MC-MM-MI CARTRIDGES . DO YOU KNOW WHICH HAS BETTER QUALITY PERFORMANCE? REALLY?

@rauliruegas I have talked recently about the Clearaudio Charisma which I have owned. It is a fun cartridge for rock and roll because it is very dynamic and has great bass, it is also dark, tilted towards the bass. The Voice is a better tracker and is dead neutral. I set up a few inexpensive ATs for friends and I thought they sounded great for the price, but the build quality was questionable. One had a positive rake angle of 76 degrees, comically way off. It was returned for replacement.  The Goldring 1042 is the best current MM cartridge I have recently heard, but not in my system and I have not been able to examine one under the microscope. I am not going to go out and purchase a pile of MM cartridges on a lark. My own experience suggests to me that the more expensive cartridges have better overall build quality which should not surprise anyone. In short, I have heard MI cartridges that can compete with the best LOMC cartridges. I have yet to hear a MM cartridge that can compete with the best LOMC cartridges. People will talk lovingly of old MM cartridges as if they were better than strawberry rhubarb pie. I have not had that experience so I can not comment. Back when I had those cartridges, Stantons, Empires, ADC's, Shures, Pickerings and B+O's, my system was not near what it is today. I do find it interesting that my favorite cartridge was the B+O. Go figure. 

Next I am going to find out just how good or bad these new R T R prerecorded tapes are. I was just given a Nagra IV-SJ! What a beautiful little thing. It's  outboard power supply is dead. I have a new one coming. Once I am sure everything is working I'll get the 10.5" adapter set and try a tape. If it does not sound as good as people say it does it will still make a handsome display piece. I do not intend on recording anything myself which is a good thing because it only takes these crazy scientific microphones. I would have to buy an outboard microphone pre amp. 

 

@rauliruegas Correct, the SG sound's bright because it does not follow the RIAA curve accurately. That has nothing to do with the fact that it can not track well. I sat with Mr Ledermann for 2 hours discussing and listening to the strain gauge and he freely admitted the SG does not track as well as his MI cartridges. The Hyperion will handle twice the velocity the SG will. He relates the hardest part of designing the SG was getting it's tracking up to the level he could sell it in good conscious. He also relates the SG is kinder to shellac masters causing less wear. I'm not sure how this can happen, but this is coming from him, not me. 

Dear friends: I can see that all of you are " inclined " for LOMC or MI cartridges and no one posted yet nothing important about MM cartridge motor designs. Well @dgarretson did it when he posted about Precept cartridge.

That fact, at least with the gentlemans that already posted ,  could says many things and for me says that no one of you were exposed/listened to top MM cartridges that outperforms The Voice or the Statement that mijos " die " for or top today/vintage LOMC cartridges.

One gentleman posted that he did not needs to listen MM cartridges and other said that owned the Grace F9 and that's it. Btw, the Grace F9 was in reality as an entry level in the Grace cartridge catalogue but the ones to listen was/is the F14 series that's where a high quality level belongs in Grace manufacturer.

Not even audiophiles as @lewm that posted about Stanton where he is an owner is a top MM vs the really top MM cartridges but at the medium step of that ladder, yes a good cartridge  but no more than that.

I was and am exposed/listen to the true/real top MM quality level performance ladder and that's why I put at the same level that all the other cartridge designs ladder alongits couple top truly to dedicated Pho Stage design that with out it no one can appreciates what I can .

Rigth not I'm listening one of those true top MM cartridge coming from Audio Technica: AT ML180 OCC that can beats any SS MI today cartridges but not only the AT outperforms several cartridge today designs but other MM too as: Audio Technica AT36 with today stylus shape: this is a fantastic performer as is the AT 160 LC OCC or the AT 25 but the Technics EPC 100C MK4 ( stand alone unit. )  or the U205CMK4 are incredible performers. Signet TK 10 ML MK2 or the Precept 440 and 550ML both came from AT Group and named by @dgarretson  or Pioneer 550E. Yes the JVC X-1 MK2 and Excel ES-70EX4 and I can't let out Shure with the Ultra 500 and the ML 140HE.

With out been exposed to one of those MM cartridges along a top first rate dedicated MM phono stage we can't know about MM cartridge performance levels and how it compares against the other cartridge motor designs.

I one of you has the rigth MM phono stage and is lucky enough then will can to find out a couple of those MM cartridges by ebay or directly in Yahoo Japan or other japanese web sited nad you can find out for peanuts when outperforms 10K+ yoday any kind of cartridge motor designs: some of them not all today samples of that level.

 

R.

Dear @bdp24 : I really don't disagrre with you from your last post but my point of view is a little different due that as we all know each link in the home system chain is overall important but when we are talking of the LP/analogue chain as a " mini-system " the both critical and more important issues other than the LP source and cartridge/tonearm alignment belongs to the cartridge it self and with out doubt the phonolinestage due that the cartridge is the " mini-system " source and the phonolinepreamp is the processor of the source cartridge signal.

