I have recently acquired a phono pre amp recommended by Michael Fremer. It is “THE VINYL”, from QHW audio, Spain. It got a great review. I have a Benz Micro Glider rated at 1.1MV. I have no idea how to set the dip switches for MC Load impedance for this cartridge. The options I have are as follows: 47K, 1K, 560R, 470R, 100R, and 47R. I have a solid state amp and pre-amp, and also have a sub that I use, rarely.
@imhififan : I think that all forum participants has a responsability and is not spread false information with no real evidence. That responsability comes by the fact that Agoners forums have different knowledge levels gentlemans and everyday comes rookies looking for advise looking for help so the higher knowledge level participants in the forums have all a higher responsability about that's exactly that: give help and good proved advises.
Don't you think?
That " man " as other always " cry " with the forum moderators. They have no other " exit ".
In any forum and everytime I read that spreading lie I will post about. It's each one responsability and please don't tell me that call something " black " that's " white " because this is a lie and I'm not a lier.
Ad hominem attacks do not win arguments, in fact once you do that you've lost the argument no matter the merits of your point.
At this point in the discussion the only way to win the argument is with data that proves your point. Conjecture, opinion and assertion won't cut it any longer. Make a design of experiment that will produce a data set that will prove one side or the other; it shouldn't be too difficult to do within a well equipped audio lab. I think the results would be interesting and probably really surprising to all involved.
In illustration using a very low output cartridge vs a very high output cartridge connected to the Current Input vs Voltage Input on the P1
My Sonic Lab Ultra Eminent BC: 0.6Ω output 0.29mV
Voltage Input: At 0.29 mV, the Wizard determined the optimal gain level at +70 dB of gain. This setting has audible hiss coming from the speakers at 30% volume without any record playing. On careful listening, the gain level was sufficient. Optimal loading was determined to be 180Ω by the Wizard.
Current Input: At 0.6 Ω, the Wizard determined the optimal gain level to be I/V + 20 dB, but based on listening test I preferred a much lower setting of I/V + 5 dB.
According to Ohm's Law where I = V/R, Current = 0.29 / 0.6 = 483 Micro Amps, a very sufficient level of gain based on the low impedance of the cartridge.
Are you using ohms law with voltage to compute the output current?
I thought that the motors were generally current generating devices?
So is the impedance of the phono stage a DC reading?
And does and external loading become more like a V=I*R(total)
My question is how significant that affect the cantilever to be stiffer and introducing possible tracking issues,ORits effect is negligible?
Your target for mechanical resonance is between 7-12Hz. The mechanical resonance is a product of the mass of the cartridge in the arm vs the compliance of the cantilever of the cartridge. Changing the load from 47K to 100 Ohms can easily get you outside of this target window- and that can cause tracking problems.
So, all those very well regarded designers are wrong?
IF they have ignored the significance of the inductance of the cartridge in parallel with the capacitance of the tonearm cable in their design
THEN yes, they blew it.
If you doubt this I recommend a simple test, which is to run a square wave through the cartridge itself and observe the results on an oscilloscope. If the square wave rings, then loading will affect it at audio frequencies. If you do this with any LOMC cartridge you'll see that the inductance of the cartridge is so low that a square wave at any audio frequency will look perfect on the oscilloscope. So its obvious then that the loading isn't affecting the tonality of the cartridge. Something else is.
So if the loading does not affect the cartridge at audio frequencies, why would it affect how the cartridge sounds- because in some preamps that is quite audible. The answer is simple- the preamp itself is reacting to the RFI generated by the cartridge (hence the emphasis on 'some'). I've explained this a good number of times, I've dropped links to Jim Hagerman's site http://hagtech.com/loading... If the preamp is designed with the RFI present at the input of the phono section, the loading resistor will make little difference- it won't tone down the high end nor will there be a need; it will sound fine with a 47K load.
How does one safely send a square wave through a cartridge? Just curious as I have no intention of trying it.
So I have a Cadenza Black mounted on a VPI printed tone arm, on a VPI Classic 3 table. My previous phono pre was a Zesto Andros 1.2. With that one, when I dialed the resistance much past 400Ohms the sound became somewhat shrill and screechy. If I recall at 1000 Ohms and above it was unlistenable to my ears. Down below 100O the soundstage collapsed
My current phono pre is a PS Audio stellar with which I can easily flip between 100 and 47k Ohms using the remote. There appears to be no significant difference between the two settings - maybe a bit more extension at the extremes, but difficult to tell during my short listening session. That extension I hear is probably expectation bias.
