What is the “World’s Best Cartridge”?

@solypsa, The question comes down to what cartridge I want to buy. It is rare to be able to evaluate a cartridge's sonic performance appropriately on your own turntable.  As time goes on, having dealt with quite a few cartridges you develop preferences. Any cartridge I buy is going to be a low impedance moving coil. They seem to be the only moving coil cartridges that with a transimpedance phono stage match the dynamics of the best moving magnet and iron cartridges yet maintain the nuance of a moving coil. It must have some type of fine line stylus. I have heard the Gyger S, the Replicant 100, the Soundsmith OLC and the MSL fine line. They are all excellent. It must have either a Boron or Diamond cantilever. It must have a sturdy, resonance free metal body. The wooden bodied cartridges I have owned have all been colored or poorly manufactured. The cartridge has to be perfectly aligned or so close that I can not tell it is off and I measure each and every cartridge I get. Reviews also factor in to some degree as does the manufacturer's reputation and stability. I will not buy a cartridge from a cottage manufacturer. 

Unfortunately, meeting all these requirements is no guarantee of great performance but it is a good start. Again, these are my own personal preferences or biases. If money was a real issue I would buy a Soundsmith Voice. It is the best cartridge for the money I have ever had direct experience with and it is high output!   

@mijostyn your list makes sense to me. Representing two cartridge brands that use non metallic bodies informs me differently on that topic but I do see your point.

On the topic of 'cottage industry' perhaps our definitions differ. I would put Lyra and SoundSmith in the cottage category. In fact I am not sure anyone making lomc isn't except Ortofon, Audio Technica and Excel. Maybe not even them .... What is the definition? Owning the supply chain and processing material from raw?

Shortly After Lockdown, I was to have Cartridge produced, which was to have PC Triple C/EX Tag Wires produced that were to bypass the Pins and Connect directly to the coils.

The Styli was to be a bespoke selection set on a Cactus Needle Cantilever.

The Body was to be Five Coat Urushi Lacquered, applied by a Japanese Military Equipment Renovator, who had been taught the application skills whilst residing in Japan.

I am still curious about how such a design will deliver.

It might prove to be the 'Best Cartridge in the World' for my purposes or not.

Comaring versus ''attributing ''  property to wahtever objject..

The later has the grammar form: ''x is P''

The former has more ''subjects'' than one: John is longer than Peter''.

We get in trouble when x state that John is longer than Peter but y

state the othee way round or state that Dover is even longer than

both mentioned (grin).

In all coutries implicite ''longer than relation'' is transformed in

names for properties. Say Stefanos is large and Miotakis short or small.

But when Stefanos moves to Holland he loses the property LARGE

because the Dutch are longest people in the wolrd.

How than can Stefano's lose the property ''large'' if he ''has the

propertt large''? Because of the grammar ? 

No because sentence form ''x is P'' is not suiitable for comparisons. 

Frege started from there when he wanted to invent languge suitble

for science. That is that accordidin to him ''ordinsry llanguge'' is not

suitable for science. He is called ''father of modern logic''.

In this thread members try to put their opinions in ''x is P'' form

not realizing that comparisons can't be put in this grammar form. 

To know which cart is ''world's best'' one would need to compare

all carts ever produced.but than ''rank them'' according to his subjective

preference. We will than get that, say, accoridng to Raul C is the best

which will be denided by dover because according to him D is the best.. 

Assuming ordening according to:  a,b,c,... n'' conditions. 

@solypsa, again, this is my personal experience and guides my own cartridge purchases. I have had two wooden bodied cartridges and their sonic performance was not as good as (read colored) the best metal units and their construction quality was not as good. Wood is not a good substrate for a cartridge. Unless it is resin treated wood is not stable, it expands and contracts with humidity. An ideal cartridge body has to be dense, stable and non resonant. Even resin treated wood is not dense enough. If you had to make a wooden cartridge Lignum Vitae would be the best choice and no one uses it!  Using a "tone wood" is a huge joke as in cartridge profile wood has no tone, that is it's advantage, it does not ring unless it is planed very thin. 

Our definition of a cottage industry differs. It is easier to define not cottage industry as larger, well established companies with a long history of making highly rated cartridges with mature technology. This does not guaranty fine performance, nothing does. As an example, DS Audio does not qualify in my eyes because I do not think it's technology is mature yet. In my eyes Lyra and Soundsmith are not cottage industries. I should also note that it is possible for a cottage industry cartridge maker to make a fine cartridge. IMHO just less likely. I am not going to plop down 10 large on less likely. 

