Cartridge loading

Since we have been in agreement all along on the first two bits, maybe its this last bit that is the stumbling block. I used to load MM cartridges to critical damping by simply ringing the cartridge/cable combination with a square wave and observing the resultant output and taming it with a loading resistor. MM cartridges have a lot more inductance so its easy for that inductance to ring. But attempts to do this with LOMC failed, simply because with any loading I could not detect anything other than a nice looking square output since the inductance is so low. So I am challenging the idea of critical damping of the mechanical aspect of the suspension, not because I don't think it can happen but more because I'd like to see the evidence.

I don't say that achieving critical damping is doable or even desirable from the sonic perspective.

I've also noticed that while I can cut a 35KHz groove on my Scully lathe, depending on loading you can't always play it back, depending also on the cartridge. 

I think here lies the answer - "depending on the cartridge". I can imagine that for some cartridges, or better yet, some cartridge/tonearm combinations, the extra damping from a low R, combined with  other factors may compromise the tracking. What I fail to see however is that this should be some universal law.

So now I am curious- at what frequencies did you make your measurements?

I did not do any measurements. I tune R_load by ear, usually preferring lower values, and have never experienced any HF mistracking.

I don't say that achieving critical damping is doable or even desirable from the sonic perspective.

I got that from @intactaudio 's comment about sidebands. I apologize as I did conflate your comments and his. Critical damping of the cantilever is one of the very few explanations I can think of for the phenom he described.

I think here lies the answer - "depending on the cartridge". I can imagine that for some cartridges, or better yet, some cartridge/tonearm combinations, the extra damping from a low R, combined with other factors may compromise the tracking. What I fail to see however is that this should be some universal law.

Its not so much a universal law as it is something to be aware of. If you have to use loading to achieve proper sound, it is a flag that something could be amiss: Instability in the phono section, a mismatch between arm and cartridge, that sort of thing.

Dear @atmasphere please treat all my writings as a friendly argument in a search for the truth, so there is no need to apologize :)

If you have to use loading to achieve proper sound, it is a flag that something could be amiss: Instability in the phono section, a mismatch between arm and cartridge, that sort of thing.

I'd respectfully disagree. I'd say much depends on how the cart is designed. Electromagnetic damping due to a low R is actually quite an attractive (at least on paper) way of damping. Look at it from this perspective: linear just by the physics, no deterriortion, easy to implement and easy to control *by the user* with a great accuracy by changing R. Mechanical damping on the other hand, could be more challenging to implement with non-linerities, aging effects, no user control etc.

Electromagnetic damping due to a low R is actually quite an attractive (at least on paper) way of damping.

I agree, it is. But the inductance of a low output moving coil is so low that resistive damping has little effect, as in a nutshell the inductor does not ring at audio frequencies or anywhere near them.

Dear @atmasphere : You followed posting your opinion and some " answers " but as in the fast you just followed failen to prove the MAIN SUBJECT under debate that you stated in this thread:

""" will limit the ability of the cartridge to trace higher frequencies .."""

You don’t have any teue facts/measurements that can prove your statement but Palmer in the other thread I mentioned and that you, Al and JC participated measured and told you that what you say is FALSE:

""" certainly not on tracking which is demonstrably false based on IM tests on tracking performance that I have incidentally performed as a function of load."""

Palmer proved with technical math simulations/studies that what you " touted " is not exactly true and in that thread you did not gave an answer to his post , I think because you have nothing on hand in that specific regards.


In the Hagermann link you posted you can read:

""" Most MC cartridges have less inductance than this example (chosen to highlight the issue), and so the typical loading value of 100 ohms is usually quite reasonable """"


@bydlo posted:

"[Lowering the R_load]... of course will limit the ability of the cartridge to trace higher frequencies. " ( this is what you posted. ) and his answer:

I fail to see it either,

@intactaudio

""" I do not see anyone debating that a loaded MC cartridge will stiffen its suspension, what I think is up for debate here is that this stiffening of the suspension will lower the cartridges ability to accurately trace high frequency info. """


Try to stop go " around and around " and go out of that circle where you are " trapped " by your self and give a direct measured answer to the main subject debate: limit cartridge trace high frequency.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


PS: I'm not pushing you as you posted. Things are that I'm asking you this questions for a few years now with no answer at all, a precise answer with out " circles ".