Exist importance gradation levels in all the system chain and for me that's my gradation for very good reasons.

 

R.

@mijostyn  : " and it will not handle high groove velocities near as well as a MI or MC cartridge will. " 

SG has no mistracking problems as a fact exist many MC/MI that can't handle high velocities recorded LP grooves, not the SG. It's brigthness comes from no RIAA and from its dedicated phono stage but that cartridge ( SS models, not Panasonic or Sao Win. ) tracks everything even at inner grooves.

 

R.

Please offer a mechanism to explain why a “good LOMC suppressed groove noise better than the others”, other than that’s your opinion.

 @lewm It’s just an observation that I came to realize after 50 plus years of playing records using different turntables, arms, phone amps and cartridges. There’s no mechanism involved, just personal experience. Could it be wrong? Maybe…Addressing your other comment, “Good” is arbitrary and hard to define but…what ever you think it is…seems best.

@rauliruegas Those ADS’s must sound fantastic in your room! Thanks for sharing! Seeing your cartridge collection I noticed a couple in particular, it takes me back to a time where I put a lot of hours on Stanton 681EEE’s and Empire 2002’s.

Apologies for the late reply, “life” gets in the way sometimes :-)))

 

@tomic601: And in fact, the cartridge/tonearm/turntable/RIAA phono amp may be considered a single multi-piece component, the performance of each evaluated only in relation to the others. The same is true of the loudspeaker/amplifier interaction, and the loudspeaker/listening room as well.

Addendum: As others have noted above, the unique sound of the London/Decca pickups is not a consequence of them being moving iron designs, but rather of their lack of having a cantilever (Decca referred to their design as "Direct-Sensing"). In J.Gordon Holt’s review of the Decca Blue in the Autumn/Winter (3) 1973 issue of Stereophile Magazine (where I learned of the Decca cartridge), he named that "cantilever haze". He also referred to the "attack" I cited as "transient snap".

Also noted above is the ability of the cartridge to reproduce the "texture" of the sound produced by instruments. The sound of a guitar pick sliding down a string is visceral, as is the sound of the tip of a drumstick hitting a cymbal, producing (in the case of good cymbals) a percussive "click". You can hear the sound of the material the instrument is made of, including the wood texture of an old Martin acoustic guitar, and the steeliness of a Telecaster.

 

The ideal phono preamp typology should be a separate thread…imo… My point remains it is impossible to evaluate a cartridge by listening without some form og gain, EQ or both…. 

@lewm   Cascode forever!

I have been exposed over many years to how a Cart' can be perceived in use, when exposed to the conditions being referred to. Unwanted conditions that can be avoidable or much much improved.

Many years past, on a heavily modified Idler Drive TT, a friend introduced a cheap MM to a SME 3009 Tonearm and had visitors assess the Pairing. The intention was to revisit over time, allowing for the Cart' to settle. The Tonearm was to undergo methods to improve its condition, i.e, Servicing and then adding upgrades, from mechanical through to Signal Wire. All revisits as the TA works progressed were assessed using the same MM Cart'. There was a point in time that the Cart' was clearly better than any recollections had, and the perception was it would be hard to better with any Tonearm Cart' configuration. The mind can play games, as a swap out to a different Tonearm and Cart' both known to be better choices, made the SME 3009 > MM sound very very poor.       

I know through my experiences had, that when a Cart' is used on a set up that has attempts made to address the optimisation of Mechanical Interfaces and methods are in use that are able to support and effectively isolate the Critical Parts from excessive influence of Kinetic Energy Transferral, there is easy to detect changes to the sonic being produced as the outcome, the voicing of the Cart' being used can be very easily distinguished.

My experiences around a Certain Cart' Brand, when Cart's are being used between Certain Purchase Values from the same Brands Range of Models, or as a same range of model Cart' having undergone Modification, such a different Styli as a  replacement only, or a Cart having undergone further modification. The differences from Cart's in use are quite discernable, when such Cart's Families are experienced in use on a system addressing referred to interface issues already mentioned.

I avoided the subject of off set Spindle > Groove centring LP's, as there is always a risk of this condition being present, when known the Vinyl Manufacture Quality Tolerance, where the Spindle Hole Centre is acceptable to be offset to the Groove by approx' 0.2mm.

The following will suggest why a 0.2mm off set can be classed as not too concerning issue, and the last one needing to be addressed, as it does not really contribute detrimentally to the energy being sent by the Styli.

I think on this matter the Industry, if able to maintain the standard for a tolerance of 0,2mm,  has been fair to the Customer. Much Much more expensive items are produced to assist with extracting recorded data from the LP that are being sold with conditions much more detrimental to the quality of the sound to be produced.  

Most record pressing standards have a production tolerances that are producing a centre hole to groove eccentricity tolerance of 0.2 mm maximum.