The obvious difference between the Zestos and PS Audio as loading changes is clear as a bell.
Your target for mechanical resonance is between 7-12Hz. The mechanical resonance is a product of the mass of the cartridge in the arm vs the compliance of the cantilever of the cartridge. Changing the load from 47K to 100 Ohms can easily get you outside of this target window- and that can cause tracking problems.
Any one own a Hi-Fi News test record can easily determine how significant that loading resistance affect the cantilever to be stiffer and introducing possible tracking issues, just play with the loading resistance setting and run the cartridge/arm resonance test.
If you doubt this I recommend a simple test, which is to run a square wave through the cartridge itself and observe the results on an oscilloscope. If the square wave rings, then loading will affect it at audio frequencies. If you do this with any LOMC cartridge you'll see that the inductance of the cartridge is so low that a square wave at any audio frequency will look perfect on the oscilloscope. So its obvious then that the loading isn't affecting the tonality of the cartridge. Something else is.
I don't have any record with square wave test track on hand, can you recommend one?
I think that all forum participants has a responsability and is not spread false information with no real evidence. That responsability comes by the fact that Agoners forums have different knowledge levels gentlemans and everyday comes rookies looking for advise looking for help so the higher knowledge level participants in the forums have all a higher responsability about that's exactly that: give help and good proved advises.
Don't you think?
That " man " as other always " cry " with the forum moderators. They have no other " exit ".
In any forum and everytime I read that spreading lie I will post about. It's each one responsability and please don't tell me that call something " black " that's " white " because this is a lie and I'm not a lier.
Dear @imhififan: We can run several kinds of tests but the real, important and critical issue for any audiophile ( not a fully technical oriented person. ) is if load impedance in a LOMC cartridge changes its frequency response and J.Carr proved it does not and this fact is what we need to know:
Kleos electrical model (9uH, 5.4ohm, 8pF)
Lyra Phono Pipe Very Low Capacitance tonearm-to-phonostage cable 120cm actual measurements (0.75uH, 0.325ohm, 32pF)
What these tell me (among other things) is that, all else being equal, changing just the interconnecting cable (each of which has a different capacitance characteristic), changes the optimal resistive load; and if you can afford to bring up that peak in the MHz to something <10dB then you can bring up resistive loading to about 500-1K ohms even with a highly-capacitive cable; and finally, you are not really affecting the audible high frequencies with any resistive load shown. "
He followed:
" To claim that the loading affects the measurable frequency response of the cartridge is bogus. However, if inappropriate loading bathes the phono stage in copius amounts of high-frequency noise, it may start to distort (unless the designer implemented various techniques to make sure that this won’t happen), and the result will likely be intermodulation distortion. IMD products can go low enough to fall within the audible band (even when the stimuli are ultrasonic), and IMD nearly always is not harmonically related to the signal, making it particularly grating to the ear. ""
All those was confirmed in the same old thread by an expert engineering of Analog Devices Co. when he stated with 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. 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 . By the way, I constructed a model for the cartridge back EMF using Lenz’s law and incorporated it into my simulations.
For those who are interested, the simplest version of the law is V(t)= -LdI/dt.
In this case the parameters can be measured (the LC100A meter from Ebay is a great way to do it) and the back EMF acts to oppose the voltage developed in the coil. The fractional change (attenuation) in the signal voltage is easy to calculate as it approx. equal to -L*2*pi*frequency of interest/Rload. So, it’s inversely proportional to the load R and proportional to the frequency. "
The other issue is if 47k is the standard load for a LOMC cartridge and the evidence showed in " all " active high gain phono stages proved that 47k is not the standard load impedance for LOMC cartridges and along those evidence/facts are the coments of the manufacturers/designers of those phono stages as J.Curl , M.Huber, J.Carr and others. As a fact if exist an standard load for LOMC cartridges this is not 47k but 100 ohms ( some say between 100 ohms-500 ohms. ) but as designers/reviewers/audiophiles know and say the LOMC loading is up to each audio system and owner MUSIC priorities.
Those both issues are already quite clear.
Now, if you want to " see " if load could change cartridge tracking abilities then use the Shure ERA V test record. I understand that you own an active high gain phono stage, this means with no SUT. There are other cartridge tracking test records as Telarc that’s very good. To make this kind of test through a test record you must be sure that the cartridge/tonearm overall alignment/set up is accurated and that the test record and the stylus tip are clean and optimal condition and the run the test and make the load changes you want it.