You followed posting your opinion and some " answers " but as in the fast you just followed failen to prove the MAIN SUBJECT under debate that you stated in this thread:

""" will limit the ability of the cartridge to trace higher frequencies .."""

Actually I explained that in some depth. I recommend you go back and read my posts and those of intactaudio and bydlo again.

But the inductance of a low output moving coil is so low that resistive damping has little effect, as in a nutshell the inductor does not ring at audio frequencies or anywhere near them

But what I meant is the mechanical damping of the stylus, not electrical damping of the LC tank.

Dear @atmasphere  : Really? because I read all your posts and after several years you never posted true evidence/facts that can tell us that " cartridge limit trace of high frequency ".

You can do it very simple: take 2-3 LP tracks and give us as examples of your posts and in this case we can have first hand experiences about because till today in no single audio forum in the web no one and I repeat no never posted that kind of trouble.

With all respect: bla, bla, bla, etc is not enough with out true foundation in your statements.

Why don't give us those LP examples? easy to do it. Of course that we need to know the different loads you try it and with which of those loads " things happens ".

I think that many gentlemans as me already made it that kind of tests and that's why insist that you bring here those facts. Please no more bla, bla but facts that we can corroborate it.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

rauliruegas

I read all your posts and after several years you never posted true evidence/facts ... You can do it very simple: take 2-3 LP tracks and give us as examples of your posts ... bla, bla, bla, etc is not enough with out true foundation in your statements. Why don't give us those LP examples? easy to do it ... that's why insist that you bring here those facts. Please no more bla, bla but facts that we can corroborate it.

No one here is obligated to conduct any tests on your behalf. Please feel free to conduct your own tests, though, and share your results with the group.

But what I meant is the mechanical damping of the stylus, not electrical damping of the LC tank.

Yes. If you pass a squarewave through an inductor, the more inductance there is the more it will ring; If you then place a resistance in parallel with the inductor this will cause it to ring less. When the resistance is the right value, the resulting output signal will be the closest you can get to a square wave. This resistance value is the 'critical damping' value for the inductor.

But LOMC cartridges really don't ring at audio frequencies. Now we can conclude from this that the damping of the coil is irrelevant except for the tank circuit, and the latter is of no importance unless the phono preamp has troubles with RFI at its input. But damping of the mechanism (cantilever and suspension) is a different matter, and its pretty safe to conclude that if it is damped, high frequencies will be attenuated. There are plenty of examples of this.


But I'm not sure how important this is. If the cartridge is properly set up in the arm and the arm is able to track the cartridge correctly, **and** if the phono preamp is unresponsive to RFI and is also inherently stable, then IME the stock 47K load has yielded the best results. I do think its an interesting topic though and think it bears more research.

Dear @atmasphere  :  """  pretty safe to conclude that if it is damped, high frequencies will be attenuated.... """

I own, owned and listened to several tonearms that uses damping like the MAX 282, Audiocraft, Triplanar, SME V, Townshend, etc, etc.

I listened to all them with and with out the damping mechanism and differences are not small.

Maybe you already listened the Triplanar with/with out: what differences did you found out?

"""  then IME the stock 47K load has yielded the best results. I do think its an interesting topic though and think it bears more research. """

I agree that needs more resarch from your part and disagree with the rest of your statement.

R.

I listened to all them with and with out the damping mechanism and differences are not small.

Damping mechanism?? If you are talking about the damping trough on the arm, you have missed the point of the conversation between @bydlo and myself entirely.

But damping of the mechanism (cantilever and suspension) is a different matter, and its pretty safe to conclude that if it is damped, high frequencies will be attenuated.