@larryi , given the right circumstances the old 57 could be a fine performer. The Levinson HQD system was the first system that I would qualify as SOTA in it's day. It's main problems were reliability and durability. It was neither. 

Tubes may in some people's minds sound better but it is relatively rare for them to be more accurate. Human's are instinctively drawn to fire and light. Fire and light are safety and security. I am not kidding. Human behavior frequently has an instinctive basis. Women like SUVs because they place them above the traffic. They like being up higher. Higher is safety. You can see your enemies coming and hide your children. My pack rat mentality in an instinctive behavior. You never want to run out of ammunition. 

i think it's a mistake to use generalizations about materials to be the final arbiter of choice. it does take the pressure off actually investigating with an open mind and ears. i do respect it is simpler just to read specs and throw out pronouncements.

there is this thing called listening. we can listen and look at the components of the cartridge, but unless we could listen with various different material choices we don't really know what is causing what.

i have opinions about materials, but am not religious about it. 

we all have our own approach. and result. YMMV.

Hi rauoliregas

I know - by your standards I am maybe a subjectivist eating bananas. And I have not heard a lot of top notch carts. Although we disagree on some points, I appreciate your comments, and your search for more objectivity. I agree that analog is truncated, limited and problematic in many ways. It is amazing that it is still competitive. But to my ears, there are digital problems too, often larger than the analog problems (even if the gap has narrowed). Digital is still not "perfect". Likewise, my 'purist' tube system may introduce distortions you would not like, but then again, I lived with top solid state for many years, and don't miss it. Or - truth to be told - only a little bit ; -).

I was asked about my music reference. I go for the best sound I hear, regardless of format. No prejudice. Sometimes the CD sounds great, better than the LP, or the streaming, or the sacd or dvd-audio - and so on. Probably mainly because it was mastered and cut more precisely to the specific format, or they had a lucky day, or whatever. But in general, AAA (all analog recorded) LPs are my choice cuts. But also more processed recordings. I go for the best sound. Not just acoustic or vocal but full scale prog rock or classical also. world music. Lots of references.

Like one bought just now, Toure, Al Farka, with Ry Cooder: Talking Timbuktu - 2 x 180g, World circuit 2015 - marvellous guitar sound and string interplay. For female vocal, Rosalia: Motomami on LP is superior to digital in my system. And for a "fat" prog rock sound - Deep purple: Whoosh, Ear music 2020 - try ’Man alive - likewise the LP version sounds better. To my ears in my system.

 

But to my ears, there are digital problems too, often larger than the analog problems (even if the gap has narrowed).

 

😁 If digital were really that much better there would be no discussion about cartridges, tonearms, where you bought that record and the like. It would be moot. Its not; its been 41 years since the inception of the CD and LPs are still around. Can we finally agree that digital is merely incremental in its improvements? I've no doubt that one day it will be better in every way... when that day comes people won't argue about it.

Anytime a new technology appears, if it is truly superior the prior art vanishes and becomes a thing of collectors for nostalgia only. I like to point to the example of side valves in internal combustion engines. Overhead valves showed up and no-one looks back- they are more reliable and offer vastly improved performance. As a result no-one puts side valves in cars anymore. Its not worth it!

When digital is truly better there won't be cartridge and tonearm manufacturers, no LPs produced and so on.

Dear @o_holter : " It is amazing that it is still competitive. ", amazing and incredible for say the least.

But exist a deep and main reason why of that and the reasonis that almost all of us was what for many years were accustom to listen it and what does it means this fact: simple we are accustomed to the LP developed high distortions it’s what we like even if its wrong and this is not the issue. The deep main reason is that: we are accustomed to those LP sound alond its developed distortions.

Whe appeared the CD as even today we " like it " but do not " like it ", we always have an argument against digital even arguments that are totally false.

We refused and refuse to really think deep down there and ask our self: what are we missing with digital medium? because this is the issue. Here M Lavigne posted that LP is " complete " and obviously and against digital this medium is incomplete.

My take is that all of us are missing through digital medium ALL THE ADDED DISTORTIONS DEVELOPED THROUGH THE RECORDING AND PLAYBACK PROCCESS .

Our brain knows something is " different " down there.

If you take a little of time and make a check-up of all the steps in the playback proccess where the cartridge signal must pass you can understand in more objective way my take my statement about. The cartridge signal playback path is a long tortuose path for the way sensitive cartridge signal and at each of those " thousands " path steps the cartridge signal integrity goes degrading and degrading till we can listen. Maybe in what we can listen are " nice distortions " ( we are accustom for. ) in 30% or maybe 40% of the original signal. Digital is way direct and if anything more complete and nearer truer to the recording it does not matters that we don’t like it so much what we are listning and till we think a little with ovjectivity the LP will stays extremely " competitive " no matters what.

