Rauliruegas....What can you say about the other cartridge technologies.
Ceramic (Piezoelectric)..Using this technology very cheap cartridges could be made, but a few true High Fidelity ones were also made.
Capacitive...Tracked at one gram when other cartridges were 5 grams or so.
Strain gauge...
Any others?
. |
Jsadurni , don't forget Apple and Microsoft:) |
Dear Eldartford: The last Piezo that I use was a very very old Zenith, because of time I can't comment nothing about. I never knew any High Fidelity unit like you mentioned, sorry.
Strain gauge, well Sao Win ( Win Labs ) designed one: the SDT10 that I never heard and that had not much success and in the last CES was presented a new strain gauge cartridge design that I can't remember the manufacturer. The strain gauge design has some advantages because there is no magnets/coils/armature/moving mass ( there are no problems with capacitance, impedance, hum and the like ), it can go down to DC!!! and goes easyly to 40-50kHz ( flat ), needs its own preamp that could be its " weak " link.
It will be interesting to test this one straing gauge cartridge bis a bis a " normal " one and compare the quality sound reproduction of both. Any one out there ( in controled conditions ) already hear it?
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
|
Dear Jsman: The B&O cartridges are a very good choice too.
Regards and enjoy the msuic.
Raul. |
Thanks you guys for all the replys, even the ones that got a bit OT. |
Jsman - So what MM and MC cartridges have you deciced to try? Do you plan on using the Rogue or something else? |
Well I think for now I will use the Rogue phono stage, I had Anthem pre 1-p phono stage until recently, I sold it to simplfy things and installed the phono stage in the Rogue. As for the cartridge I have decided on the Dyna 20X VPI special version (1.0 mv) output. |
Jsman - The output of the Dyna 20X may allow you to use either the MC or MM sections of your preamp. It would be interesting to see which phonostage you prefer.
If you also use a JMW arm with your Scoutmaster, then take advantage of being able to compare cartridges via interchangable armwands. So when you have another, identical armwand you can see if you enjoy your new MC more than your AT 440MLa. |
Hi again Raul,
In response to your 05-05-07 post, I do not have direct experience with simultaneous play of MM/MC cartridges on the same track. This is a nice feature to have and it would be interesting to hear a cartridge/stage combo in this manner. However, I can see some being concerned about the effect that one cartridge/arm combo has toward the other during simultaneous playback -- adding still one more variable to account for.
The author of this thread asked a question about using MM cartridges and going back to doing so after trying MCs. This question and the replies posted can potentially be misleading and may be better interpreted by clarifying that the preferences expressed by members involve more than just the sonic performances of the cartridges alone.
As to the test CD idea I did say that what I proposed is a long shot and that I was just thinking out loud. Of course this process requires some inverse RIAA step prior to routing the signals to the preamp. The set-up you suggest -- MM and MC cartridges with a multi arm tt through separate MM and MC stages in one chassis -- is a good one. However, this still does not allow one to separately determine the sonic contributions of the MM or MC stages. Although, not perfect, the test CD idea is more ideal than even the convenient set up you suggest when one wants to first evaluate the sonics of his MM vs. MC phonostage.
Here is yet another (admittedly expensive) idea... a TT using laser technology to extract music from the grooves may serve as a source to be able to compare the a MM vs MC phonostage. If such a unit already puts out line level signals, then it would be easy to add a well designed inverse RIAA to feed the phono sections being compared. Despite the need to have to also apply a neutral attenuation/gain stage to equalize the signals, this approach had one advantage over the test CD idea. It does not require an AD/DA conversion as all signal processing is done in the analog domain.
As you and Frankm1 already posted, ultimately and as far as day to day use is concerned, it really does not matter. In fact, I also hinted similarly near the end of my second post to this thread. Although obvious, it is easy to overlook that a comparison of a MM and MC cartridge is one that involves an evaluation of a specific cartridge/phonostage combo vs. another. In such a setting, we have to accept that we cannot conclude that a MC is better than a MM, or vice versa, as the differences heard is partially attributable to the performances differences between the phono sections used.
So the attempt to investigate how one can characterize the sonic differences between MM and MC phonostages is consistent with trying to keep all other factors equal. Once accomplished and an equivalent performing MM and MC stage (with identical sonic signatures) is found, it can serve as a great tool. THIS IS ONLY IMPORTANT if one aims to truly and definitively determine the real differences between a MM and a MC cartridge.So it would still be interesting to hear excellent, creative, or crazy suggestions on how one can compare (purely from an academic point of view) the sonics/performance of a MM vs a MC phonostage. It would be great to have a way to factor out this variable so it does not cloud a MM/MC cartridge comparison.
Regards, |
Guys I think this thread got a bit away from what I was looking for. I guess what I really want to know is, who went back to a MM cartridge because they did not like the MC cartridge. |
Jsman - I went from MC to MM and have decided to keep both. Although I am newer to MMs, I can say that I am glad I have gotten to experience them. I enjoy the strengths of each type of transducer. Since you have a phonostage that has a MM and an MC section, you have an excellent oportunity to find out for yourself which type you prefer through the Rogue.
As to whether or not I like an MC over a MM... :-) My posts should show where I stand on arriving at an answer to this question, which upon further inspection is a lot more involved than it appears initially. |
Dear Ctm: Even if Jsman has the answers to his question ( IMHO he already has it ) and even if you read what he posted on 05-08 and 05-09, well he is the " boss " in this thread and he is right that his thread is a bit " away......" and we have to respect. Sorry to disturb you Jsman.
Why don't you start a new tread about?
Regards and enjoy the music.
raul. |
A direct comparison between MM and MC is difficult, because in common practice phono preamps have an extra pre-preamplifier stage or a step-up transformer to satisfy the extra gain required by MC cartridges. This introduces a sufficient loss of transparency as well as colorations, that will render the direct comparison useless.
For this test to work, both phono preamps should have identical number of stages, components, working conditions and signal response. This is of course not possible (due to the mentioned gain issue), but it can be approached within reasonable limits. With a good topology, it is possible to duplicate most of the circuitry without needing to have an extra stage (or transformer) for the MC cartridge, effectively rendering the differences between MM and MC phono stages irrelevant.
Having said this, I must also express that I still prefer MC cartridges. I have yet to hear an MM cartridge approaching the soundstage definition, the attack speed, and detail resolution of the best MCs (love the Dynavectors). Whether this has to do with the MMs having so much inductance, or its higher mass, I don't know for sure. This has to be investigated further.
Regards, |
Jmaldonado...As I said in a prior comment, at least one such preamp exists (Tandberg 3008A). There are just 2 gain stages and only a couple of resistors differ between the MC and the MM circuits so as to adjust gain. (Of course the inputs have loading resistors and capacitors as appropriate for each cartridge type). It seems to me that if you can achieve a good MC preamp it is a trivial change to cut the gain for MM use.
On the other hand Rauliruegas has designed his unit with different circuits, and different transistor types, because he feels that each type of cartridge should have an optimal design. |
Eldartford, how do you know this? Do you have the schematic or something?
Regards, |
Jmaldonado...I bought the service manual, so I have the schematic. |
Me too. Circuit City is selling them. |
Eldartford: I see. This appears to be a good way to switch the gain between MC and MM. However, the amount of gain change seems extreme IMHO.
Audiofeil: Thx for the info.
Regards, |
|
About schematics...In the good old days the owner's manual always included the schematic. For pro audio equipment this is still true. If I buy the thing I think that I should have knowledge of how it is made without having to open the cover and reverse-engineer the circuit boards.
Rant over.
. |