Ok, so if by tracking problems at HF you mean attenuated HF then I agree. But this behavior applies to any damping, also purely mechanical, not only to electromagnetic. The simplest damping is a force proportional to velocity of the cantilever movement. For periodic movements this means proportional to the frequency, so the damping force is increasing with the frequency of the played groove. Electromagnetic damping is just an example of this type of force. And this is what anyone who has ever played with loading hears - lower R = less HF, more pronounced LF. The question is so what if at the end you can reach a natural balance? If you cannot, sth is wrong or substandard.

But I’m not sure how important this is. If the cartridge is properly set up in the arm and the arm is able to track the cartridge correctly, **and** if the phono preamp is unresponsive to RFI and is also inherently stable, then IME the stock 47K load has yielded the best results. I do think its an interesting topic though and think it bears more research.

Again, I think this the last sentence is more of a personal preference than any rule. I do not see anything bad in designing a cart in a such a way that it relies on a certain load resistance to help mechanically damping the cantilever.

Ok, so if by tracking problems at HF you mean attenuated HF then I agree. But this behavior applies to any damping, also purely mechanical, not only to electromagnetic.

The first thing Moncrief does in his article is to do a frequency plot of the cartridge with the two different loads he did the IM sweeps of.   This was to show that the frequency response did not appreciably change to rule out the "old wives' tale" of loading damping a rising response inherent to MC carts.

@intactaudio As I said in proper design it is obviously possible to reach a neutral balance and this is what we all do adjusting the load. Is the article available online?
In general, there are dozens of situations where a wise pre-loading linearizes a mechanical system. Think e.g. of a motor, where a pre-load helps to smoothen out coging

The question is so what if at the end you can reach a natural balance? If you cannot, sth is wrong or substandard.

Yes.

Alas this article is not available online but if you go to the IAR website it states Issue #5 can be purchased.  I got my copies off of Ebay when I was pointed to the topic.

I said in proper design it is obviously possible to reach a neutral balance and this is what we all do adjusting the load

I think most of us agree that adjusting the load of an MC cart does have some effect on the sound.  It is the cause of what we are hearing is that is up for debate.  As it stands now I think the quoted text above sums it up pretty nicely and I find it interesting that outside of Moncrief, historically I have yet to see mention of this.  

dave

Dear @bydlo : He is changing as the thread goes on because the main subject is that he posted:

"" will limit the ability of the cartridge to trace higher frequencies .."""

" to trace " not attenuates and that " limit the cartridge abilities on HF range is what I’m questioning to him and asking for evidence true evidence ( for many years now. ) on it because in any internet audio forum no one and I mean it: no one never reported that a loading change or a 100 ohms load in a LOMC cartridge produce that tracking/trace HF problem ! !  I had not never with any cartridge in my systems in the last 30 years with different phono stages and different loads impedances.

No one is questioning the electromagnetic damping but does not exist that trace/tracking problem because of it.

I was not whom posted about trace/tracking issue but him and he continue spreading that inexistent behavior from several years now. Go figure.

R.

no one never reported that a loading change or a 100 ohms load in a LOMC cartridge produce that tracking/trace HF problem ! !

To be clear, I have maintained and as we've seen on this thread, any damping will result in less HF response. Any LOMC cartridge these days has bandwidth far in excess of 20KHz; I can reproduce 35KHz sine waves I cut on my Westerex/Scully cutter and lathe system with a Grado Gold which is a MM cartridge which inherently has less bandwidth that LOMC. Since my cutter is bandwidth limited to 42KHz to prevent excess power from damaging it (this due to the pre-emphasis curve which boosts high frequencies at 6dB/octave) I've not been able to cut higher frequencies to see how high LOMC cartridges can really go, but I am certain that they can easily go past 60KHz.