Btw, one of those false argument in favor of LP is that " we listen analog not in digital " but is false because what our ears and body are perciving with digital what comes in is just a SPLs waves exactly in similar way that the SPL waves that comes in from LPs, this is not the issue. Other false argument is that LP moves us more emotionally than digital to the degree that digital could be boring. Other false argument: " When digital is truly better there won’t be cartridge and tonearm manufacturers "" and is false because exist thousands and thousands audiophiles that own thousands of LPs and that " loves " reissues.

I asked you which is your MUSIC REFERENCE and your answer is full of subjectivity: " what we like it ".

I asked you because when talking of digital vs analog almost all always compare digital against the LP REFERENCE or the R2R REFERENCE when in reality and overall those mediums can’t be a MUSIC REFERENCE .

We can argue against that but for me the only true reference are the live events we attended and attend seated at near field position that even at nearer position ( that we can seat. ) is where the recording microphones are " seated " and where pic-up the signal coming from the MUSIC sources.

If we don’t have yet enough lisent experiences like that then we really do not know what I’m talking about and why I repeat and repeat that " nearer and truer to the recording " that in my point of view should be the main target for any audiophile/MUSIC lover.

Sure I can be wrong but not only in this thread but in many others over the years I posted that statement in this and other web forums. Only an opinion.

Anyway, thank’s for your answers,

 

R.

Nandric pointed out that the question posed by the OP is poorly conceived. So did I and others at the top of this thread. Which is maybe why it’s degenerated into an even more endless and unresolvable debate about analog vs digital. By now we know where most of us stand on that issue.  But some of us nevertheless expect to “win”. That’s not going to happen.

Dear @lewm : " even more endless and unresolvable debate about analog vs digita "

Unresolvavle? really ? certainly could be " unresolvable " for you and the full biased subjectivists but not for me and other gentlemans with real/true open mind/unbiased.

 

R.

I am fine, as long as we can keep this a forum with friendly echange of opinions. We are all a combi of subjective and objective experience. Subjective sometimes lies before objective - look folks, this is what my ears tell me. Endless and unsolvable debate - no, I dont agree. Even if not always interesting.

Isnt this the nature of a forum like this? We do our best, to arrive at a better sense of the truth. It always avoids us, of course. Our muse is only partially there. But the free debate in itself is a rich source of information, we are better informed, not just "sheep" to use the term in Pink Floyd: Animals (which btw sounds good, more clear, from the new 2018 mastering on vinyl, in my system).

Hereby Resolved These Resolutions:

Resolved The best cartridge will be the one that matches the tonearm in use, in this case the Triplanar, since the ability of the tonearm to track the cartridge is paramount to the cartridge, which is penultimate.

Resolved Analog vs digital will be on-going until digital is so much better that LP production ceases.

Resolved These statements will make no difference to anyone entrenched in their arguments per human nature.

I was listening to a Radio Programme the other day, where a recording was played from an Interview with a founder of the CD Technology as the World knows it.

The Interview went from the breakthrough to the Music Medium it was used for and how it compared to its predecessor the Vinyl LP.

The interviewee was biased to the core for CD 's superiority, making bold claims for how it was technically much improved over the capabilities of the Vinyl LP.

On Paper it might have been and on Paper as a medium for recording all different data it was much more versatile than the Vinyl LP.

40 Years in the debacle continues, there are still multiples, with an interest in replaying recorded music, that are not too sure of the Superiority of the CD as a Source, and who vociferously reject the notion, and remain with the tradition of using the Vinyl LP.

I wonder, if those who were at the forefront of the Vinyl LP Medium being produced, were as critical of the predecessor Shellac, and kept the putting down Shellac as a Medium for 40+ Years throughout the heyday of the Vinyl LP.

   

@pindac 

Many years ago I bought a Leak Stereo 20 off a guy and he gave me all his classical 33rpm records, including many superb recordings from the 50's/60's, for free when I picked the amp up.

I asked him why - he said he preferred 78's and was sticking with them.

Absolutely Wonderful, we 'Love' what inspired, and will defend our choices made, unashamedly, with the ambient, baying in their attempts to put reputations at stake.

Raul, once again you unfairly presume to know what I think. 

@lewm  No, I did not, you posted: " 

" Which is maybe why it’s degenerated into an even more endless and unresolvable debate about analog vs digital "

If you already solved then why posted that? and if you resolved then please share with all of us your take. Welcomed.

 

R.