For me everything is already clear: load impedance does not affects cartridge frequency response and 47k is not the standard for LOMC loading. The test could be only for " fun ". Just do it.
If anyone wants to do a simple experiment on how loading affects a magnetic circuit, one can use a speaker. It’s similar to a MC cartridge circuit wise as the coil of a speaker moves in a magnetic field just like an MC cartridge.
Start with an open circuit (speaker disconnected from amp) and lightly push the woofer, it should move freely. Then (as an extreme example) try wiring a jumper across the + and - terminals of a speaker (make sure the amp is disconnected). Try pushing the woofer, it will resist all movement. Then, try wiring a resistor at 10x the impedance of your speaker. You will notice some resistance trying to push in the speaker compared with the open circuit. Then try a resistor 100x, then a 47k resistor.
This will demonstrate how loading affects the effective stiffness of the cantilever under various loading conditions.
I have the Benz Glider Gold and regarding @Blackdoghifi on loading recommendations, the Benz do like higher loading. I have found 1K to work the best after running through other lower options using my Fosgate Signature phono amp. Try them all but I’ll bet you will find the 1K to sound best.
@rauliruegasTo be clear, at no point have I stated that loading affects the frequency response of a LOMC cartridge. Your statements to the contrary are false. Please cease and desist. When you engage in such statements and then debunk them, you are engaging in a logical fallacy known as a strawman. Logical fallacies are inherently false.
How does one safely send a square wave through a cartridge? Just curious as I have no intention of trying it.
Apparently PS Audio did their homework.
I suspect if you put too much energy through the cartridge you might be able to damage the magnetic field generated by the magnet structure, so your reticence is wise. I used a square wave generator set to a very low output. I put the cartridge in series with a nominal resistance so I could read the square wave across the resistor- essentially if the coil of the cartridge were a problem for the square wave, it would be readily visible. The signal was low enough (I have to admit I was a bit concerned about damage to the cartridge when I did this the first time) that the cartridge was unaffected. This meant the scope was at a very high gain setting.
Note that a load to the cartridge would be a resistance in parallel with the cartridge, not in series. Anyway, I found that the cartridge could pass a square wave at any frequency- even 20KHz, with no ringing at all.
This surprised me at the time, since the reason for doing this was to create a box that would allow you to plug in the cartridge and easily determine the ideal load (this was about 35 years ago). When I saw that the cartridge could pass a perfect square wave at any audio frequency, I realized that the loading was not affecting its frequency response so something else was afoot.
One of the side issues associated with this topic is that of ticks and pops. If the phono section has good RFI immunity and if it also has good high frequency overload margins, that peak at 1 or 2MHz won't overload the input of the phono and you'll get less ticks and pops. I had this graphically demonstrated to me when an employee complained of a noisy LP he had bought. His LP played fine on the shop system so he brought in his preamp and there were the ticks and pops, sounding for all the world as if they were on the LP surface.
How that works is the energy of the cartridge can set off the electrical resonance, even though that peak is well outside of the audio band. This phenomena is known as 'excitation' in the radio world. Once the peak has gone into excitation, it puts out a signal at its resonant frequency which is applied to the input of the phono section. Since its a good 20-30dB higher than the cartridge signal, it can overload some phono sections if they have not taken this phenomena into account. I suspect such phono sections are a lot more common than we like to think- that preamp I mentioned earlier was a Toshiba and Toshiba is a supplier of semiconductors so you would expect good engineering... this has led me to think this problem was an epidemic back in the 1970s and 80s.
@imhififan@fundsgon friends: As I said not only the Shure or Telarc test records are really good but other as Ortofon are great as the CBS Laboratories series and the Stereo Review and we have not forget the B/K and Vanguard.
I own in mint condition/almost new around 15-20 vintage test record.
The Ortofon are special because there is no analog recorder in the recording process due that are D2D and the Telarc neither because is a digital recording test LPs. We can find out almost any test we can make not only tracking or resonance issues.
I bougth all through ebay and the overall recording proccess of any of those old test LPs even for today " standards " are second to none.
One of the side issues associated with this topic is that of ticks and pops. If the phono section has good RFI immunity and if it also has good high frequency overload margins, that peak at 1 or 2MHz won't overload the input of the phono and you'll get less ticks and pops.
That is absolutely true. In fact, with a clean LP (the only kind I play), ticks and pops are virtually non-existent. I've played LPs brought by visitors, after cleaning them ultrasonically, and they've been astounded by the silence.
I use an ARC Ref Phono 2SE balanced into a Ref 5SE. With an MC cartridge, the difference between 47K and 100 ohm loading is virtually undetectable and may even be zero. (You can use the Ref Phono remote to change loading from your listening chair.)