I have not maintained as Raul claims that there will be a 'tracking/trace problem'; in fact I've been very careful about my use of English (not Raul's first language) to simply say that by causing the cartridge to drive a lower impedance it will of course be less able to trace higher frequencies. I've not said what those frequencies are. And I've also maintained that this is an area that warrants further study.


Raul has created a Strawman argument (and being a logical fallacy, therefore a false argument) that I've been saying that loading the cartridge leads to mistracking. I've not said that at any time; its my assumption that Raul's use of English not as his native language has led him in this manner.

Raul, with due respect, I don’t think you took the time to understand what I wrote about damping. Since then, Ralph, Dave, and a third person have pretty much corroborated my idea, although all 3 explained it at a more sophisticated level. Thanks to them.

Dear @atmasphere  : Could be my bad english.

Anyway, you posted:

"" will limit the ability of the cartridge to trace higher frequencies .."""

""  to simply say that by causing the cartridge to drive a lower impedance it will of course be less able to trace higher frequencies. ""



You said: "  it will of course ..". Where exist that evidence true evidence about because I don't see the foundations for your several years statements.

@intactaudio  already posted evidence coming from IAR with evidence that tell us a way different " thigs " that what you support.

My post where you said I lost the " road " ( or something like that. ) was only an example where if we have a room/system with high resolution and low distortions levels we can be aware of what damping in the tonearms can do or can't does.

Damping makes at least two things: " cleans " the frequency range extremes that permit that we listen more MUSIC and less colorations/distortions/resonances with out losting recorded information. I could think you own that kind of room/system and enough first hand experiences with nera field listening of live MUSIC so your ears tell you for sure what I'm saying and if not then you are in trouble.

So damping it's not a " bad " move but a very welcomed parameter/characteristioc for a way better MUSIC enjoyment, to stay nearer to the recording and nearer to live MUSIC.

In that thread that I mentioned you participated, Palmer posted:

"""  the purported effects of heavy resistive loading you state could be definitively true- certainly not on tracking which is demonstrably false based on IM tests on tracking performance that I have incidentally performed as a function of load. While mechanical impact does occur as a result of electrical load- there is some back emf necessarily generated by the signal current that affects the mechanical motion, but a quick back of the envelope calculation using Lenz's law and the 10uH cartridge suggests a 2 orders of magnitude difference between the generated signal and the back EMF for a 100 ohm load at 20kHz- certainly not enough to cause tracking issues I would think. As for the rest, well, take the Madake for instance- the resistive load that people (reviewers) claim is best literally varies by nearly four orders of magnitude! I load mine with 60 ohms (as do many users) and I find that the resolution and dynamics is excellent while maintaining a natural timbre, tonal balance and micro/macro dynamics while not creating the unnatural e  """


Some one in that thread questioned about was not EMF and Palmer gave this answer:


" Yes, it really is back EMF- it's calculated using Lentz's law and is a consequence of Faraday's Law of Induction and it occurs as a result of the change in current through the coil- that's where the frequency dependent term comes from (the derivative). The term is subtracted from the voltage generated by the cartridge and in that way it acts to reduce the output voltage and hence the current, so there's a degree of negative feedback. I chose to use the full inductance rather than the MC inductance alone as a way to add a bit of correction for the physical displacement of the stylus/cantilever/coil that occurs as a result of the generated force. I did it that way as I don't believe that true reciprocity occurs and I have no idea what the losses are. The "gain" can be scaled to increase the mechanical feedback- for example the value of multiplier for the s term in the feedback could be increased to Icart*1.5 for example. What I actually calculate is
FBvoltage= k.Lcart*Icart*s, where K is the scale factor mentioned above (a default of 1), s=jw as usual, Lcart is the extended inductance and Icart is the actual cartridge current in the coil which I measure using a very small R as sucky LTspice doesn't include the right components to let me do it easily. """


I have no time rigth now to go on, maybe latter.

R.

Where exist that evidence true evidence about because I don't see the foundations for your several years statements.