Dear @mijostyn : " wooden bodied cartridges and their sonic performance was not as good as (read colored) the best metal units and their construction quality was not as good. Wood is not a good substrate for a cartridge. "

 

Cartridge body material is " only a part of the overall parts in the cartridge design and yes it’s important but I think that the designer knows more than you or me how his designs performs in the whole context and inside the designer targets. Normally wood cartridge materials are " treated " in several ways.

 

I have good experiences with wood cartridge bodies through the time. My first one was the Brier great vintage performer but my first Benz Micro was the Ruby 2 and I like it and I like it so much that I bougth its LP model that did not like me but his LPS is very good performer and the Colibri still is at the top along other today ones as could be MSL. I own the Koestsu RSP and even that I normally do not like the Koetsu signature the Platinum wood is very good. In this thread @mglik almost " die for " his Grado Epoch.

Not only wood material was or is used for cartridges but with TTs too as the Teres Or Sota and even in tonearms as Durand or Grace ( I owned the Sota and the Grace tonearm. )

 

Almost all first hand experiences and yes inside my room/system and MUSIC/sound priorities.

 

R.

 

So, I disagree with you in that specific regards. Maybe not the best cartridge body material but it works and works fine.

Do you understand that I took no position in the statement you’ve quoted? I said the proposition was not resolvable, only. If you think you can “prove” with data the notion that digital is superior, there will always be others who won’t agree. That’s life.

Then if you don't took position in the overall issue why in " hell " you are posting about.

Please don't go around: which your take about your today position? thank's in advance and please try not " dead silence ".

 

R.

If you don’t like my not taking a position, is that your final position on my not taking a position? My position is that many LPs are not great sounding but many are great sounding even compared to live music, and we attend live performances once or twice a month both in local clubs and at the Kennedy Center. RBCDs are good for when I want to read a book or as background for a party but there’s no way I can listen to them for long if I’m serious about listening. SACDs and the like are better IF they were recorded as SACDs. So in general the silver discs are a yawn. I don’t have RTR, so that’s out. I believe that hi Res digital streaming may outperform LPs. I’m sure hi-rez streaming measures better if done right. I also own 2500 LPs, so I play them. This is a hobby and a source of personal pleasure, not a military exercise.

Some members posting in this thread seem to believe as digital “measures” better than analogue, it must be better and every audiophile should find digital better. I think they are missing a couple of points. 

 

First, are we measuring the right things, and all of the right things, that affects our emotional response and enjoyment to music reproduced in a system? When CD was introduced, engineers already told us it was “Perfect Sound Forever”, with much lower distortion and wider dynamic range than LP etc. See what happened since than? New type of digital distortion called “jitter” was discovered, which was never measured, or at least not shown in products’ specifications, before. It was certainly new for audiophiles! Now we have DSD, DSD512 etc., and same old story we are still being told it measures better than analogue, so can we be sure no more new types of digital distortions will be discovered in the future? 

 

The second point is there is a personal side to our reactions to distortions, some of us are just more sensitive to a certain kind of distortion than others. Just to share a recent experience, I and my friend visited another audiophile, who had a high-end digital base system with all the room correction functions etc. While the sound was not my cup of tea, I didn’t hear any obvious distortion. However, after listening for a while, I felt the muscles at the back of my neck tensed up, and with passing time, I felt slight physical pain starting from the back of my ears all the way down the neck! What is interesting is that both the audiophile and my friend didn’t share the feeling！

 

I want to point out that I rarely have this reaction on audio systems, digital or analogue. The last time I had similar reaction, but a lot less severe, was with a first generation CD player.

 

The point I want to stress is that since my friend and the audiophile didn’t have the same reaction, I have to conclude that I am just more sensitive to the particular type of distortions in that system. To expand from this, I think it is certainly possible that, we who prefer analogue may just be more sensitive to the types of distortions in digital, even though the “measured” distortion maybe lower! 

 

Of course, the opposite can also be true, audiophiles who prefer digital may just be more sensitive to distortions in analogue!

Some questions are difficult to answer. Some smart ''.. ''asked the religious

kind: ''Can Almighty make such havy stone which he can't lift?'' 

The 'Debacle' of which Source Material works best for one individual to another is pretty much a fuel source that has been burnt.

There are small pockets of individuals, that can't let the embers burn out, the need to fan the flame and maintain some heat is a seen occurrence, especially when a Thread becomes very focused on the Vinyl LP as a Source and discussions on supporting ancillaries are at the forefront.

I have read a lot on digital replays over many years, and more recently read a lot about the options available to myself on streaming.

From recollections, I can't remember a user of a Vinyl Source, countering the discussions about the virtues of using a Vinyl LP recording, as better choice over a Digital Recording.