Apply the 0.2mm to a playback radius of 100 mm (approximately the centre of the LP modulated groove area) equates to a wow of +/- 0.2 % peak ( 0.14 % RMS). As this is for most an people inaudible, it does seem like a fair tolerance for a standard production item. Does a Premium production Item address the off-set to a Zero mm dimension?

Usually, when I refer to eccentricity of a rotation, I refer to the eccentric rotation of the LP, in conjunction, with the eccentric rotation of the Platter Spindle Bearing being the main concern.

Where the combined LP/Spindle Off Set eccentricity does become a little more interesting, is when there are individuals reporting that eccentricity is identified up to 5mm as the guestimated off set. Such reports about the off set being more than 0.2mm are quite incorrect, when coming from reports that are claiming noticeable movement of the Headshell that far exceeds 0,2mm.

Using the Headshell as the indicator of the LP's off set dimension, is only showing the effect of the force being applied to the Headshell as it passes the groove location of where there is maximum force being exerted, which is then incorrectly described as the full force being generated by the groove off set.

There are a Huge amount of variables as to why a reported off set from a visual observation can be seen to be approaching up to 5mm. As a layman, I would suggest the LP's 0.2mm off set is a very small influence on what is being detected and there are other influences contributing in a much larger measure. 

How many individuals who are willing to report on a Cart's qualities are using a Cart' on a Tonearm that has a noticeable deflection to the Headshell, at a particular area on the LP's surface, that can be seen to be guestimated between 2-5mm as the off set deflection. Does different Cart's on the exact same set up with the LP placed at the exact same orientation on the platter produce identical off set deflection seen on the Headshell?

If this type of deflection was made known when one is supplying their report on the impression a Cart' has made, how much would another attach themselves to the report declaring it to be creditable. 

Once more, where is the 'all things being equal', all thing are uniquely bespoke to each individuals experiences had at the replay environment.    

"Strange creature"? That's me, for sure.

Bipolar transistor for balanced circuit; FET for single-ended circuit.  Either used in a cascode topology with a tube "on top", gives very high gain with very low noise.

Don't really need a FET or a SUT to amplify the voltage of LOMC. A well designed BJT  with parallelism and premium parts does it better and just as quietly.

Pindac lists all the things to worry about - good to keep them in mind in a thread like this one.

@pindac Good Lord man…possibly the board room white paper on why the CD was invented… You left off ( possibly due to brevity ? ) the off center record… of course Nakamichi fixed that…. Not everyone is pitch sensitive… love ya man

 

and yet… The line at my local RSD. ( Lou’s in Encinitas ) exceeded 5 hours at about noon… Certainly some audiophiles in the line…but… lot’s of music lovers craving physical media…. fun

 

@mke246 The Armstrong sounds great. None of my 78's sound that good. It sounds pretty much like the Caruso I have, all midrange. Are you using a pop and click filter?

@dogberry Good for you. The Decca is a purely British view of the situation. Nice idea until you try to use one. It did not survive in the market for rather obvious reasons once you use one. Some people swear by them. Human's are strange creatures. 

@tomic601 There is a strong argument for MI cartridges outperforming MC cartridges. I wound up using both and my reference is a MC cartridge. The Soundsmith Hyperion MR has the most advanced stylus shape I have ever seen. 

@pindac So, what's new?

I've been inspired to read about Induced Magnet and Variable Reluctance cartridges as variations on the Moving Iron concept as a result of this thread. It always seemed a bit odd to classify a Decca as being the same thing as a Grado or a Soundsmith or Nagaoka, and now I have alternative names available! Decca used neither, I think, preferring to call it a tip-sensing design.

Old Linn Basik/Akito going from MMs to current Ortofon Quintet Blue MC...sort of amazing sounding...tweaked by nearby Goodman's...el cheapo...into an old Caimbrige phono pre with a bespoke Peter Madnick Pangea power supply. Sounds superb.

The impression made from a Cartridge, as being nudged into the discussion by tomic601, is fundamentally dependant on the Mechanical Interfaces that are present.

A non- True Axis of the rotation of the Platter Baring Spindle and noise/energy transfer from the Platter Spindle Bearing Function are as the most simplistic description, a detriment to the optimal function of the Cart' in use.

The accuracy of the Speed of the rotations are at some degree of variation, quite able to be detected and ultimately effect the impression being made of the sound being produced perception of quality.

The Tonearm is very capable of impacting on the Cart' and can very easily be a detriment to the optimised function of the Cart'.

The selected Mechanical Interface for the Tonearm to Platter and Geometry used are both capable of being  a detriment to optimised function of the Cart'.

The Kinetic Energy Transfer from the Ambient Environment, into the Support Structure and Turntable > Styli / Tonearm > Styli are a detriment to the optimised function of the Cart'.

Any of the above detrimental impacts are present to a varying degree across all systems in use.

The energy sent from the Styli, to be converted to a electrical signal, to be sent on for Amplification, is not ever going to be the purest energy from the groove modulation only, the electrical signal produced will have been impacted on from other energies being transferred to the Styli when interfaced in the groove. If one thinks this is not occurring in their Vinyl Replay Set Up, there is a little bit of the fantastical at play in their thoughts.