I see that you don't. But if I tell you that the sky is often blue, do I need to provide evidence, such as what 'blue' looks like? This is a similar problem; one based in engineering inherently understands that damping limits high frequencies.

Dear @atmasphere  : please don't change the words. You posted several times:

  "" will limit the ability of the cartridge to trace higher frequencies .."""

where are the evidence of that " limit to trace ".

Damping effect is one thing and trace/tracking isssue in the cartridge is a way different subject.

I thinkthat now we are talking of different issues. Palmer proved to you and all that there is not that such " limit trace/tracking " in the cartridge abilities and in that thread no one including you had nothing on hand ( evidence. ) to refute the Palmer true facts:

""  certainly not on tracking which is demonstrably false based on IM tests on tracking performance that I have incidentally performed as a function of load . ""

and in your last post in this thread now you are changing and talking only that : "

"  damping limits high frequencies ..." when for years you said " trace " ( including in this thread.



Btw for those gentlemans that don't know or forgot whom is Palmer here what he posted about in that thread when some one asked for:

"""  may not be a renowned Audio Designer, but I am a somewhat renowned IC designer with credits that include cell phone transceivers and high performance opamps.

I focused on high performance high speed amps like the AD843, 845 (at one point an audio darling), 846 (also a transimpedance design with some very interesting design aspects that I gave an ISSCC paper on) etc. etc. mostly using a complementary bipolar process that I helped develop that I believe was also used in the AD797. I also did things like designing the FET based AD736/737 RMS-DC converter and others.
I moved on to more RF, disk drive read/write, GSM, CDMA etc. transceivers, signal processing, PLL and DSP designs .."""



He was  a leader team at Analog Devices and like all the engeenering gentlemans that works as a leaders in those kind of companies ( in the past National and today B&B/Texas Instrument and the like. ) Palmer has not only a top electronics/electrical knowledge levels and skills and tools where belongs his opinion foundations. Extreme high credentials.

He worked too in UK in Decca in the recording overall production and then retired and as free-lance is an advisor of manufacturers and through specific internet forums and individual persons that needs his services.


R.

please don't change the words. You posted several times:

  "" will limit the ability of the cartridge to trace higher frequencies .."""

I didn't. There is nothing above that suggests I did other than your text.

Useless with you. Keep talking with no true evidence of that " limit cartridge trace/tracking " due to loading changes. Only your bla, bla that at least for me is not enough because I have very low understand to with out evidence.

@lewm did you know how much " force " do you need to apply/need/ at the base of the cantilever to really impedes at the stylus tip position its free movements, a tiny movement? no? then what are you talking about? yes? please let us know?. and please no bla, bla like your friend but true evidence.
Btw, do you know the " power forces/inertia " generated at the stylus tip when ridding the grooves at 33/45 rpm and what " force " is need it to " limit the trace " of the stylus tip to track when appliyed that force/loading at the other end of the cantilever?

For the five time in this thread: Palmer is the only gentleman that did it his technical job where he found out no single evidence of that " limit trace " by the cartyridge loading. Is the only gentleman that posted true evidence but obviously as your friend you don't beleive him with out reason by your part.

Btw, you participated in that " party " of your friend and you was dancing with emotion when posted that you preffer listen to your MC cartridges at 47K ! ! From that same time/moment your credibility with me in that specific regards goes down/falls.

R.

 Raul, it may shock you to learn that my credibility with you or lack thereof is not a matter that concerns me a great deal. We disagree on many many things, and you know that.  But you have absolutely no grounds to say that a 47K load on a LOMC cartridge sounds best to me in my system in my house with my equipment. Your system is almost a direct antithesis of mine to begin with, and you have never been in my house. Here it is not even a matter of disagreement. I seek understanding, and I am getting some understanding by reading the posts of Palmer, Ralph, and Dave Slagle. Perhaps I could thank you for being provocative, so I can learn from those other  persons.  The only thing I can be said to have contributed to this discussion is the concept that there must be a back EMF generated at the coil of a cartridge, just like the back EMF that is generated at the coil of an electromagnetic loudspeaker.  There seems to be general agreement that that is the case. After that, I am all ears and I do not pretend to be a source of knowledge. Yes, Ralph is my friend, and so is Dave. That has nothing to do with anything.