For all the ad hominem attacks, handwaving and double-talk that has plagued this thread, I've yet to find any fault with what @atmaspherehas explained.
Dear @cleeds : " I've yet to find any fault..." , good because all statements are only " anecdotes " or imagination that proves nothing.
Take a look:
" The industry spec is 47K for all cartridges. " where is the " official " announcement about, say by the AES that coul confirm it? where?
" less able to trace high frequencies. " again: where are the white papers that can confirm it.
holmz asked:
" Wouldn’t loading it down to 250 ohms from say 47k make it softer as the back EMF os gone that “would have been” stalling the motor? "
his answer was: " EMF?. No...." the same answer on other 2 subject treads different forums where was proved that it's EMF:
"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. "
and in this thread you can find out the equations used. In this and the other threads your " man " "just " dead silence " against that EMF analysis the engeenering did it, not a single comment.
This is the 4 time he posted this " tale " or in the best sense a non proved anectdote:
" He ( J,Carr ) and I met and spoke about this topic at a Munich audio show 6 years ago; " so WHAT??????
" I have maintained is that the additional stiffness may decrease the ability of the cartridge to trace high frequencies, "" again, where are the white papers that shows and proves that that is happening? where?
Then he posted other tale: " the Grado Gold MI bad tracker anecdote " that proves nothing.
" Empirically speaking its easy to deduce that the load is affecting the ability of the stylus to trace the groove, which is why we see distortion as essentially the stylus is mistracking. " again: where are white papers that shows exactly that and not mere " imagination "?
" Your target for mechanical resonance is between 7-12Hz. The mechanical resonance is a product of the mass of the cartridge in the arm vs the compliance of the cantilever of the cartridge. Changing the load from 47K to 100 Ohms can easily get you outside of this target window- and that can cause tracking problems.. "
That is ridiculous and with no facts or diagrams/equations that shows exactly that. I That " can easily get you outside of this target window ( ideal resonance frequency range. ) " is not proved here or in any other subject threads. Again: only IMAGINATION.
Another " anecdote "/tale that rpoves nothinG:
" won't overload the input of the phono and you'll get less ticks and pops. I had this graphically demonstrated to me when an employee complained of a noisy LP he had bought. His LP played fine on the shop system so he brought in his preamp and there were the ticks and pops, sounding for all the world as if they were on the LP surface. "
So, " I've yet to find any fault.." ? wow ! ! I had the impresion that you was or have higher audio knowledge levels. Well all we learn something every day.
At " least " J.Carr shows his white papers diagrams that are self explained.
I use an ARC Ref Phono 2SE balanced into a Ref 5SE. With an MC cartridge, the difference between 47K and 100 ohm loading is virtually undetectable and may even be zero. (You can use the Ref Phono remote to change loading from your listening chair.)
Why ARC featured such function in their reference phono stage that serve no purpose? So they can charge more?🤔
" Wouldn’t loading it down to 250 ohms from say 47k make it softer as the back EMF os gone that “would have been” stalling the motor? "
his answer was: " EMF?. No...." the same answer on other 2 subject treads different forums where was proved that it’s EMF:
"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. "
and in this thread you can find out the equations used. In this and the other threads your " man " "just " dead silence " against that EMF analysis the engeenering did it, not a single comment.
Voltage Input: At 0.29 mV, the Wizard determined the optimal gain level at +70 dB of gain. This setting has audible hiss coming from the speakers at 30% volume without any record playing. On careful listening, the gain level was sufficient. Optimal loading was determined to be 180Ω by the Wizard.
Current Input: At 0.6 Ω, the Wizard determined the optimal gain level to be I/V + 20 dB, but based on listening test I preferred a much lower setting of I/V + 5 dB.
According to Ohm’s Law where I = V/R, Current = 0.29 / 0.6 = 483 Micro Amps, a very sufficient level of gain based on the low impedance of the cartridge.
Voltage Input: At 0.9mV, the Wizard determined the optimal gain level to be 70dB of gain on the Voltage input. On listening test, I preferred +60 dB of gain, a much lower setting. Optimal loading was determined to be 330Ω by the Wizard.
Current Input: At 50Ω, the cartridge required IV+ 20 dB of gain.
According to Ohm’s Law where I = V/R, Current = 0.9/50 = 18 micro amps, the GFS’s high input impedance resulted in a very low level of gain regardless of the Goldfinger’s output of 0.9mV, which is relatively high for an MC cartridge.
