having a proven track record and a win-win reputation for minimal groove wear and maximal fidelity.

The images below provide a mental image of the potential benefits of advanced styli. On the left is a conical profile and the one on the right an advanced type. We see the one on the right seats deeper in the groove and exerts lower pressure on the groove walls due to its very narrow vertical footprint and accurate groove tracing capability.

It is evident that if this transcription falters, there is no downstream knob to correct for it. I applaud Audio-Technica for recognizing this fact and offers a real solution amenable to any budget. Although the images above seem exaggerated, this is exactly how the signal is generated from vinyl and is a focus of this review.

In what follows, I compare sound quality of the two budget cartridges against my ‘reference’ rig described later in the article. For VM95 testing, a more reasonable table was selected as these cartridges may be mated to older tables such as the vintage Technics SL-1500 direct-drive which proved to be a wonderful combination. The images below show the ART9 and V95ML cartridges in action.

VM95SH Shibata

First up for a spin was the VM95SH with Shibata stylus. After break-in, this variant impressed me with speed and smooth spectral balance. Bass is exemplary as it should be with a MM and actually betters the ART9 in this region with more apparent pace and drive. But this ‘speed’ comes at the expense of naturalness. For rock and heavy metal aficionados the Shibata will never skip a beat, but for small acoustic ensembles or jazz the ML version might be the better choice. Voice and instrument separation are first rate with the Shibata providing a wide and high soundstage. A main distraction is shallower soundstage depth. Without comparison to the reference, this deficiency would have not been so apparent. This is perhaps the main issue with these budget cartridges irregardless of stylus profile.

The Shibata’s mid-band response is surprisingly close to the reference. This might be related to the A-T house sound and voicing of their product line. The upper end/treble is extended with low levels of granularity but remains inferior to the ART9 which excels in buttery smooth analog richness. While not butter smooth as the ART9, the Shibata can be best described as, ‘I Can’t Believe it’s Not Butter.TM’ In terms of sheer dynamics, the Shibata was equal to the reference, but at the expense of artificially leading-edge transients (note that this is not sibilance in the conventional sense, but a general characteristic of this design and may improve with more run-in). For a budget MM cartridge, nothing can be faulted here.

Although I mention the upward tilt in the treble, it’s not a deal breaker. To put it into perspective, the ‘reference’ MC (100ohm load) sounded slightly darker and ‘closed in’ against the Shibata. Increasing MC loading to 400 ohms brought both to equal footing in overall balance suggesting the VM95 is very close to the sweet spot in overall tonality.

V95ML Micro-Line

Next up is the ML version. I have had much experience with this profile including a succession of Shure V15’s Micro-Ridge MMs as well as Denon, Sumiko, and other A-T MCs sporting ML styli over the past four decades. The ML stylus traces the groove well with excellent ‘trackability’ numbers. It does not exaggerate ticks and pops and treats your records with care. Even better, it does not require exacting alignment as does the Shibata.

In ‘A-B’ comparisons, I find the Shibata superior in every regard. The ML glosses over important cues responsible to achieve a truly three-dimensional aspect. Both versions are tonally neutral and cover the entire spectrum except for some added confusion in the upper treble with the ML. Although more neutral than the Shibata, it is at the expense of diminished cymbal shimmer and lost ambience cues during the quietest passages. To this ear it can be best simply described as a lack of resolution.

‘Absolute’ Performance

Compared to the reference MC, the VM95’s Achilles Heel are their inability to “see into” the recording. On the reference, playing the old chestnut “Winelight” by Grover Washington Jr. reveals a softly repeated guitar line deep into center-right soundstage. This adds a layer of complexity and while supporting the beat. In other words, the cut sounds complete. With either VM95 stylus, this guitar is nearly absent and one must strain to pick it out of the mix. If I did not previously hear that guitar line on the ‘reference,’ I would have been none the wiser. But knowing it is integral to the mix, it is obvious advanced styli can take only these budget cartridges so far. I attribute this distraction to heavy tip mass and ‘flimsy’ aluminum cantilevers employed with these advanced styli. I have found they seriously compromise ultimate performance by smearing and homogenizing micro details. I would really like to see A-T offer an upgraded cantilever for the Shibata VM95. For a couple hundred dollars more it may have potential to become a world-beater for the thrifty.

Summarizing the differential and ‘absolute’ performance between these two cartridge variants has been an enjoyable and very pleasant experience. Both represent a major leap forward in affordable high-quality analog reproduction compared to past products in the budget arena. While it is my opinion that the ML offers the best value for money, the Shibata really ‘delivers’ justifying the small step-up in price. Both are highly recommended.

Technical Stuff

For the review, the VM95 was mounted to a 1970’s Technics SL-1500 direct-drive table with the standard lower cost version of the SL-1200 skeletal gimbal arm. With a 15g effective mass, this arm provides a very compatible 11 Hz resonance frequency. As designed, the VM95 will perform best with higher mass tonearms or those with detachable head-shells. This Technics table represents a natural choice at the VM95’s price-point.

The ‘reference’ source is a Pro-Ject RPM Carbon 5 table with the 9cc Evolution carbon fiber arm. This is mated with A-T’s ART9 XI LOMC sporting a “special line-contact” (ML) stylus and 0.28mm boron cantilever that resonates at 10 Hz, squarely within the recommended range for best performance. All tracking forces were 2 grams with anti-skate set at that value. Due to compatibility issues, the ART9 would not be a great match for the Technics and vis-a-versa. All cartridges well aligned with a DB Systems protractor and tweaked for best performance (i.e., arm height, offset angle, etc.) and also in listening.

ART9 cartridge signal equalization, gain, and loading are provided by a Ray Samuels Audio battery powered F-117 phono stage. Keeping with the VM95’s low price point, I employed an Edwards Audio MM-1 MK2 phonostage. It offers a friendly 47kohm/120pF load squarely inside A-T’s recommended settings. I also used a Belles 28a phono preamplifier as a double-check, finding no discernible differences. This strongly suggests any differences in sound quality (absolute or relative) are due to the styli profiles. Your experience with either of these two budget cartridges should reflect these findings provided your phono preamp is capable. Since introduction, many reviews have been published. Several are listed below and with independent results consistent with my recommendation.

Forch – May 2022

Other VM95 Reviews:

• In Sheep’s Clothing
• Audio-Head
• HiFi World
• Stereo Times
• Audio Appraisal  
• Discogs