who is this "palmer" and can someone point me to the relevant posts of his regarding this subject?

dave

Dear @lewm : """ But you have absolutely no grounds to say that a 47K load on a LOMC cartridge sounds best to me in my system in my house with my equipment. """

Really? , well you have a short time memory even of what you post. Here is what you posted about, your words not mines:


""" But I have lately found that even LOMC cartridges sound their best when the cartridge is essentially un-loaded, at 47K ohms. The treble is more "open" and airy. Dynamics are also improved vs more traditional values of load resistance. """

and you followed:


""" I only recently experimented with reducing the load on my LOMC cartridges, which is to say I am running them at 47K ohms routinely now. I find the sonics to be more open and airy that way, and I feel no impulse to move back to the more typical 100R value. """


In the other side, yes I know that there is no reason for you can have a matter/worry that lost of credibility. Who cares about?, certainly not me ( not shock for me in any way. ) and obviously not you but after those posts by your self finally I can understand why you almost " die " for the FR/Dinavector ( terrible/horrible. ) tonearms and is because you love those kind of distortions. Good for you.
In my case I like different kind of distortions.

R.

On my post to which you responded (today at 1:18 pm), I was typing on my iphone, on which I am prone to errors. Perhaps the grammar of my sentence confused you, and I was unable to edit it because Dave (Intactaudio) posted before I could make a change.
So, my sentence, "But you have absolutely no grounds to say that a 47K load on a LOMC cartridge sounds best to me in my system in my house with my equipment", should have been re-written to say that you have no grounds to doubt my observation that 47K sounds best, in my house, in my system, with my cartridge. (I think at the time I was using either my Koetsu Urushi or my ZYX Universe.) I certainly did not mean to deny the fact that I did make that observation. Yes, that is what I have found with one of those two cartridges. As of today, I would say that loads above 1000 ohms, up to 47K ohms, sound about the same, but below 1K sounds less "real", more closed in. I’ve never checked the actual frequency response. Nor did I ever claim that high frequencies were actually attenuated with loads below 1K ohms. I am reporting a subjective judgement of what I hear on music. So keep your shirt on.

By the way, I should add that when it suits you, you are quite willing to accept J Carr as a guru.  Yet JCarr is one of many of the cognoscenti who also suggest 47K as a load for LOMCs, especially the Lyra cartridges he designs.
So now, what’s your problem?

I am probably crazy for jumping into this conversation, but boldly going in; there is a lot conversation with a lot of experience on this subject, but from a engineering perspective, actual analysis can be pretty light, and the accuracy of vendor data often a best guess.  

For the mechanical resonance issue, this article that you can download is a good detailed explanation:  "On The Mechanics of Tone Arms" Dick Pierce Professional Audio Development, Jan-05. But, it also begs the question - how does each vendor measure and report mechanical compliances.   Recently I was reviewing test data for some cartridges, and a noted vendor reported a cartridge compliance of 16, but when tested, it measured 23; that can be a big difference.  And, depending on your particular setup, the tonearm compliance can be different from the vendor data.  If, you are 9-10Hz calculated, then you have a pretty good margin for error.  But, if you are at the margins, maybe not; so a test record to verify is recommended.  Unfortunately, electrical can be a bit more complicated.

For the electrical resonance/loading issue, this article on TNT http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/load_the_magnets_e.html; does a closed loop electrical analysis, but then shows by testing that the actual measured results do not follow the simple electrical closed loop model.  However, this article "NEW FACTORS IN PHONOGRAPH PREAMPLIFIER DESIGN" TOMLINSON HOLMAN, 1975, clearly addresses multiple pre-amp design factors that can effect the overall cartridge-preamp performance; so the skill of the pre-amp designer and the pre-amp has a lot bearing.  Add to this, that the vendor reported cartridge data may not be correct.  When I was reviewing test data for some cartridges, a noted vendor reports a cartridge output voltage of 5.5mV, but it measured 10mV; that is a big difference.  