If that is the case I still appear to need feeding to compute the back EMF.
Luckily you stated:
I think that all forum participants has a responsability and is not spread false information with no real evidence. That responsability comes by the fact that Agoners forums have different knowledge levels gentlemans and everyday comes rookies looking for advise looking for help so the higher knowledge level participants in the forums have all a higher responsability about that’s exactly that: give help and good proved advises.
Well… I am the rookie that needs some help.
Ralph stated that the cantilever gets stiffer as the impedance goes down,
you stated this most recently:
"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. "
and earlier this:
@holmz : " He never posted that loading to hard a cartridge will cause stiffness to the cartridge cantilever enough to mistracking. "
I was who posted that only to clarify that J.Carr never support those false statements by atmasphere. Tha’s all.
" to which answered " with false statements. Good for you if that is what you was looking for.
I paste all those information coming for true experts for we audiophiles can learn and don’t believe in what " some one " is spreading every where with out facts.
I would have assumed that the higher impedance was making it more difficult to push the current, and that the low impedance would allow it to flow easier and result in a lower voltage at the phono stage.
But Ralph says it is the other way, and another gentleman as well.
(Hence the statement I made about needing a real physicist.)
I would like to understand how the loading affects the voltage at the phone stage as well as the stiffness change at the cantilever/stylus.
Dear @cleeds : " I've yet to find any fault..." , good because all statements are only " anecdotes " or imagination that proves nothing ... where are the white papers that can confirm it
I'm not here to win an argument or provide scientific proof. I was simply reporting the results of my own experience. Empirical observations aren't "imagination."
Dear friends @holmz : Here and in other threads I told you that you read but sometimes you did not because those equations ( not all the development but help you. ) are twice posted in this thread.
Look something interesting:
" 1-
To claim that the loading affects the measurable frequency response of the cartridge is bogus. However, if inappropriate loading bathes the phono stage in copius amounts of high-frequency noise, it may start to distort (unless the designer implemented various techniques to make sure that this won’t happen), and the result will likely be intermodulation distortion. IMD products can go low enough to fall within the audible band (even when the stimuli are ultrasonic), and IMD nearly always is not harmonically related to the signal, making it particularly grating to the ear. ""
That came from J.Carr and next what was posted by other expert gentleman around EMF and tracking that involves IM too:
" 2-
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 . By the way, I constructed a model for the cartridge back EMF using Lenz’s law and incorporated it into my simulations.
For those who are interested, the simplest version of the law is V(t)= -LdI/dt.
In this case the parameters can be measured (the LC100A meter from Ebay is a great way to do it) and the back EMF acts to oppose the voltage developed in the coil. The fractional change (attenuation) in the signal voltage is easy to calculate as it approx. equal to -L*2*pi*frequency of interest/Rload. So, it’s inversely proportional to the load R and proportional to the frequency. "
Why ARC featured such function in their reference phono stage that serve no purpose? So they can charge more?🤔
We have a loading strip on our preamps too, and I advise customers with LOMC cartridges to not use it. But if you have a higher output cartridge, the loading strip can be quite handy! Because of their higher inductance, high output cartridges have that electrical peak at a lower frequency, which can be at the high end of the audio band or just outside of it. The winding of a higher output cartridge tends to have a lower Q value so loading can be helpful to reduce ringing.
" The industry spec is 47K for all cartridges. " where is the " official " announcement about, say by the AES that coul confirm it? where?
Cripes. If one is grounded in audio history then this is obvious. ARC SP6: 47K phono input impedance; similarly H/K Citation 1, Marantz 7, Conrad Johnson PV12, etc., etc.
" less able to trace high frequencies. " again: where are the white papers that can confirm it.
It has to be published to be real?? Since JCarr published something, you're not challenging his statement (despite the obviously recursive aspect of that argument...), you're employing a double standard. In order for the cantilever to not get stiffer a fundamental rule of physics (law of energy conservation https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Law_of_conservation_of_energy) has to be violated. IOW you would have free energy and the world's energy issues would be solved 😂
So no papers needed- just a grounding in basic physics (high school level), in particular how alternators and generators work. A 'Sheesh!' is in order here.
That is ridiculous and with no facts or diagrams/equations that shows exactly that. I That " can easily get you outside of this target window ( ideal resonance frequency range. ) " is not proved here or in any other subject threads. Again: only IMAGINATION.