Using my own Set Up as a description of how the Two Recording Mediums are used, it is quite simple to Comprehend.

The mechanical designs required for replaying the Vinyl LP have been quite interesting to myself, and for nearly as long as CD has been available as a Source, I have pursued learning about the engineering that is offered with ancillaries required to be used when replaying the Vinyl LP.

I never quite adopted the same stimulus for the ancillaries required to replay CD as a Source.

Today, I run both the CD Source and the Vinyl LP Source in parity to each other, when it comes down to enjoying a replay experience.

The difference is that the ancillaries used for CD, are remaining to be unstimulating to be investigated to see where there is a mechanical improvement to be found. With Vinyl the interest still remains strong, and I am actively pursuing encounters to see what is still to be learned.

In a nutshell, I have adopted Two Mediums, where one medium that I use, has a need for supporting ancillaries that I have a secondary passion for. This as a Medium is the one that become available for mainstream use 64 Years ago in 1948. This is in use, in Parity, with a Digital Medium that become mainstream available 40 Years ago in 1982.

It is hard to see where the two such antiquated mediums, are able to attain such a competitive position toward each other, where each is contested for their superiority of usage.

Interestingly from my end, the Digital Streaming Replay method, which is relevant and off the now, and not as such, an antiquated Medium, does seem to be recognised for being a replay method that is very dependent on ancillaries that are noticeable in the impact they can have on a SQ / Presentation. Learning about the influences of these ancillaries does have a certain stimulus, more so, than CD replay in my case.             

      

@thekong 

 

Nicely put. 
 

I am also very sensitive to high frequency distortion and sound floor. I have practically gone running from some systems with my hands clapped over my ears while a couple other folks next to me were overwhelmed with how great the system was (detail at all costs… ? And damaged hearing?.

Dear @thekong : Te digital/analog issue is not about measuremenst, in this thread and other threads where I posted about I never mentioned " measurements " because it’s not the issue. I posted in this thread:

 

" for many years we were accustom to listen it and what does it means this fact: simple we are accustomed to the LP developed high distortions it’s what we like even if its wrong and this is not the issue. The deep main reason is that: we are accustomed to those LP sound along its developed distortions. "

 

and :

 

""

all of us are missing through digital medium ALL THE ADDED DISTORTIONS DEVELOPED THROUGH THE LP RECORDING AND PLAYBACK PROCCESS .

Our brain knows something is " different " down there.

 

You know if we have a " routine " of any self behavior that we do it day by day for several years and if one day we haven’t the time to do that " routine " the brain works in automatic and many times we could be a little confused about due that we have to go but the brain told something was not do it. This is not about measurements it’s how the human brain works that in that case works by " instinct ".

Live MUSIC seated at nearfield position just does not sounds, not even near, as what you or any one of us listen at our places. Far away from there.

 

Look the main issue is what puts us nearer and truer to the recording. No matters what is digital medium compared not with analog but to LIVE MUSIC SEATED AT NEAR FIELD POSITION where normally are the recording microphones. It’s not rocket science is only : common sense with no biased attitude.

Do you think that live MUSIC seated at that position will permits you to listen it , say , 60 minutes?. No way, you will feel not what you experienced in that friend system listening digital but even more tortuose.

 

Live MUSIC has a dynamic power that we have to " live " at that position: is unveliable, but live MUSIC is brigthness and sometimes even hardness as could be the Dizzy horn at 2 m. that you can’t " support " it for more than 10-15 minutes with out damaging your ears for ever.( well microphones can pick-up en excess of 140db SPL. ). That sweetness or warmness that many talk  with analog/LP just does not exist at that live position.

 

Live MUSIC is like poetry or painting all of them a true ART and always wake up some kind of emotions no matters what.

 

MUSIC brougth to us, many times, very nice or not so nice " memories " even if we listen in a radio device.

 

So what are you talking about? Jitter?: you mentioned for the first time in this thread and that kind of " characteristic " exist playing LPs.

 

R.

''Çalling names'' as grammar versus logic, linguistic and even phlosophy

of languge. Our Lew felt ''insulted'' by some remarks by Raul while

Raul deny his intetntion to insult Lew. This is my intriodiction to,uh,

this ''subjec matter''. not my ''explication'' of this matter.

Logic state big difference between NAMES and PREDICATES. The firtst

meniotned ''lack predicative function''. That is to say ''they say 

nothing about the bearers of name. If  I say Gordon Smith and you

ask ''whom do you mean'' or ''what about him''. You would not ask this

question if NAME Gordeon Smith has its own, say , meaning.

