Relative Spending on Turntables and Cartridges


It seems conventional, at least at the low to mid-range of equipment, to spend much more for a turntable than for the cartridge. I'm wondering about the logic behind that. It seems to me that, once you've spent enough for a well-made turntable that with a good motor, sufficient weight and torque, and a solid tonearm that a cartridge upgrade is, relatively speaking, more valuable than a turntable upgrade. For example, I have a Rega P3 that typically comes with (in the package version) and Elys II cartridge. On mine, I know use a Rega Ania cartridge, which, as upgraded by SoundSmith, costs a bit more than the turntable. But the audible return on that investment has been enormous. I also have a Pioneer PLX-1000, which I initially used with a Sumiko Pearl cartridge. I've since upgraded, first, to a Hana EL, and subsequently to an Ortofon Quintet Bronze. Each upgrade improved sound quality (frequency response, transparency, detail, sound stage, etc.) dramatically. Perhaps I'm not getting everything out of the Bronze or the Ania that I would hear if I used them on higher-level turntables. But in terms of bang-for-the-buck, I've reached the conclusion that it is smarter to budget 50% each for cartridge and turntable than the prevailing norm of 75% for the turntable and only 25% for the cartridge (at least once your total budget reaches around $1000. Your thoughts?
dancole

Showing 1 response by audioquest4life

@dancole,

You bring up good points. Not sure where the ratio on expenditures for audio equipment originated from. Perhaps, golden ear reviewers of yore.

When I was a young, and dapper, aspiring audio geek in my teens, I tended to be focused on technical specs based on readings from stereo review magazine at the time. Those readings and my curiosity provided me with the impetus to explore turntables and cartridges based on specs. In those days, late 70’s, early 80’s, my Audioquest4life journey began. 
I state this because I was young and exploring the audio gadget field on my own terms, no Internet, a few audio dealers within proximity and through discovery learning, I figured out that the combination of the system had to play music and I had to I enjoy it. Costs associated for each component was not even a factor because I did not think it was relevant or not even thought about it....I just needed to get what I could get within my means, and obviously, my budget. And yes, I did splurge on Shure cartridges, Pickering, ADC, and such to pair with my Pioneer, Radio Shack, Denon turntables which I thought at the time, were just a platform to install these magnificent cartridges on at the time for me to hear the music. So, I can see how you can question this rationale. 

Remember, I was a spec guy back then, mostly still today, and thought that really good channel separation and wide frequency response was all that I needed for me to enjoy music on my turntables. I still look at specs but with a wider view of my interpretation of synergy of system. I say go for it because invariably, your the only one, besides, friends and family who will get the pleasure of hearing the synergy that you develop. Sure, a general consensus can be extracted from forums about equipment combinations, and it’s helpful, to a degree. Each of us have our own listening environments and ears and that separates us from the masses. Disagreement is quite alright in this hobby as I don’t see many absolutes, except for those darn specs. Enjoy.