Ohm's Law and the power formulas are not a figment of someone's imagination 😁
The cartridge is being asked to do just under 2 1/2 orders of magnitude more work with the example you provided:
47,000/100 = 470
-meaning 470X more current is drawn from the cartridge; because 47K is so high a resistance value relative to the impedance of the cartridge winding, the output voltage is essentially unaffected so the current increase also represents the wattage increase).
Anyone with an elementary school education can work out the math here. Perhaps, knowing that, you can tell me where that current is coming from?? If you can answer that, a bonus question: what is the consequence of that current flow?
This is such simple math I don't see why a paper needs to be written about it, but maybe even though its basic, some people simply haven't thought it thru. Or didn't do so well in math.
These only 2 of your examples about that 47k input impedance:
SP6
50K ohms, all inputs. (Magnetic phono may have any value from 10 ohms to 100K ohms substituted. Also has provision to add input capacitance for matching certain magnetic cartridges.)
PV12
Frequency Response: 2Hz to 100kHz
Distortion: 0.25%
Gain: 49dB (mm), 16.5dB (line)
Input Sensitivity:
Signal to Noise Ratio: 78dB (mm)
" In the PV12 with phono stage, this input provides the amplification and equalization required by moving magnet and high output moving coil cartridges. " This information came by CJ directly, not mine.
One of them not even handled LOMC cartridges that’s the real issue.
Useless that you insist about. No one active high gain phono stage came or comes by default with fixed 47k input impedance, no one. I posted here around 8-9 today phono stages ranging in price from 3K to 95K that’s is not only enough evidence but a true evidence and not as your CJ or SP6 and the like.
In the other side you did not gave us the answer to what you posted before:
" can easily get you outside of this target window ( ideal resonance frequency range. ) "
where are those cartridges that with today decent medium mass tonearms shows what you said coming from 100 ohms to 47k or the other way around. We need to see/read those numbers out of the ideal frequency range due to loading. Where ? and don’t try to distract with other kind of information or other question: JUST SHOWS THOSE NUMBERS AND LOMC CARTRIDGE MODELS WITH TONEARMS.
J.Carr: " Regarding loading of low-impedance MC cartridges, in general I recommend trying to reduce any capacitances present between cartridge and phono stage input to as little as possible. Use the lowest-capacitance phono cable that seems decent, turn off any additional capacitance in the input stage of the phono amplifier etc.
The reduced capacitance should make it possible for you use a wider range of loading impedances without having the sound go bright, peaky or thin-bodied. Conversely, any excess capacitance between cartridge and phono stage input will almost certainly force you into choosing lower loading impedances to save your ears. "
Why JC? because he is a true expert in any cartridge design and a co-designer of one of one of the great ( all time ) active high gain phono stages.
With out diminish here any one he has a way higher whole knowledge levels on the thread issues that any one of us. He is the " SOURCE " of true.
50K ohms, all inputs. (Magnetic phono may have any value from 10 ohms to 100K ohms substituted. Also has provision to add input capacitance for matching certain magnetic cartridges.)
The preamp has a 49.9K resistor to ground, but has other elements in parallel. It measures out at 47K.
You know we can do this all day.
In the other side you did not gave us the answer to what you posted before:
" can easily get you outside of this target window ( ideal resonance frequency range. ) "
Sure I did. Whether you are able to understand what I posted is another matter.
Dear @imhififan : Rigth now you can look the Telarc test LPs ( Omnidisc. ) and the Ortofon in ebay. The one Ortofon to go is that where you read: !" direct cut ".
Other nice characteristic of both is that comes with live recorded MUSIC and this sole fact makes both desirable items.
Other LP that we can use not only for tests but to enjoy music are the Opus label series.
Where ? and don’t try to distract with other kind of information or other question: JUST SHOWS THOSE NUMBERS AND LOMC CARTRIDGE MODELS WITH TONEARMS where appears that its resonance frequency is 9hz-10hz and when you change the loading " can easily get you outside of this target window ( ideal resonance frequency range. ) " of 7hz-12hz.
@atmasphere :You can choose the cartridge with the electrical characteristics you want and the tonearm you like with a premise: that the resonance frequency in between be: 9hz-10hz. Then tell us from which loading impedance you have to go to stay out of the ideal range of: 7hz to 12hz.
Again, don't try to distract in any way and go straigth about. Show what only you know. Easy question.
Perhaps I'd have a different result with a different phono cartridge.
We have a loading strip on our preamps too, and I advise customers with LOMC cartridges to not use it. But if you have a higher output cartridge, the loading strip can be quite handy! Because of their higher inductance, high output cartridges have that electrical peak at a lower frequency, which can be at the high end of the audio band or just outside of it. The winding of a higher output cartridge tends to have a lower Q value so loading can be helpful to reduce ringing.