'All things being equal', across a broad Spectrum of Users, is an impossibility.

Add to this the LOMC Cart' being reported on.

How many Cart's are being assessed on the experience had when they were at their condition, that could be suggested they were at their optimal.

A Brand New Cart' is well known to need a 100+hours to become balanced in the overall presentation.

When does the Cart' start to lose its designed in optimisation, only when the Styli shows wear? When the Tension Wire loosens and has lost the ideal interface with the Armature and Damper?

As for all Cart's, at what point of usage does their designed in optimised performance become one that is compromised through usage/ wear and tear/ exposure to the environment. 

Dust has been witnessed built up on the critical interfaces within a Cart' where there is a need to have a freedom of movement. Witnessed dust, has clearly been a detriment to the movement and will have been a substance that has been causing a resistance to the freedom of movement. 

As a result of differences of a condition within a Cart's environmental effects on the Cart' not all being equal over a period of time. Once more, 'All things being equal' is an impossibility to be in place.

Each report is a unique and bespoke experience, that can only be had by being at the place where the sound is being produced.

I have no problem with accepting anybody's reports on the experience they have had, the impression made on them and influence of the impression, which motivated their end choice.

A Cart' from the design MM/MI/IM/MF/LOMC/HOMC/Ceramic, where one has proved to be a most preferred Cart' at what ever the cost, is totally acceptable.

Due to all the variations that can be present and impact detrimentally on a Cart' being used, it is not possible for myself to believe there is a report that is one to be ubiquitous, all reports are unique.

Depending on the environment the Cart' is used in, the user report can be quite flawed in its content about the Cart's quality at producing energy to be transferred to produce sound.            

An act of clarification; TT includes effective isolation… HRS grade or better…

Somebody s mentioned Signet and Grace, i have both an TK-9ea and an F-9 w Soundsmith Ruby OCL. Both are excellent… especially as the allow me to get around the FET front ends of both the Herron and ARC Ref phono front ends….…..but i wouldn’t trade the relatively LOMC Kuzma, Koetsu or the Dynavector for them…

Enjoy the music….

@rauliruegas I mentioned the 404 because i sold probably 50 of them in the Eighties,,,, i started in a Grado centric shop in 1978.. As you may also recall the 80’s shop displayed and sold the ADS 2030 you mentioned. Fun. 

I would submit for @lewm that one mechanism for lower groove noise is tanking in the phono stage… bit surprised  @atmasphere Ralph has yet to weigh in.

Which in my mind leads into thinking about the essential 4 elements of a phono front end: TT, Arm including that VERY sensitive wiring, Cartridge, and very critical the how and how much gain… I suspect some just don’t much like those FET needed for many LOMC… Aint nothing free…transformers, FET, Tubes…. all have + / -

Raul and the civil are welcome in Seattle or Carlsbad… there is always much to be gained in visiting / listening w others….

And i agree, Kid next door got a 4 year full ride on her talents… i’ve a few high speed reference tapes of her shredding the best Royer ribbon…. a steady diet of real music never hurts….

@rauliruegas 

I had previously owned a Clearaudio Concept turntable with a Clearaudio Concept mm cart.  I was then offered the opportunity to upgrade to the brand's moving coil and as my Musical Surroundings Phono stage had appropriate settings paid for the upgrade.  I couldn’t do A/B comparisons but I regretted the change; I had gained a little low level detail at the expense of a dryness.  Eventually became so unhappy that I sold it off .  
  Eventually I acquired a Technics Direct Drive-I had listed after these in my youth-and this time spent a fair amount of time auditioning perhaps six cartridges, including a few moving coils.  The results were all over the place- some would emphasize different aspects of music that others didn’t quite prioritize-so I went for a relatively inexpensive mm that pleased me since vinyl is a secondary play back media for me.

  I only offer my observations as my personal observations, not a dogma, and every one is entitled to their opinions .  In general they all reproduced music at a high level, and then it becomes a question of what each listener prioritizes 

In my experience I would rank LOMC 1st, then HOMC, followed by MI, and then MM. I've had Ortofons (MM and MC), Grados, B&O, Hana, Grace, Shure, Pickering, ADC, Sonus, and even AKG. My intro to LOMC was an Ortofon MC-20 whose peaky high end was a great match for my soft Double Advents. I loved all 3 B&Os, I always admired the overall sound and presentation of Grados (when compatible and didn't hum). The tracking abilities of the Shure were offset by its ho-hum dynamics. ADC and Sonus were very high compliance and sounded very smooth, but often failed when the cantilever suspension collapsed. The Pickering XSV-3000 was a sleeper, detailed and romantic, would track anything. The AKGs never had much market share, but I would liken them to the Ortofon 2M. Grace F9 never did much for me, neither did the lower end A-T. The higher end A-T (AKA Signet) were excellent, but still lacked the explosive dynamics and transparency of MC. Currently,  I am very happy with a Hana MH running into my modified Holman Apt 1. It is quieter than the LOMC, with great dynamics and transparency, and in my VPI JMW 10.5 3D Printed arm, tracks as well as I have any need for, and I save the not insubstantial cost and hassle of another preamp and cable. So while I have no doubt a higher end LOMC with suitable preamp and cabling may yield an incremental improvement, the 5X to 10X cost differential isn't justifiable for me.

