"Harder" cartridge recomendation

Halcro, yes VW's have always been reliable, simplicity is the key. I would rather have your 356 than any 911. I ran an Audi Quattro Turbo Coupe ( the real one ) for a few years and it handled way better than anything they make today apart from maybe the RS4.

Hi Nandric, true, for some our hobby is a religious experience. I always thought the use of stone was to accentuate the high's when offering sacrificial lambs...

Halcro, I'll apologise, my 1st post could have been better phrased.
Yes, I do believe you are wrong if you prefer the coffee table in. In my experience large coffee tables in front of the listening chair generally "cut off" bottom end flow and air, literally truncate the bottom portion of the sound stage. Glass coffee tables tend to bounce high frequencies around and I always remove them. These are perhaps the some of the reasons why I gravitate to LOMC's, whilst you prefer MM's.

Nandric, thanks for the feedback. I do have German ancestry via Austria ( one of my forbears was given gold by the Habsburgs to travel the world to return a favour, he settled in New Zealand ) we may have a similar taste in humour.

in defense of Henry, I am sure he means that among cartridges he owns or has heard in his system, he prefers one or more MMs to any of the MCs. This does not rule out the proposition that there is a superior MC somewhere in the universe.

It also does not rule out the proposition that H's system is so coloured, bleached out or grainy that in that particular system MM's are a better match as they tend to be more forgiving through the mid to top end. Whilst we do not want to bag other systems and I respect H's input into the forums, we must look at context. The system in question is located in a small room with hard stone floors, a massive glass coffee table in front of the listening position and speakers jammed into the corners. I would expect that this environment would be very unforgiving of any forwardness in the mid to top end.

Halcro - you've over reacted. I have not criticised your system or equipment choice. You probably have an excellent system.
I have suggested that from my years of experience, including importing and installing high end equipment in many differing environments, that the hard reflective surfaces in your room would suggest that the environment may be more susceptible to mid to high frequency excitement. If this is the case it would influence your component choices and preferences. Do you disagree that stone and glass are reflective, particularly in the mid to upper frequencies.

Halcro, thank you. I dont think you are wrong. We all hear differently, and component choice is made in context of existing system/room/preferences.
Our systems may not be that far apart in reality. We agree on digital, I can only listen to simple music on digital.
I remember the story in TAS years ago. Some guy complained to the car manufacturer ( Buick or Pontiac from memory ) that his car didn't like chocolate ice cream, that it always broke down when he bought chocolate ice cream. Letter did the rounds at the office until one engineer decided that he would follow it up. The family had a weekly treat of taking the kids down to the store on a Saturday night and getting ice cream. Turned out that the chocolate ice cream was at the front of store, the other flavours were located at the rear. Whenever they bought chocolate ice cream, because of the short time frame in and out the car was getting vapour lock in the carburettor.

Hi Halcro - which 3-4 would you recommend for hi ? low ? Would be interested to know. Do any of your top ones do both ? Cheers.

Timeltel,
Myself, I dont have a religious preference. I value speed and timing, transparency which in my view derives from resolution and/or removal of resonances. My two favourite cartridges that fulfill this preference are the Decca London Garrot ( MI ) and the Ikeda ( MC ). Both of these cartridges have no conventional cantilever and are demanding of both arm and phono stage. I have also heard excellent sound from Garrot P77 ( Dynamic coil ), Soundsmith SG400 ( Strain gauge ) and Stax ( condensor ) all of which have their different attributes.
I have no issue with the proposition that in many systems MM's will be the optimal choice. I do have an issue if someone makes a blanket statement that MM's are better than MC's.
Frequency response claims are nebulous, when I first heard my Dynavector Nova 13D, it sounded lean in the bass. Then I heard it in a system flat to 13hz - different view entirely.
One point that we should all agree on, that is continually ignored when making cartridge recommendations, is that cartridges that are low compliance or push a lot of energy into the arm should not be used with mediocre arms.

He thinks digital has less distortion.

Ironical when digital is a mathematical approximation of
analogue, ie 100% distorted. The argument becomes is the distortion inherent in
digital relevant when asking the question "Is this medium accurate enough for
enjoying music ?".
Or to put the question to digiphiles 11110101010100001010101010101100 ?