Develop a hierarchy for phono playback

Since a cartridge can't tell the difference between the vibrations it creates following the record grooves from the ones that are transferred through the TT and arm, I would put TT and arm at 1 & 2 followed by the cartridge, with phono stage at 4 and connecting cables, wires and SUT at 5, 6, and 7 respectively.

The cartridge is---as is the loudspeaker---a transducer. Both are the most variable (in terms of sonic character, color---the reproduction of vocal and instrumental timbre, and transparency) component in a system. IMO.

Likewise, the biggest contributor to the sound of a recording are the microphones, which are also transducers. Substituting a different recording mic can drastically change the sound of an acoustic instrument, far more so than changing any piece of electronic gear. 

turntable

tonearm

phono pre

cartridge

(internal cable)

external cable

billstevenson

I am hoping we can form a consensus ...

Not likely.

If starting out. Looking at investment level (assuming research and careful choice... the best and most compatible in each category). If you try to answer simply by performance... I just don’t know how to do that. Then you have to start comparing strange things that few would ever have experience with. 

~ Turntable (all) = Phono Stage in importance and is 95%... the cables will net you a small (say %5) improvement vs the major components. 

Then breaking down to the first level:

Turntable = Tone arm = Cartridge. About equal responsible for 95% of the sound quality.

So, I guess that means roughly 45% phonostage, 15% cartridge, 15% tone arm, 15% turntable and 5% wires.

This is about what my systems have typically ended up. For a long time I underestimated the phonostage and it was alway holding back my turntable. 

I used the same Cardas Myrtle heart cartridge, and the same phono preamp, on two different tables and tone arms.  The Marantz vs Transrotor with an Acoustic Signa­ture TA-1000 tonearm.  Huge, very noticeable difference. I would suggest balance and synergy, subject to owner’s bias of course.

Assuming that even the weakest link is not really weak,

what vinylcat said.

I think, cartridges less than about $500 are a waist of money, though. US prices, you can usually get some cartridges from the UK and Japan for significantly less.

@billstevenson 

  I burst out laughing when I read your first sentence “ I hope that we can build a consensus…”

I like your posts and think that you are a thoughtful listener.  However the subjectivity inherent to Audio appreciation mitigates against consensus building.

  IMO the best we can hope for on any topic are a couple of valid viewpoints that are cogently supported.  I have found personally that some great members here have viewpoints that just don’t conform to my reality although I respect the reasoning that goes into shaping their judgements.

  Meanwhile, back to phono stages…

I would like everyone to go back and carefully re-read ghdprentice's post.  I think his logic is excellent and could form the basis for consensus.  Thoughts?

The top of the list may need to be the record itself. Here there are 4 turntables set up from different manufacturers. A crappy record/recording sounds crappy on all 4. 
 

All leads back to the G.I.G.O. adage. 

In order of importance... 4/3/6/1/5 Phono to Preamp/2 Turntable to Phono Input/7. My reasoning for placing the phono preamp ahead of the cartridge is that too many systems never attain the potential of the cartridge due to a subpar phono stage.

I would say the better the cartridge, the more important the phono stage. So if you have 2000 dollars don't spend half of it on the phono stage. If you have 10, yes, absolutely. @ghdprentice is up there with his system, way across the 10K per component line, and he is always very thoughtful

The bias against "cheap" cartridges is lame. The Sumiko Pearl at 125 bucks or so was amazing...I use an Ortofon Quintet Blue MC which at 500 bucks or so isn't cheap but also sounds amazing. Don't be fooled by elitist baloney as there are tons of great sounding inexpensive options.

Very interesting, but I think it's more about figuring out the weakest link in your system as well as system synergy, rather than a strict hierarchy.

My system consists of a significantly upgraded Garrard 301 with an Ikeda tonearm.

The tonearm cable is Nordost Odin 2, which was a significant upgrade or the Nordost V2. I didn't think it would make much difference and I was wrong.

The cartridge varies, but is usually the Ikeda 9GSS or MSL Platinum.

I just upgraded my preamp to the Luxman CL-1000, which was a significant upgrade. At one point I had a couple of expensive stand alone phono preamps, but I prefer having them integrated into the preamp to cut down the box count.