@tomic601  : Audioquest cartridges weremade by Scan-Tech same builder ( OEM ) of all Lyra cartridges. 

So it's not at random that AQ came with very high quality performance levels.

R.

@mke246 It seems none of the cartridge manufacturers think 78s are worth the effort. I use an Ortofon 2M series for 78s. It has a huge bonded spherical stylus. To describe the 78s I have a scratchy would be an understatement. I would love to know what a new unused 78 sounded like. I do have digital examples of Caruso singing that were taken from 78s and cleaned up with DSP. He sounds like he is in a phone booth holding his nose singing into a plastic bag, but you do get the idea.

Some recent examples from my channel. Both made with the much-maligned Strain Gauge. With 78s, it’s really mostly about the engineer. The climax in the last minute of that Armstrong record sounded brutally harsh with the Shure and perfect with the SG. All the past engineers have rolled it off hard to avoid distortion. Most engineers favor truncated elliptical stylii, and that's what I use, too. Sadly there aren’t many good 78 engineers, so a few of us audiophile collectors have taken it upon oursleves to do it. The work never ends!

 

Dear @tomic601 : It’s weird that you mentioned the Audioquest HO AQ 404 because as you can read in my Agon virtual system that’s one of the HOMC cartridges that I own and for a good reason. Good.

Btw, Audioquest had the same model but LOMC design too.

 

R.

Dear @mahler123  : I'm curious how do you arrived to that conclusion that's similar to mine? because I read that you own only MM cartridge/phono stage. I don't think that what you posted was just at " random " but could be.

Can you explain a little about? thank's in advance.

 

R.

Dear @ak749  : IM means:Induced Magnet as the ADC crtridges and MF is: Moving Flux as the Astatic/Micro Seiki/Glanz and MP: Moving Permalloy like the Nagaoka ones. The Electrostatic I mentioned is the MicroAcoustic cartridges and all these cartridge motor designs work through MM phono stages.

You can get samples of all the cartridge motors mendioned in the thread through ebay and other web sites.

R.

Small point:  I did not mean to declare definitively that LOMCs can fail to produce realistic piano music because of low compliance resulting in mistracking.  I certainly do not know that to be the case.  I was just offering that as one unsubstantiated possibility.  I do also observe that my LOMCs with highish compliance, like the Ortofon MC2000, do a much better job on piano.  Thus I infer there might be a relationship.  But I campaign against making associations that seem logical but for which there is no direct evidence, and that is one example of such.

@mke246  It seems none of the cartridge manufacturers think 78s are worth the effort. I use an Ortofon 2M series for 78s. It has a huge bonded spherical stylus. To describe the 78s I have a scratchy would be an understatement. I would love to know what a new unused 78 sounded like. I do have digital examples of Caruso singing that were taken from 78s and cleaned up with DSP. He sounds like he is in a phone booth holding his nose singing into a plastic bag, but you do get the idea. 

Dear @mijostyn  : " I auditioned the Strain Gauge. It is on the bright side do to response irregularities and it will not handle high groove velocities near as well as a MI or MC cartridge will. "

I agree with you on the brigth side of SG but not in your last sentence due that as optical cartridge design SG did not develops voltage due that " no sense " groove velocity but its amplitude and tha's why in the first page of the thread @mke246  posted that his SoundSmith SG cartridges has not only lower noise but lower distortion even at inner grooves that his high compliance Shure cartridge and he has reason on what he is listening.

Interestingly, the material for which I use the SG has a flat treble response (1920s early electrical recordings), and after I run the SG input through an inverse RIAA treble filter, it's marginally darker than a moving magnet, which in my experience is almost always a good thing. Sometimes I really want to be able to use the moving magnet transfer, but there will always be a few spots where it has notes with distortion that the SG tracks brilliantly. Hard to explain. All my 78 stylii have aluminum cantilevers. I'd like to use something lighter, but it's going to be tough. A friend found someone to make him sapphire cantilever 78 stylii; might try those at some point. I hear they're a bit bright and need EQ to flatten out. I'd really like to find a sustainable 78 archival solution that is as good as or better than the SG and much more affordable, but no obvious answers in sight.

Collect em all and win. Flavorizers aka pleasure seeking has a big place w studio music where the intention is not accuracy and in anything coming out of a DAW. But flavorizing does not obviate the need for some from seeking better reproduction of sound. Some of us on the consuming end go to great lengths to make reference recordings… and certainly a few… precious few manufacturers do…

i fondly remember the magical, inexpensive yet in some systems intoxicating lowly $ HOMC Audioquest AQ-404….