In summary, and somewhat amusingly, here we are in the 21st century, all full of metrics and big-data, and we are still trying to predict with accuracy how an over half-century technology will perform.  So, with the data we have, we take our best guess as to what will work.  But,  in the absence of actual integrated data - cartridge-tonearm-cable-preamp, which is surprisingly limited, we are still left just listening to the music; and making adjustments and decisions based on what sounds best.  An imperfect system that with patience can produce near perfect sound, one of those "freakin" miracles :).

No, you have a big problem. Not me.  Wanna go back and forth on this? I cannot imagine why you think I hit on you simply by pointing out a possible mechanism for one effect of loading on an MC cartridge. I was trying to make a neutral contribution to this discussion, but I realize it may have seemed to you that I was taking Ralph's side against your attack. I really wasn't.
Thanks for the correction on the recommended loading for the Lyra cartridges per the Lyra website, but is it not the case that Jonathan Carr has suggested 47K ohms for LOMCs, in this forum?  If I'm wrong there too, I would like to know about it.  In any case, I am far from "recommending" a 47K load.  As you may recall, I discovered that I liked 47K for one of my LOMCs by accident, because I forgot to adjust the load at the phono input one evening before playing music.  So I reported my surprising result here.  Unlike yourself, I do not try to tell other people what they should do. And the cartridge was not riding in either of the two tonearms that I own and you hate, on the evening when I made the observation that there is some merit to 47K loading in my system.  And why does THAT make you so furious?

Have a good time, especially all 2 0 2 0   !!  Congratulations.

R.

@lewm : ""  I am running them at 47K ohms routinely now. I find the sonics to be more open and airy that way, and I feel no impulse to move back to the more typical 100R value. """ "

" them........routinely now.No impulse to move back...."


and now you said: one cartridge by accident.No problem.

R.

I would guess that the difference is in the cabling. these are extremely low level signals and the cabling may be a big part of this. 

I loaded by AT33PTG at 200 ohms with my MacIntosh C2300. Started off at 500 ohms and as it broke in, adjusted to 200 ohms where the sound suited me. 

Dear @lewm : """ against your attack.."""

I’m not attacking him only asking for true proof/evidence of that " limit trace " that he spreads every where with out shows the evidence as foundation for.

R.

I’m not attacking him only asking for true proof/evidence of that " limit trace " that he spreads every where with out shows the evidence as foundation for.

Just to be clear, yes, Raul, you attack me at every opportunity. This is well known by many others on this forum.


With regards to your need for proof- I recommend that you study the effects of damping on high frequencies. It is clear from your posts that at this time you have not done so.

NO, I did not only ask for evidence and not more bla, bla like your bla, bla in your last post.
 Btw, I know for sure the effects of damping in HF and over the FR. This is not the issue and stop to go " around and around " that only saids you are a lier as I posted till shows here that evidence ( like PM or Palmer. ) with no bla, bla.

And please the " victim " role is not for you , forgeret. If you have nothing to show then why posted again: incredible ! !  

R.

NO, I did not only ask for evidence and not more bla, bla like your bla, bla in your last post.
 Btw, I know for sure the effects of damping in HF and over the FR. This is not the issue and stop to go " around and around " that only saids you are a lier as I posted till shows here that evidence ( like PM or Palmer. ) with no bla, bla.

And please the " victim " role is not for you , forgeret. If you have nothing to show then why posted again: incredible  ! !  

R.

I’m not attacking him only asking for true proof/evidence of that " limit trace " that he spreads every where with out shows the evidence as foundation for.

The quote above belies this quote:

NO, I did not only ask for evidence and not more bla, bla like your bla, bla in your last post.

