If it is in good condition and is priced where you rate it as a great price then I would recommend buying it. If you can't tell a difference between it and the MMC4 later...you can sell the MMC1 to me for a great price 🙂.  Had to throw that in. But seriously, if it is a great price and good condition then snatch it up and give it a try.

-sonavor

Chances are the suspension will be shot, these cartridges are over 20 years old now and the rubber in the suspension stiffens up with age, meaning it won't track the high end frequencies very well. So although it has a better stylus profile and a sapphire cantilever chances are it will do no better that your SMMC4.

If you do get the MMC1 send it off to Axel (schallplattennadeln) to have the suspension renewed.

Lee

Rich wrote:

It's an entry level phono, albeit a fine one. Surely upgrading the deck would give better fidelity than upgrading the cartridge.

I dont think so Rich, checking these BGs there is not too much difference one to the other, and in the sound track less so, I have a TX2 and it playes just as good as any BG 6500, except for a little clicks from the relay at start and end of record. Where it get interesting is with the BG 5000, for the radial tracking ones, a much better build than any other I have seen.

Forgive me for being uninformed. But what difference in fidelity does a deck provide? I figured most of the sound quality came from the cartridge.

Depends on what you mean by 'sound quality'?

Clarity of sound is one thing and even a top quality cartridge can sound awful if full of fluff and grime as it won't track the grooves properly.  You wouldn't expect a 50 € TT to sound exceptional just because you put a 500 € cartridge on it.

Different cartridges have different frequency ranges so you may lose detail at the higher frequencies or have muddled lower frequencies.

The TT itself has a huge impact on performance and sound.  If the motor runs at inconsistant speeds it will sound terrible and If the motor or bearings are poor you will get rumble, wow, flutter.  The build materials and design of the deck impacts the sound too - some people spend a fortune on 'upgrade' kits for decks (I'm really thinking of Thorens here) to improve the acoustic qualities of the already well performing TT's.

If the TT and tonearm aren't set-up properly this also has consequences to sound quality and record wear.  If the headshell isn't aligned the channel separation will be poor.

The internal RIAA (if it has one) also makes a big difference as do many other internal components - quality and spec of capacitors for example.

This also doesn't take into account the amp used - I'm not going to get into expensive cables and snake oil things like that!

I'm sure lots more will come from other members.

Dave.

PS MODS!

Clicking on more does nothing; I was unable to edit or delete either of the above posts?!

All valid opinions.

My personal point of view is not to bother with anything "better" than an MMC4 on the RX2.  Afterall, that was the B&O recommended cartridge for the RX2 back in the day.

My personal record collection numbers in the several hundred in all conditions from barely listenable to mint "audiophile" pressings.  I also have a range of turntables and cartridges on which to play the range of LPs (and 45s).  The RX2's with MMC4's are perfectly adequate to play the good records as well as the not so good records.  But I wouldn't dream of using my two best cartridges to play the not so good records.

We have been making recommendations without knowing anything about OP's record collection (or the rest of his system, for that matter).

Rich wrote:

We have been making recommendations without knowing anything about OP's record collection (or the rest of his system, for that matter).

Makes sense, I use my MMC2 only for new or like new records, all other are for the MMC4s or the SP14