Fun

@pryso Your below statements are ones that I identify with and can not be in more agreement, that broadening ones listening in the homes of others with a real enthusiasm and adeptness for thing audio is a substantial foundation for finding ones place in how a Audio System can sound. 

"I had opportunities to hear many different audio systems in a variety of home settings. "

"I've gone through, hearing a multitude of different systems is an education for our ears."

Can someone please provide a glossary for MM/MI/IM/MF/HOMC & LOMC?

Dear @mahler123 and friends :

" One can speak of general traits of differing technologies, but ultimately a high degree of musical fidelity can be obtained with all of them. "

 

Tha’s my main conclusion that I achieved through all my first hand experiences in the MUSIC/audio world.

 

Exist and existed several MM/LOMC/HOMC/MI/IM/MF/ELectrostatic/ and the like that are superb one against the other with no real winner no matter what.

 

As many of you I made and still make several cartridge compARISONS/EVALUATIONS/TESTS using over 30 different tonearms, over 10 different TTs, over 10 different phono stages, over 15 different SUTs, heavy different cartridge output levels/compliances/stylus shapes/cantilever materias and in several room/system and mainly in my room/system. In all cases/situations using almost the same test whole proccess using almost the same LP tracks at almost the same SPLs. So I trust in my unbiased conclusions.

One important issue is that my audio system noise floor is inaudible other that by a bat. You can swith on system link one by one or switch off and you can’t detect any noise even with your ear at 5cm. of my 95db efficiency speakers.

Each kind of design cartridge has its own noise floor and I agree with @mijostyn

that when we have a HO cartridge we totally now is HO and not a LOMC design no matter what and this is a heavy advantage between a HO cartridges against the LOMC ones but in the other side the LOMC cartridge has the great advantage that the cartridge signal pass internally to very short wires against the HO that in that specific regards makes a little higher signal degradation that the LOMC but nothig comes by free because that LOMC advantage has a price to pay for: it needs phonolinepreamps with additional gain stages that degrades too the cartridge signal where in the HO cartridges that degradation is lower.

So, it’s a figth between those cartridge specific characteristics that again has no inherent winner.

LOMC cartridges arenon sensible to load impedance/capacitance and this fact is an advantage when the MM and MI are sensible to load impedance and

capacitance.Nothing is perfect but electrostatic designs are not sensitive at allin those characteristics.

LOMC cartridges has other advantage when his cantilever/stylus is not changeable like the MM/MI/IM;MF;elctrostatic but in the old times and today these cartridge type of designs (not all only a few of them ) took assolution and B&O was the first design with fixed cantilever/stylus ( today only Grado and SS that came from B&O desin cartridges.) other manufacturers made different as Technics in his EPC 100C MK4 and Audio Technica in their models AT 24 and AT 25 but Signet too ( member of AT group. ) with the TKS9/10 where the stylus cantilever/is ounted in a tiny metal frame srewed to the bottom cartridge body.

This fixed cantilever/stylus is way important because avoid additional developed distortions that I detected with the Stanton/Pickering cartridge and where both been exactly the same cartridge design/motor Pickering

came with a tigther assemble to the cartridge than the Stanton one and you know what: you can interchange one for the other cantilever/stylus in the HO MM designs as a fact is the way how I listen to the Stanton.

There is an Agoner that almost hates the HOMC cartridges and my take is that he had not the opportunity to listen it in a first/top phonolinepreamp and the HOMC specific models that perfortma beautyful through a MM stage.We need a topMM stage to do it and for the MM cartridges and even the MI/MF/IM and the like that phono stage needs at least the we can load the cartridge at 100k not 47k and even 200k is better along the need it capacitance according each cartridge.

Well if some of us do not like the HOMC cartridges mainly reasons are the ones explained here but what about MC cartridges designs that are designed with user remplacable cantilever/stylus,ether LO/HO?

Well I still own 3 of those designs. One from Empire, one from Sony and the best ones in the world by Satin. Till you listen the Sony or Satin ( different models in between. ) HO changeable cantilever/stylus in the rigth MM phono stage you just can’t know whay you losted in the MUSIC enjoyment. The Sony was made by Satin and is a truly dificult cartridge to mates to any tonearm due that its weigth 18grs. with over 30 cu and 4.0mv output but it’s an excellent performer, its bass range is something you can live only true live MUSIC seated at near field position:period.

 

That I remember and he did it by coincidence the only Agonerbs that I know that already listened to a Satin HO replaceable stylus/cantilever are @sbank  and @dgarretson due that @sbank bougth from me a Satin ( that I still own and is formidable. ) that when he received and aftera few hours started to distort when @dgarretson by coicidence was at his place: Spencer knows about and yes I changed for a different cartridge that fortunatelly likes himand the Satin came back to me..