However grammar change names into adjectives and THOSE may

be insulting. Say America and American. The later may mean many

things: the richest country in the world, American military , American

dominance etc. But the question to whom bellong English language is

never questioned among English speaking ''nations''. On my Balkan 

the issus is much more serioes. There are 4 ethnic  groups who will start 

a war about the language question because each of them claim their

own despite the fact that they all can understand each other. That is

how adjjective work as ''belonging to''. Aka as owners

question. We all are programed with some languge with words and

their presupposed meaning so there are also ''words'''which are 

''verboten'' or ''not done'' . This is ''obvious'' (?) confusion between

NAMES and predicates or adjectives . I think that adjectives are about

assumed ''quolities'' and predicates about properties. 

 

 

 

 

One

There is affirmation from both types of Medium Users, that there is something to be contested, an analysis of the commonly seen exchanges on the CD Source vs Vinyl LP Source, there is the assertion to be seen stated that something exists.

There is a resistance seen to show conflation and merge ideas, there is seemingly refute presented and this serves as an ongoing fuel to maintain division.

The properties to be compared from each Source are intangible, the methods used for embedding recorded information, and the method required to replay the recorded material are not similar, and limitations of one vs the other are known.

Reconciling with the differences to be discovered in each and allowing oneself to adjust to the idea that both are viable as a means to produce a satisfying replay, will be key to accepting that either are quite capable, and worthwhile embracing if the choice of the Medium is wanted to be used. 

In a Thread as this one, with the Specific Topic inquiring about 'What is the World's Best Cartridge' the not too commonly discussed, requirements to create optimised interfaces for a TT > Tonearm > Cartridge and the Materials and Designs that would be seen to be selected as Good > Better > Best to enable a Styli / Cantilever to be used to their optimum, would be a much more valuable area of additional discussion and information to be aired, in place of where Digital as an alternative Source Material fits in to the discussion.      

I'll jump in once more. This thread is not about CD vs LP, and any entries of that kind ought to be ignored or deleted.

My opinion is that the new technologies that take the idea of minimising the moving mass on the cantilever are on the right track for ultimate fidelity. I know I'm biased, but the cantileverless Deccas started out in this direction, and the Soundsmith strain gauge and the DS Audio optical cartridges are running with it. The AT Art1000 with the coils right at the distal end of the cantilever is a third approach. It seems to me that only the very best of conventional LOMC pickups might vie with them, but at a much higher price. There is no reason, other than a dislike of losing advertising dollars, why a magazine should not conduct a shootout between these three. I am fairly sure I would not be alone in wanting to read that!

(Yes, it would be better for me to conduct my own comparison, but I'm not made of money and there is no way I could go and hear all three, sadly.)

@lewm , digital is more accurate. There can be no doubt about this. It is superior in every and all measurable parameters.  This says nothing about "sounding better." Beauty is in the ear of the beholder. 

@rauliruegas , My wood comment pertains to cartridges only. I have owned a Koetsu Rosewood and a Grado Statement. Yes, wood can be treated in a number of ways but it will never be as inert and massive as a metal. Resin treated it can be used effectively in tonearms but I still prefer a metal or fiberglass wand. I have not yet heard an Epoch and at this point have no desire as I have focused on very low impedance moving coils. Like me you think the Ortofon MC Diamond is a killer cartridge design. So, don't give me this BS on wooden cartridges :-)

digital is more accurate. There can be no doubt about this. It is superior in every and all measurable parameters.  This says nothing about "sounding better." Beauty is in the ear of the beholder. 

Something is keeping current LP sales on the rise. Most of it isn't coming from audiophiles and likely the buyers know nothing of the specs. Usually when a succeeding tech appears it eclipses the prior art which disappears. That's not happened over the last 40 years with the LP so we can safely say digital is an incremental improvement sound-wise as opposed to transformative (disruptive).

IMO the factor is that most people don't ever hear good digital audio (just as most people don't ever get to hear good analog either). Some of the older digital playback gear was pretty dreadful, especially if it was less expensive and my surmise is a lot of that is still in service.  

 

I think I’ve already said this: CDs and DVDs inevitably bore me. You could say it’s because my Ayre C5Xe-mp CDP isn’t good enough. Top quality LPs kill it. Hi-rez streaming is another matter. That’s where modern digital can shine. But I won’t give up vinyl for streaming because I’ve got so many wonderful LPs, and there’s a certain Zen about playing them that appeals, not to mention the visceral sensation of reality that occasionally occurs. May I be left alone to enjoy? Raul always ends his posts with “enjoy the music “. Yes, do that. Also recognize there are some things that are either unmeasurable or not yet measured.

Great post, Lewm. I agree on every count; exactly my experience.  