And both look antagonistic to anyone familiar with the English language.

Bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla and more bla-bla.  What a shame.

R.

res ipsa loquitur

Raul accusing Ralph of "blah blah blah"'ing is the most ironic moment of 2020 so far ;)

@mulveling  : That's your contribution to the thread?, what a shame too.


R.

Raul, You could make a useful contribution to the thread by describing why you (apparently) think Ralph is incorrect in his statement that low resistive loads on an MC cartridge can impede its ability to trace HF. 


And by the way, in the American/British idiom, calling someone a "lier" (by which I think you mean L-I-A-R, i.e., a person who lies), can correctly be categorized as an insult.  Insults are the basis for a verbal "attack".  Thus it can be said you attacked Ralph.  You can't have it both ways.  If Ralph is incorrect in his thesis, that does not constitute a "lie" in any sense. He is stating what he believes to be true, right or wrong.

I think much of the issue here is confusing / lumping together the electrical and mechanical aspects of loading.   Tracing high frequencies is a mechanical thing and while electrical loading will have an effect on this mechanical aspect, assuming that if follows the electrical model is flawed.  Parallels can be drawn between the underdamped, critically damped and overdamped in both the mechanical and electrical realm but the net results are quite different.  In the electrical realm you get variations in output level and in the mechanical realm you get mistracking which creates new information that is not on the original.  Ultimately the choice of what load is best is a subjective one based on the best choice of compromise between often conflicting objective details.   

Dear @atmasphere  : These are some of your statements in this thread that are more or less the same posted in other threads:

"""  to simply say that by causing the cartridge to drive a lower impedance it will of course be less able to trace higher frequencies.  """

"""  [Lowering the R_load]... of course will limit the ability of the cartridge to trace higher frequencies. """

"""  so the cantilever will get stiffer and less able to trace high frequencies  """


Two things on those statements: 

"" limit trace.../ability of the cartridge ""  and that means that the cartridge , by loading effect, lower is tracking abilities.

Now, you said in two of those staments "" of cource "" that means you are sure or you only infere/suppose that happens.

Your theory and posts says you are sure of that and my question here is that you can explain us: how did you measure that " limit trace " as a function of loading and which is the point/value where the loading figure starts to " limit trace " abilities in the cartridge?

I'm asking that because according with what you posted the loading electrical effect is " converted " in a mechanical effect that certainly degrades the recorded signal information.

I always say that every single day is a learning day and that's why I insist in this " controversial " subject: I want to learn because what you posted it never happened to me in the " tons " first hand experiences in my system and other systems and with different cartridges in diferent and same tonearms.

What I experienced always is that at 100 ohms quality level cartridge performance is always better as are and posted @intactaudio  experiences who confirmed what PM for many many years ago proved/evidence when intactaudio duplicated more that one time what PM said.

I'm looking for evidence that I can duplicate in my system but before this if you please the answer(s) to my question.

There are several " sides " on the overall subject but I think that step by step we can have a true answers.
Latter on we can analize that " cantilever will get stiffer ", please latter on.

Btw, you know me perfectly and even that my language/words seems to say I'm attaking you it's not that way and never have the attitude to attack no one. I know who you are and you know the respect I have for you.

Of course that your answer is appreciated and you can be sure that be appreciated not only for me. Thank's in advance.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

To add to what I mentioned above, The big wrinkle that got me interested in all of this is the trend for current amplification that pops up every half a decade or so.  The story goes something like this.... 

 A MC cartridge is inherently a current generator and the best way to get the ultimate performance out of it is to treat it as such and feed it into a current amplifier.  

By definition a true current amplifier would load a cartridge with a dead short which is about as far away from 47K as you can get.  With all of the discussions of how loading a cartridge has negative effects, one has to wonder how these current stages could possibly work.  There are many reports that they do indeed work, and work quite well.  It wasn't until I came across Moncrief that a possible reconciliation of the opposing viewpoints was possible for me.



dave