 

Btw, @dogberry touched the word " neurologist " and this link will explain all about that when listening MUSIC at home or in alive even or when we are doing comparisons:

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8228195/#:~:text=The%20amygdala%20participates%20in%20the,of%20the%20fight%2Dor%2Dflight

 

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

@lewm  The MC cartridges I have do not have any problem tracking. They range from medium to low compliance. The lower compliance cartridge uses the highest VTF, but it also has the largest contact patch. Higher compliance cartridges track at lower VTFs, but it seems they are all capable of handling 80um @ 315 Hz. 

@dogberry   I am not so sure about the two different end points. I think that is more a characteristic of the LP-S. It has been my experience that the best cartridges of each group converge. Any sonic differences are mostly due to minor differences in amplitude response. At this moment my gold standard is the Atlas SL. From the listening I did with the Hyperion MR I suspect that once I EQ it it will sound very much like the Atlas. 

@lewm I suspect I listen at louder levels than you do and are more irritated by phono stage hiss. The hiss is a problem coming from the phono stage not the cartridge. Obviously with higher output cartridges this is not as much of a problem. Phono stages that will gracefully amplify very low output cartridges without audible hiss at say 95 dBSPL are very expensive. My point is that you can get even better signal to noise ratios out of high output cartridges and much less expensive phono stages. 

That "lean" characteristic you note with LOMC cartridges is not universal. I would never describe the Atlas, MC Diamond or Signature Platinum as lean. However, MI cartridges can easily perform at the same level. As I have mentioned on many occasions, the Soundsmith Voice can give any cartridge a run for the money using much less expensive phono stages. People speak well of the Grado Epoch and I had a Statement at one point for over a decade. It was a very enjoyable cartridge. I also suspect that less expensive MI cartridges can perform very well like your Nagaoka. Now that I also have a MM phono stage I plan on trying one. 

@rauliruegas  I think you misunderstood me. By groove velocity I meant heavier modulation, miss-tracking. That brightness is because it does not have RIAA correction. It sounds very vivid which some people like, but it is not natural. 

I have a new Hyperion MR, but I can not really comment on it yet. It is a little brighter than I like and I will be able to EQ it shortly. Then I will listen more carefully and comment.

Looking forward to that. I could raid the retirement savings if I had to do so.

Anyway, I am rarely bothered by the sense that noise is a problem with LO cartridges. What I sense when comparing let’s say a good LOMC to a good MI cartridge is that the LOMC always seems just a tad lean compared to real music and compared to what the best MI cartridges can do. With the latter on average I get a greater sense of the real.

Exactly! My impression is that my LP-S and the Sussurro make two endpoints, and the Decca Reference sits between them.

@rauliruegas, thanks for the kind words and memories.  Your visit was a wonderful leaning experience and meeting you was a pleasure.

However I must make a correction, My Duntech speakers were Princesses.  The Sovereigns were much too large for my room, not to mention well beyond my budget.

But that was many years ago and many things have changed, including a major move.  Unfortunately I no longer have that decent sized group of audio friends nearby.  That was important since in San Diego I had opportunities to hear many different audio systems in a variety of home settings.  Just like live unamplified music, and the almost embarrassing number of components I've gone through, hearing a multitude of different systems is an education for our ears.

What I have learnt from this thread is that a MI Cart' can now be acquired for $12K.

Setting the Brand of that Cart's other models aside, what is the price jump from another go to MI Cart' to get to the cost referred to above, $6K, $7K, $8k as there are no in between models?.

In the MC Market the outlays to get to $12K, would easily be progressive in 300 - $500 increments, even all the way up to $15K, as a result of the range of models on offer.

Dear @mijostyn  : " I auditioned the Strain Gauge. It is on the bright side do to response irregularities and it will not handle high groove velocities near as well as a MI or MC cartridge will. "

I agree with you on the brigth side of SG but not in your last sentence due that as optical cartridge design SG did not develops voltage due that " no sense " groove velocity but its amplitude and tha's why in the first page of the thread @mke246  posted that his SoundSmith SG cartridges has not only lower noise but lower distortion even at inner grooves that his high compliance Shure cartridge and he has reason on what he is listening.

 

R.

Mijostyn, You wrote, "The one huge advantage of high output cartridges is a much better signal to noise ratio which everyone will notice right away." That is actually a very complex statement, not completely correct and not completely incorrect, in my opinion. To begin with a low output cartridge will per se have a worse SN ratio when its signal reaches the first amplification stage, simply because noise due to the LP surface irregularities and etc is a fixed base affecting all types equally and signal is purely a function of the cartridge output. So LO cartridges are at a disadvantage vs HO cartridges purely as regards the ratio of S to N, because S is relatively low. But at the phono stage output, I would think the disadvantage in SN ratio is ameliorated at least to a degree (different for each of the myriad of different possible combinations of cartridge and phono stage), if the phono stage is very low in noise and I suppose if one is using a SUT to supply some voltage gain for an LOMC. Anyway, I am rarely bothered by the sense that noise is a problem with LO cartridges. What I sense when comparing let’s say a good LOMC to a good MI cartridge is that the LOMC always seems just a tad lean compared to real music and compared to what the best MI cartridges can do. With the latter on average I get a greater sense of the real. Especially on piano jazz do I sense problems with good LOMCs. Again, I have never had a $10K+ LOMC in my system, or even one costing much more than $6K.