That's what I thought, and thanks to atmasphere confirmed it.
ARC and ML (No. 32) not only provide a range of loading resistance settings, they even have "custom Loading" option for user to fine tune their setting!
So no papers needed- just a grounding in basic physics (high school level), in particular how alternators and generators work. A 'Sheesh!' is in order here.
Ok I had HS physics and few more courses after HS.
Ohm's Law and the power formulas are not a figment of someone's imagination 😁
The cartridge is being asked to do just under 2 1/2 orders of magnitude more work with the example you provided:
47,000/100 = 470
-meaning 470X more current is drawn from the cartridge; because 47K is so high a resistance value relative to the impedance of the cartridge winding, the output voltage is essentially unaffected so the current increase also represents the wattage increase).
OK if the cart was a 0 ohms output impedance, then I think that the voltage would be linear, and inversely proportional to the impedance.
As the cartirdges have an output impedance that is not zero, I am assuming that the produced current will not result in a linear relationship between voltage and loading, so that even with a 47k load the voltage will top out making the current either stall from flowing out of the cartridge, or ??
Anyone with an elementary school education can work out the math here. Perhaps, knowing that, you can tell me where that current is coming from?? If you can answer that, a bonus question: what is the consequence of that current flow?
The cartridge.
This is such simple math I don't see why a paper needs to be written about it, but maybe even though its basic, some people simply haven't thought it thru. Or didn't do so well in math.
I am hanging my head in shame, as I am assuming that the achieved current flow could be something like V/(R-cart +R-Load).
But I am not getting the simple ness of the math.
@holmzOh man, you're doing Raul's homework for him😄! I suspect you know how any generator will respond when asked to do say, 470 times more work? BTW you are correct that the output voltage isn't the same with the two different load resistances since the source impedance isn't zero. But since both loads (47K and 100 Ohms) are over 10x the source impedance, they will have little effect on the output voltage (which I simply ignored to make a point). No need to hang your head in shame, although I suspect that comment was facetious.
At any rate, the answer to Raul's latest query to me is inside the answer to the last question I posed to him.
atmasphere @holmz : " " Your target for mechanical resonance is between 7-12Hz. The mechanical resonance is a product of the mass of the cartridge in the arm vs the compliance of the cantilever of the cartridge. Changing the load from 47K to 100 Ohms can easily get you outside of this target window- and that can cause tracking problems.. " "
Where out side in specific: 5hz? 15hz? 6hz? . All you have to do is show it.
@rauliruegasI see you are refusing to answer my prior question to you. I've handed all the information you need to you on a silver platter. But the way you are reacting suggests you are not here for any other reason than to troll. If that is not the case, go ahead and answer my prior question. Here again for your convenience, are both of my prior questions. If you are disinclined, I can only assume its because trolling is your goal rather than anything else:
Anyone with an elementary school education can work out the math here. Perhaps, knowing that, you can tell me where that current is coming from?? If you can answer that, a bonus question: what is the consequence of that current flow?
So you're not going to answer my question? That leads me to think you are simply trolling. Because there are internal losses, the cantilever will not be quite 470 times harder to move; we'll call it 400, assuming that its also designed to operate at 47K.
Since the generator only converts mechanical power to electric power, the motor driving the generator shaft must supply at least 10 times more power in order for the generator to supply 10 times more power.
This is fundamental and inescapable.
You are correct on one thing, it was pretty easy.
The arm has an 11 gr effective mass, the cartridge is 9 grams; the compliance is rated 'Approx. 12x10-6cm/dyne at 100Hz' note the word 'Approx' (that is variable based on load). Now plug those values into the calculator:
You'll see for starters this cartridge is not a good choice for this arm. Now let's assume that the cartridge is loaded at 800 Ohms. By decreasing the load to 100 Ohms we ask slightly less than 8x the current out of the cartridge. This will increase the stiffness a bit, how much is difficult to know without more specific information about the cartridge, but as you see from the first link of this post it has to be significant. Let's assume that the load is a fractional bit of the compliance instead of dominating it. You can see what happens if the compliance is decreased by decrementing from 12 to 11, which is conservative; this puts the results outside of the green zone on both charts.