When a System is put together in a way that the devices in use are able to resolve recorded information and present it in a manner that creates a perception that an Honesty and Truth is being presented, it will be quite easy to describe the experience as having a realness to it.

The wording used to describe the believability of the 'realness', will be as varied as the wording one might use to describe how attending a Live Performance from an enjoyed Band hit home, as much of the emotion being portrayed will not only be created by the now experience, but these will also be influenced by very specific events that took place over earlier periods of time and how they impacted on each individual. 

Individuals are very much controlled by their emotional state. Music Replays evoke emotion, and the impact of the evoked emotion, can be used to determine the quality of the replay. This is not the best method for judging equipment performance. It is the best method to judge why a item or selected system is the best choice for an individual.

To see a Band, Perform Live, that was a creator of selected Song at a Loved Ones Funeral, or a Special Song chosen at an Important Moment in one's Life, will have a compound effect on an attendee of an audience.     

It’s much simpler than that (for me).

Assuming no significant electrical incompatibilities that would cause us to unfairly judge its actual potential in a different application, each piece of audio gear inserted into an audio system affects the resulting sound in one of two ways- it moves the resulting sound closer to, or farther away from the sound of live music. This, no matter that piece of equipment’s pedigree. Even the very best gear has a long way to go to being truly “neutral”. We can talk about technical “accuracy”, or technical superiority all we want, but then are left with the inevitable question of whether it actually brings the sound closer to the sound of live music. THAT, as far as I’m concerned is the most important measure of a component’s superiority; and technical issues take a back seat. So, how to make that judgment?

The best we can hope for is to judge the sound relative to the sonic “generalities” that we have learned to recognize through experience and exposure to live sound. And, yes, even the sound of electronic music can be judged this way; although, the well of information available for making that judgment is far far less deep than that available from live, unprocessed acoustic music. A simple and unavoidable fact.

Oh, but then there are the cries of- “there are too many variables”, “we all hear differently”, “how do we know what it sounded like in the studio?”, etc., etc. Or, “it is superior if it sounds closest to what is on the recording”. First, how the hell does one know exactly what is on the recording unless one was at the recording session AND have an extremely good aural memory? We don’t.

So, ask yourself this question: how is it that when walking down a street and one hears the sound of a saxophone or vocalist coming out an open window a block away one can immediately tell when it is an actual live musician playing?

First, it is the complex tonal textures and, even more importantly, the dynamic immediacy and nuance that immediately tell us it is the real thing; aspects of musical sounds that suffer tremendously during the record/reproduce process. There is no electronic signature. And, importantly, we don’t have our audiophile hats on at that moment. Hats which tend to cause us to lower the bar of expectation and accept at least some degree of electronic signature as “normal”. I think that, ironically, many audiophiles have not learned to listen. We tend to go into a different mode of “listening” when dealing with and listening to “Audio”. Another example:

How is it that even over a telephone, the lowest of the low-fi pieces of equipment, we can immediately recognize, not only the voice of a loved one, but that the person has a slight cold, for instance? We can because of familiarity with that sound. There is no substitute for this.

I don’t understand the point of proclamations about component superiority based only on technical issues. As important as those are, it really comes down to what sounds best to us based on our own set of sonic priorities. However, if superiority (“best”, whatever) is to be declared, to me it has to be relative to whether the sound of that piece of gear moves the sound closer to, or farther from my sense of the sound of live; and, the emotional component that is best expressed when live. Simple as that.

No argument with Frogman. For me the most astonishing aspect of live music is the transient response and dynamic range, compared to home audio. There’s plenty of “distortion “ in a live club venue due to bad rooms and ambient noises, but the sense of immediacy is riveting. For me therefore, the speakers are of paramount importance. I don’t care if the signal is pure as can be, analog or digital, if the speakers are sluggish all will be lost. I once had a sax player perform in my listening room, standing between a pair of massive ESLs. That was informative.

Also recognize there are some things that are either unmeasurable or not yet measured.

The words of Daniel Von Recklinghausen come to mind. They apply directly to this conversation. As I mentioned, something is driving LP sales. If the digital community fails to recognize the significance of that, it will also fail to take the measurements that they have failed to take in the past. If you live your life according to made up stories rather than 'what is' you will suffer. Literally this is why digital has been unable to eclipse vinyl; the digital community simply makes up the story that 'its better'. This made up story is the impediment that causes digital to fall short for the last 40 years. 

A few pragmatic designers do move the art forward but a serious problem is so much really dreadfully awful terrible digital gear that is still in service. IMO that bit is what is preventing digital from finally committing the LP to history.

