moving magnet or moving coil cartrige

Hi Raul and thanks for whatever you think you said.

Bill

Dear Audiofeil: My common sense tell me that you are an intelligent/wise/mature person with some audio level kow-how and I assume these because you are an audio dealer that carry several good " names " in audio and I can't imagine that those audio manufacturers give its products to a stupid or non know-how person.

Why then an intelligent/wise person like you IMHO made/posted so " stupid " ( with all respect to you, please no doubt about. Everything I post here is in good shape. ) answers/statements here?

That is out of my mind/no common sense and certainly for other people posts here are out of mind on theirs too.

Audiofeil, I'm talking about " oranges " and your answers/talking are about " ocean/beach " !!!!!, where is the relationship down there?

My attitude in almost all what I post is try to help other audio people, sometimes I achieve that target sometimes not but my attitude is to help, which yours?

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Audiofeil, No, I have not had enough. I love this BS. It's relaxing.

Yes, please dont buy MM cartridges, leave more for us!!!

TheMMC-1 and MMC-2 are excellent. Of course, If you are selling other brands they are automatically better....hahahaha

I was going through this phase a few months ago and I ended up buying three MM and a high output MC cartridges to try out for my self. I ended up keeping the high output MC because it sounded more musical to me, it like seeing the instruments playing i real time. Thats my experience. I bought the Clear Audio Virtuesio wood cartridge, Goldring 1042, Ortofon 2M Black, and a Dynavector 20XH. I kept the Dynavector, but I liked the Ortofon 2M Black, next, and it was hard to decide between the two. The 2M Black is much louder and brighter than the Dynavector. If I was going to keep parties then I would definitely keep the 2M Black. The best thing it to compare and listen for yourself if you have the chance to do so.

Mando..

Modern electronics and TX-2 tonearms aside there is no way the MMC-1 and MMC-2 compare to the cartridges I mentioned.

If you're going to cite modern this and that, let's not forget the advances in cartridge development. Better wire in the coils, better magnets, better quality control, and better (and smaller) stylus shapes.

In addition there are probably another half dozen including the Air Tight and Lyra Helikon that could have been included.

Had enough?

Audiofeil, It's an obvious question, but I have to ask it. You wrote above, "Well I disagree with this. I owned both the MMC-1 and MMC-2 with my B&O TX-2 some years ago. Etc." From these sentences, I gather that you used the MMC1 and MMC2 only in your B&O tt, and only several years ago. How then can you categorically contradict Raul's statement, as you do? Raul is using modern electronics and one or another of his very fine turntables to make his judgment. It could be that there's gold in them thar hills, as regards the old B&Os, OR you could be right. But we don't really know from your experience. FWIW, I once owned a B&O cartridge (don't remember which one), and I found it to be rather colored, in the sense that it cast a homogeneous sheen on most music. But I'm quite sure that the turntable and tonearm and preamp I was using then were junk, compared to what I have now.

Kurt,
Although I agree wholeheartedly with you, price had nothing to do with Raul's assertion.

I simply pointed he was wrong in that regard.

Dear Kurt tank: I can't understand what you posted on the B&O cartridges if you don't have any single idea how them performs in your today audio system loaded at 100KOhms along 100pf on capacitance.

It will be interesting/learning for many of us how you achieve those conclusions, maybe I'm missing something about. Could you explain on it?

Thank you in advance.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Audiofeil: True, the B&O cartridges can't compete with the better cartridges that you've named, (I happen to own, and love, the Dynavector XV-1S). But then again, the cost of the B&O cartridges, even adjusting for inflation, is only a fraction of the cost of those cartridges either.

I think a better comparison would be to something like the Benz Micro Glider 2, (another cartridge I've owned recently), and in that comparison, I think the capabilities of the B&O cartridges were definitely in the ballpark.

My two cents worths anyway.

>>IMHO at least at the same level overall of any MC/MM today cartridge.<<

Well I disagree with this. I owned both the MMC-1 and MMC-2 with my B&O TX-2 some years ago.

No way either of these cartridges stands toe to toe regarding clarity, depth, and dynamics compared to Zyx Universe, Transfiguration Orpheus, or Dynavector XV-1s.

Never.

Dear Kurt: +++++ " Of course maybe that is due to my current system being so much better than my old system. " +++++

certainly you are right on this. I own those B&O beauties that I use in a non B&O TT loaded at 100Kohms and 100pf and all I can say is that are just fantastic performers and IMHO at least at the same level overall of any MC/MM today cartridge.
If you have any today opportunity try to test those B&O cartridges I'm sure you will be happy about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Thanks everyone for your responses.The reason i needed to know was the fact that the pre-amp that I choose will work with the grado gold.

Hey RW, Well, I agree with you, up to a point anyway.

I too used to have a B&O TT (A Beogram 3000, as I recall that was also a linear tracking TT, like yours), and I too used a MMC2 cartridge.

The cartridge's mass being so low was certainly a plus, because even though I consider it to be a mid-fi TT (albeit a top of the line mid-fi TT), it did absolutely no damage to my records, as all of my records from that 10 year era sound as good as new, and there is no wear to even my most heavily played albums. I always felt that the cartridge outclassed the TT, IMHO anyway.

However, I will point out that while it had good frequency extension, especially on the top end, I never felt that it soundstaged or imaged nearly as well as any of my more current tables and cartridges. (Of course maybe that is due to my current system being so much better than my old system. I suppose it is possible that the turntable is better than I give it credit for if it were matched up with better electronics.)

My two cents worth anyway.

I *LOVE* my B&O MMC1 and MMC2 cartridges - very smooth and clear-sounding, and the lowest effective tip mass in the world. B&O gets slammed by many audiophiles, but they did some things VERY well...

-RW-

I think this will help you.

Click on the link below, then press the "Cartridges" tab, and then the "Prestige - Gold and Silver" tab.

Grado Gold Spec's

Not a bad cartridge for the price.
My brother and brother-in-law both have one and it sounds pretty good.

Hope this helps.

Grado Gold, like most Grado cartridges, is a Moving Iron design.

From Michael Fremer's Stereophile review of Soundsmith SMMC1 moving-iron phono cartridge:

In a typical moving-magnet (MM) cartridge, a tiny permanent magnet, attached to the cantilever and positioned between two sets of fixed coils inside the body of the cartridge, induces a tiny current in the coils when it is vibrated by the stylus's motions as it navigates the record groove. In a moving-coil (MC) cartridge, the magnet is fixed; it is the coils attached to the cantilever that move. The mechanical and electrical advantages and disadvantages of both designs are best discussed elsewhere.

Moving-iron designs such as the SMMC1, or the Grados, use stationary coils and magnets and a small piece of "moving iron." In the original B&O design, what moves is a cross-shaped piece of ultra-low-mass, high-purity iron attached to a soft elastomer damper stabilized in a plastic frame. The iron also incorporates a minuscule tube into which the cantilever is inserted. Each arm of the iron cross is associated with a fixed-coil/magnet structure and as the cantilever moves, it varies the distances between the four arms of the iron cross and the four fixed-coil/magnets, thus inducing tiny voltages within the coils. The advantages of this arrangement include ultra-low moving mass, even compared to an MC design; relatively high output (because the stationary magnet/coil structure can be made large); high suspension compliance; and low vertical tracking force (VTF).