This has been a fabulous technical lesson provided by one of the industries best. This has also been an exercise in personal credibility. Desperation vs confidence. Compliance vs torque. What a discussion; one for the ages.
atmasphere @holmz : " " Your target for mechanical resonance is between 7-12Hz. The mechanical resonance is a product of the mass of the cartridge in the arm vs the compliance of the cantilever of the cartridge. Changing the load from 47K to 100 Ohms can easily get you outside of this target window- and that can cause tracking problems.. " "
Where out side in specific: 5hz? 15hz? 6hz? . All you have to do is show it.
R.
Ah you are talking about cartridge stiffness with respect to the arm/cart resonant frequency.
I was only wondering about the stillness changing.
And not wedding that to overly affecting the arm per se, but more as to whether the loading is affecting the cartridge stiffness, and maybe affecting the tracking of the cartridge.
So we are on two different targets, which are not intersecting.
I happy you have a wizard, I am not even sure what it is, but I like to at least have an intuitive feel for physics, if I cannot have a grasp on the equations.
I would want that grasp, irrespective of whether I had a machine that told me the answer.
This has been a fabulous technical lesson provided by one of the industries best. This has also been an exercise in personal credibility. Desperation vs confidence. Compliance vs torque. What a discussion; one for the ages
I am usually always confident 😎, so I have a start on it.
Dear @fundsgon@holmz : " also been an exercise in personal credibility..." , Really? because again your " trusti man " is way wrong, not the calculator that’s similar to the one in VE.
The Lyra Kleos is a great match for the SME V as I posted with a true resonance frequency at 9hz. Better than that impossible.
The other calculation is wrong because the Lyra compliance spec is at 100hz not at 10hz that’s what all calculators run. Japanese cartridge compliance specs normally comes measured at 100hz instead 10hz and at 10hz the Kleos has a compliance around 17-18cu not 12cu.
Any rookie knows that, even me. Obviously both of you have to follow learning, as today.
Again, for whatever reasons you just don't read in the rigth way the posts in thios and other threads because I was not who posted:
"" Your target for mechanical resonance is between 7-12Hz. The mechanical resonance is a product of the mass of the cartridge in the arm vs the compliance of the cantilever of the cartridge. Changing the load from 47K to 100 Ohms can easily get you outside of this target window- and that can cause tracking problems.. " "
Dear @imhififan : I followed your advise and my curiosity and made some tests with 4 different cartridges mounted in two identical tonearms in the same whole room/system. Cartridges were: Denon 103, Sumiko Talisman ( B ), vdH Colibri and Ortofon A95 and I used 3 different of my test recording LPs where I runned for resonance and tracking . All cartridge/tonearm alignment set up as accurate as I can and take care of recording/stylus tip clean. I used too the after market AT vacuum hold down item as Discwasher gun demagnetizer. I did it with and with out using the damping silicon tray in the tonearms:
results in all cases were with out differences because thwe load impedance changes.
I used too 5-6 LP demanding tracks of nor mal MUSIC recordings one a Sheffield direct to two track recording where by a fault in my sample ( I think is a fault but not totally sure. ) in one track several of cartridges have a mistraking in that high frequency grooves. Here the mistracking in the 103 was what normally is no matters of load impedance and the others where the mistracking is really near to non-perceptible stays that way.
Other track was the last third part of the Telarc 1812 where not only has a toruose low bass grooves for any cartridge but at the same time tortuose high frequency with the Carrillon/tambourin/triangle. Here the load changes shows no difference on tracking/resonance and in all the LPs " clicks/pops " were non-existents due to load changes.
As with all voltage amplification circuits, proper impedance loading is crucial to the resultant frequency response of the audio signal. The P1 provides a selection of five hundred resistance values from 20Ω all the way to 100kΩ in logarithmic increments; you’ll have steps of 1 ohm in the 20 Ohms range and the gaps between the values are increasing as you go upwards. The steps around 24k Ohms or above, are at 500 ohm increments. While most manufacturers will tell you to "go with your ear" while choosing the right loading, CH has developed an approach based on scientific measurements. The P1 is built in with an ingenious two part "Wizard" which will determine the optimal settings for GAIN and MC loading resistance automatically.
The P1 comes with a test LP designed to work with the P1’s internal distortion analyzer.
How reliable is the Wizard? I compared the results generated by the P1 versus the results from my own proprietary test LP and analog setup software currently under development. We arrived at the exact loading choice with a difference of only 10-20 ohms. Assuming we are relying on each other as the reliable benchmark, the results are close enough to be called scientifically verifiable! "
Swiss made too and expensive Dartzeel 18NS. MC load impedance up to 300ohms:
What's happening with you and with what you read here and every where?
I don’t know, I admit that I am having a hard time following along.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