Since LOMC cartridges tend to be low in compliance, I would guess that most of my mild dissatisfaction with even "good" ones is due to mistracking, especially on piano.  So that would be my beef with LOMC, not noise.

@dogberry  Good to hear. Yes, all of the more advanced stylus shapes VTA sensitive because they have a longer contact patch. You can lose the high end easily. The OCL stylus is more like the stylus Lyra uses in the Atlas. It is not quite as severe as the replicant. Soundsmith's MR stylus is much more like the reolicant, but the Replicant remains the most severe stylus on the market. The GygerS is closest. I have a new Hyperion MR, but I can not really comment on it yet. It is a little brighter than I like and I will be able to EQ it shortly. Then I will listen more carefully and comment. 

Live Opera in a great theater is an incredible experience. You can't know what the human voice can do until you hear one and it is a great example of what a great system should sound like. Close your eyes for a few minutes and imagine you are listening to a stereo. Detail the sound in your mind, a mental note. 

I might also add that from my perspective tracking performance and detail are most important. With the ability to EQ a cartridge you can modify the sound to taste. The Hyperion MR is a great example. It tracks like a bandit and is superbly detailed, but just a bit on the bright side for me. This is easy to fix. Poor detail and poor tracking can not be fixed. 

@frogman Thank you for the link: I do know that musicologists regard tension and release as something written on the stave. My point was why is they can say that? Why do we all, or nearly all, recognise what the music is doing to us? That must belong to the realm of neurology, even if we don't have the foggiest idea of how.

@mijostyn After a day of experimentation yesterday, I'm of the opinion that the Sussurro MkII ES sounds different this time because it is awfully sensitive to VTA - I believe I have read that the Soundsmith OCL stylus looks a lot like an Ortofon Replicant. For the first time I'm seeing why Soundsmith cartridges are so beloved by their owners. Once I had fiddled with that, I ended up playing albums on the LP-S, Sussurro and Decca Reference. The LP-S plays them in a coolly clinical way, detailed but not necessarily involving (and this is supposed to be a relatively lush MC!). The Sussurro would be a great way of getting a non-vinyl person to see why they might try it out. It's warm, bouncy and rich, but still has nearly all the detail of the LP-S, if a bit less clarity. The Decca is somewhere between those extremes. I wish I were in a position to try The Voice and a Hyperion too. (I cannot speak about imaging or soundstage, having one ear and no ability to hear stereo.)

@rauliruegas You're right that rare live attendances at live music won't make much impression. I wonder whether the kind of performance makes a difference too? I used to go to half a dozen operas a year, so I feel I know what one ought to sound like (for that hall etc). My next door neighbour before my last move used to offer piano and chamber recitals in a purpose built space in her home, and often remarks how much she likes to listen to my hi-fi. I have very little exposure to small venue jazz, folk or vocals, so I may be less critical about those kinds of music. I suppose that at the end of it all, as long as we enjoy what we use, we should be happy. It just makes it harder to describe the sound of a cartridge to others if we don't share a reference point.

@lewm  exactly, especially when you consider price.

MM and MC cartridges occupy two distinctly different markets. Buyers of MC cartridges are willing to spend much more money on a cartridge than buyers of MM cartridges. Thus, MM cartridges are a much better value. MM cartridges rule below about $1500. MI cartridges seem to straddle the two markets. I would rather have say an Ortofon 2M Black LVB than any of the low end Hana cartridges. The one huge advantage of high output cartridges is a much better signal to noise ratio which everyone will notice right away.  If you have a MM phono stage and desire to get into the highest level of performance I can not recommend the Soundsmith Voice highly enough. It makes far more sense and will be less expensive than springing for a MC phono stage and cartridge. 

Mahler, in my opinion, no, it is not possible to generalize about the different transduction mechanisms, as regards a pecking order of what gives best SQ. All MCs are certainly not better than all MMs, to address your specific point.

@dover , great to hear from you and thank you for your concern, but it was not I who made the comment re groove noise.

In the endless debate about the relevance of the live music experience as reference, as @rauliruegas has pointed out this comment from @pryso is key.  It may not be possible or practical for some, but there is no getting around it.

*** I don’t intend to say attending one or two a year is sufficient. Repetition is needed to ingrain the unique sonics or each type of instrument and vocal range. Again there is the likelihood for sonic variations from one live venue to another, one brand or design of a given instrument to another, and individual vocal characteristics. So broad and aggregated experience becomes necessary. ***

 

 

Is it possible to really generalize about this?  Can we say that all mms are inferior to all mc, for example?  Or are some mm better than some mcs?  One can speak of general traits of differing technologies, but ultimately a high degree of musical fidelity can be obtained with all of them.  At some point listener preference becomes key