According to most formulas, I have too much tonearm cable, and maybe not enough phono preamp depending on how much of the CL-1000 is attributed to phono preamp. As for the Garrard, people love or hate it. I love it.

Overall IMO a well balanced and excellent sounding analog front end as far as I can tell

+1 bdp24

Transducers always have the largest impact on sound transmission.

@billstevenson 

I think you left the most important factor off your list and that is cartridge alignment.  It may ruffle some feathers but a properly aligned $500 cartridge will sound better than a casually aligned $5000 cartridge.  

dave

@intactaudio  Won't speak for the OP but the assumption is that the cartridge would have proper set up including compliance/leveled turntable and vibration control. 

I can change the voicing of my entire system simply by changing the rectifier in the power supply to my phono stage. The biggest improvement to my current main system, the core of which started in 2006, was probably the change in cartridge, but everything else was up to snuff. I don’t know how to assign priorities or percentages simply because there are synergies and I guess I subscribe to a weakest link approach.

I also have no holistic view about system building beyond knowing what I hear, first hand. There are some known synergies, but a lot of factors go into sorting the system set up in the room to maximize its potential. In this sense, even using the same gear, I think every system almost becomes sui generis. 

Not dismissing the question posed, since I responded but I suspect you’ll find that some folks will be able to get great music out of a well set up vinyl front end with a modestly priced cartridge. 

So, my response should not be taken as a "rule" to apply to others, but rather, where I got the biggest uptick, once everything else was primed for it. Too many variables for me to wrap my brain around, perhaps. 

Interesting discussion.  I hadn't realized that the phono stage would make more difference than the cartridge, as some seem to say. 

I am also partial to the notion that the record should be at the top of the list, however.  No matter how great your equipment, a lousy record is still going to sound lousy.

I hate this sort of thread, but I am bored.  So, tonearm, phono stage, cartridge, wires cartridge to phono only, other ICs last. Why I hate this sort of thread: Any item in the chain can screw up the whole deal.  My ranking assumes each item is at least "good", and cartridge not misaligned, although my Viv Float tonearm constantly begs the question of alignment. You do have to align it according to the manufacturer template, which places the single null point at about 90mm from the spindle. So to that extent, even for the underhung tonearm, alignment is important.  And Dave demonstrated to me most vividly the importance of "zenith", the angle of the stylus contact surfaces to the groove walls which optimally should be 90 degrees.

@lewm said: "I hate this sort of thread, but I am bored." 

You need a hobby! :)

I hate this sort of thread, but I am bored

turn on a news channel

Well it seems that there is universal agreement on two points so far:  First, the record must be a good one, GIGO and all that jazz.  So we will stipulate that the record to be played must be of high quality in every respect.  And second, everything is aligned and set up properly.  So we will also stipulate that set up is precise and optimal as well.  There seems to be debate concerning the phono stage.  My bias puts it at the top of the list in a highly resolving system.  But perhaps compromise is possible if the priority depends on the system.  What think ye?

I agree that the phono stage is very important and I think the tonearm is almost as important. A lesser cartridge in a great tonearm can sound better than a high end cartridge in a so-so tonearm.

@dayglow 

I was referring to XYZ alignment....  X and Y being azimuth and VTA/SRA and Z being Zenith.  These are all parameters where the actual tracing facets can substantially differ from the cantilever / coil orientation.

@lewm 

The viv is an interesting twist to the whole Z alignment since in the underhung topology the Z error seems to have nowhere near the effect that it does in the case of a traditional overhung tonearm.    The key point in the zenith discussion is the diamond set WRT cantilever.  Aligning to a cantilever with a 1° Zenith error to the diamond set is a fools errand.   I have retipped multiple identical brand new  cartridges  only to find they all sound different.  it wasn't until consideration to the actual diamond tracing faces was given that a consistent sound was realized.  JR @wallytools  has many documented cases where the tracing facets are not 90° perpendicular to the cantilever and the 'accepted industry tolerance' is ±5°.  I have the test results that come with the cantilever assemblies and the best number I have seen of the 4 test sheets (3 samples of 50 cantilevers) is 1°40' and the worst was 3°50'.  I have pretty much accepted that getting a diamond set precisely 90° to the cantilever is a rare occurrence. 

dave

@intactaudio agree strongly with set up added to the list, and IMO that requires microscopy analysis to deal with errors such as zenith, which can be as much as +/- 5%.