In the meantime having a good cartridge set up in an arm that can really track it solves a lot of headaches- you can just sit down and enjoy music rather than having to worry about any specs. But as Mr. Von Reklinghausen points out the right specs are important for that to happen.

Dear @frogman  : I aggre with some of your statements and disagree with others.

 

"" each piece of audio gear inserted into an audio system affects the resulting sound in one of two ways- it moves the resulting sound closer to, or farther away from the sound of live music ""

 

There are main characteristics in live MUSIC that can't be matched in our systems.: first is that in a live event seated at near field position there is almost nothing between you and the MUSIC sources but air and that's why that power and dynamics that develops the live MUSIC sources transients and the other characteristic is that natural tone color and rythm in live MUSIC.

So each gear can't puts us closer but farther away. Why?:

Each link in the room audio always alters/degrades the recording MUSIC and that alters/degrades means that recording information even at minimum is losted and added by each single system link developed any kind of distortions the next link in the system can't recovery the losted information and can't disappears the developed distortions but the other way around because what happened in the first system link continue in the more or les same way with all the other links till we listen the final MUSIC sound information.

Now and even that we did not attend to the recording proccesss we can work inside our room/system to stay nearer to the recording if at each system link we choosed good item designs with the lower distortions that technically is possible and that's why my room/system main target is to put everykind of generated distortion at minimum and in this way I will be nearer to the recording and if I'm nearer to the recording I'm nearer to the live MUSIC.  can have some good control inside the whole system playback proccess but obviously no control of the recording proccess.

Yes, accuracy is way important and technical specs count about today.

Do you thing that that Dava cartridge FR 6db deviations can puts you nearer to the recording in any room system or that the next system link can do it?  NO WAY no matters what because no single room/system link is neutral.

Subjectivity is important but objectivity too and we have to take in count all the facts/obectivity around the playback proccess. Objectivivity along subjectivity is what works and not that  " technical issues take a back seat. "

 

Only an opinion.

 

R.

 

@frogman always exist a true problem with audiophiles and that’s that our ears are way limited and several times we can be foolished by when we trust on them on what we like it.

 

Look, in the last 2 years Dava cartridge owners ( including M Lavigne. ) die for it as the " best " quality cartridge and all of them have that attitude because they like what they listen ( and I think still do. ) against other cartridges and all of them do not knew that the cartridge FR between 20hz-20khz has ( at least ) a 6db deviation till 2 days ago that after those 2 years the manufacturer disclosed ( in other thread and under pressure. ) the cartridge specs. All those gentlemans trust in their ear, references and audio system experiences. Obviously each one of them with a different room/system.

That way of " massive " behavior was totally subjective and yes they all like it and  they like it with out knowing the " numbers " that shows that were totally wrong by any cartridge quality standard and obviously all paid money for.

That FR deviation is the worst I knew and know of any other cartridge .

We can’t trust exclusively in our ears and experiences, " numbers " always helps a lot if we know to " read it " we just need this kind of objectivity like it or not.

R.

@rauliruegas - You make many valid points about subjective & objective balance for a “World’s Best” title 👍

As for as FR is concerned, such objectivity might exclude technologies that cannot properly decode eq.

@rauliruegas +1! The Dava field coil cartridge with its 6db frequency response deviations precludes its use for music playback! Even the lowly Shure M44 beats that! This is a case where the "golden ears" crowd’s subjective impressions leads to erroneous conclusions!

I believe Sony once made a cartridge with a diamond cantilever. The cantilever and the stylus might have actually been one continuous piece. Maybe someone could confirm this?

XL88D

Dynavector D series cartridges also have a diamond cantilever, but what was your point?

@lewm My point was to discuss cartridges rather than argue about whether digital is superior to vinyl.

Koetsu also has models that can be upgraded to diamond cantilevers for $4000.

Some swear by the Etsuro Gold as the world's best cartridge, though it's also the most expensive.

 

Goofy, good idea. My past efforts to do the same were not successful. But I think the actual subject of the OP would prove equally vexing.

@lewm It is vexing. The idea of the best cartridge is somewhat abstract give that most people haven’t heard all of the manufactured cartridges past or present. Even among let’s say, forty of the best reviewed cartridges of all time, I doubt most vinyl spinners would have heard even half of them. And basing an opinion about which cartridges are the best cartridges according to reviews in Stereophile magazine, is akin to studying baseball statistics on the back of baseball cards.

So according to my personal interpretation of which cartridge is the best, it’s the cartridge currently on my tonearm. All other possibilities mentioned here become topics for endless mental processing. In actuality, bringing up a diamond cantilever is pointless (as my cartridge doesn’t have one) and you were correct in saying so.