Wally Tools is the only source that I am aware of that provides and end-to-end solution.

For the list...

1. TT (which for me includes arm because I've only bought ClearAudio combos.
2. Cart
3. Cart set up 
4. Phono stage
5. Wires

Why? 

The TT is the foundation. You can always grow into a commensurate Cart/PS combo.

Cart before PS because the cart influences the what PS you need or want to some extent. 

@whart wrote

So, my response should not be taken as a "rule" to apply to others, but rather, where I got the biggest uptick, once everything else was primed for it.

I think that last clause is important: all other things being equal, the closer to the source, the bigger change can be expected when something is upgraded. Errors there are going to be magnified going down the chain of reproduction; a "perfect" loudspeaker can only reproduce the imperfect signal from a poor cartridge etc. This assumes all components are roughly of the same calibre, and if you do have a "weakest link" it must be addressed first.

And don’t forget the platter mat...if your TT has one. After market mats can make a significant difference.

Cleeds and Mahler123 with their realistic perspectives correctly predicted that my effort to form a consensus would fail.  Still it has been worthwhile to try, because I got more than I had hoped for.  ghdprentice wrote in part:

 "...Turntable (all) = Phono Stage in importance and is 95%... the cables will net you a small (say %5) improvement vs the major components. 

Then breaking down to the first level:

Turntable = Tone arm = Cartridge. About equal responsible for 95% of the sound quality.

So, I guess that means roughly 45% phonostage, 15% cartridge, 15% tone arm, 15% turntable and 5% wires.

This is about what my systems have typically ended up. For a long time I underestimated the phonostage and it was alway holding back my turntable." 

For anyone aspiring to assemble a highly resolving system, my advice is that they  grasp the significance of his contribution.  I would like to thank everyone for their participation.

"I would like everyone to go back and carefully re-read ghdprentice's post.  I think his logic is excellent and could form the basis for consensus.  Thoughts?"

Many thoughts are already out there, and I have not changed my opinion that assigning percentages of importance to each item in the chain may make you feel good, because you can have a feeling of having achieved something, but it's worthless, because we each seek a slightly different goal and there are hundreds of ways to get there. 

Two honest men can have an honest disagreement.  A formula like this provides a useful guideline as we seek to reach our goals.  In particular it should underscore the relative importance of the often misunderstood phono stage.  I suspect that you, like I, have A - B'd expensive turntables and tonearms and can hear the subtle differences.  By comparison the difference in phono stages can be considerably greater.  And, if a top flight phono stage is in play it is ever so much easier to assess two top flight cartridges.  We each have found methodologies that suit us.  To each his own.  But to call gdhprentice's elegant solution "worthless" says more about you than you may wish you had said.  Would you care to recant?

I’m not @lewm, but "recant"? Seems to suggest that not following fixed percentages is heretical!

The English language is so imprecise.  I meant it more along the lines of soften his words.  And with that said, the spirit and intent of a model of this sort is not to be rigid, it is a guideline to aid self analysis.  Think of it as a kind of a decision tree to help figuring out were you are at and what next area of focus might be most productive.  It might have more value for me than for lewm.  That is ok, but the word "worthless" especially as used to apply to one and all is very strong.   

I would think it depends upon what your goals are.

If someone was making an all out assault on the state of the art, then they would spend the majority of money on a turntable.  There's a handful of $150k plus turntables, but phono stages seem to top out around $50k.  Does anyone make a $20k plus cartridge?

If you entire system is less than $20k, then you might choose differently.  Also are you putting together a vinyl setup from scratch?  Starting from a blank slate gives the user a lot of freedom, but I think it's more common for someone to already have a vinyl system and wants to improve it somehow.  My guess is that people in this situation overspend on a cartridge.  I could be wrong.