Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?


Dear friends: who really needs an MM type phono cartridge?, well I will try to share/explain with you what are my experiences about and I hope too that many of you could enrich the topic/subject with your own experiences.

For some years ( in this forum ) and time to time I posted that the MM type cartridge quality sound is better than we know or that we think and like four months ago I start a thread about: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1173550723&openusid&zzRauliruegas&4&5#Rauliruegas where we analyse some MM type cartridges.

Well, in the last 10-12 months I buy something like 30+ different MM type phono cartridges ( you can read in my virtual system which ones. ) and I’m still doing it. The purpose of this fact ( “ buy it “ ) is for one way to confirm or not if really those MM type cartridges are good for us ( music lovers ) and at the same time learn about MM vs MC cartridges, as a fact I learn many things other than MM/MC cartridge subject.

If we take a look to the Agon analog members at least 90% of them use ( only ) MC phono cartridges, if we take a look to the “ professional reviewers “ ( TAS, Stereophile, Positive Feedback, Enjoy the Music, etc, etc, ) 95% ( at least ) of them use only MC cartridges ( well I know that for example: REG and NG of TAS and RJR of Stereophile use only MM type cartridges!!!!!!!! ) , if we take a look to the phono cartridge manufacturers more than 90% of them build/design for MC cartridges and if you speak with audio dealers almost all will tell you that the MC cartridges is the way to go.

So, who are wrong/right, the few ( like me ) that speak that the MM type is a very good alternative or the “ whole “ cartridge industry that think and support the MC cartridge only valid alternative?

IMHO I think that both groups are not totally wrong/right and that the subject is not who is wrong/right but that the subject is : KNOW-HOW or NON KNOW-HOW about.

Many years ago when I was introduced to the “ high end “ the cartridges were almost MM type ones: Shure, Stanton, Pickering, Empire, etc, etc. In those time I remember that one dealer told me that if I really want to be nearest to the music I have to buy the Empire 4000 D ( they say for 4-channel reproduction as well. ) and this was truly my first encounter with a “ high end cartridge “, I buy the 4000D I for 70.00 dls ( I can’t pay 150.00 for the D III. ), btw the specs of these Empire cartridges were impressive even today, look: frequency response: 5-50,000Hz, channel separation: 35db, tracking force range: 0.25grs to 1.25grs!!!!!!!!, just impressive, but there are some cartridges which frequency response goes to 100,000Hz!!!!!!!!!!

I start to learn about and I follow to buying other MM type cartridges ( in those times I never imagine nothing about MC cartridges: I don’t imagine of its existence!!!. ) like AKG, Micro Acoustics, ADC, B&O, Audio Technica, Sonus, etc, etc.

Years latter the same dealer told me about the MC marvelous cartridges and he introduce me to the Denon-103 following with the 103-D and the Fulton High performance, so I start to buy and hear MC cartridges. I start to read audio magazines about either cartridge type: MM and Mc ones.

I have to make changes in my audio system ( because of the low output of the MC cartridges and because I was learning how to improve the performance of my audio system ) and I follow what the reviewers/audio dealers “ speak “ about, I was un-experienced !!!!!!!, I was learning ( well I’m yet. ).

I can tell you many good/bad histories about but I don’t want that the thread was/is boring for you, so please let me tell you what I learn and where I’m standing today about:

over the years I invested thousands of dollars on several top “ high end “ MC cartridges, from the Sumiko Celebration passing for Lyras, Koetsu, Van denHul, to Allaerts ones ( just name it and I can tell that I own or owned. ), what I already invest on MC cartridges represent almost 70-80% price of my audio system.

Suddenly I stop buying MC cartridges and decide to start again with some of the MM type cartridges that I already own and what I heard motivate me to start the search for more of those “ hidden jewels “ that are ( here and now ) the MM phono cartridges and learn why are so good and how to obtain its best quality sound reproduction ( as a fact I learn many things other than MM cartridge about. ).

I don’t start this “ finding “ like a contest between MC and MM type cartridges.
The MC cartridges are as good as we already know and this is not the subject here, the subject is about MM type quality performance and how achieve the best with those cartridges.

First than all I try to identify and understand the most important characteristics ( and what they “ means “. ) of the MM type cartridges ( something that in part I already have it because our phonolinepreamp design needs. ) and its differences with the MC ones.

Well, first than all is that are high output cartridges, very high compliance ones ( 50cu is not rare. ), low or very low tracking force ones, likes 47kOhms and up, susceptible to some capacitance changes, user stylus replacement, sometimes we can use a different replacement stylus making an improvement with out the necessity to buy the next top model in the cartridge line , low and very low weight cartridges, almost all of them are build of plastic material with aluminum cantilever and with eliptical or “ old “ line contact stylus ( shibata ) ( here we don’t find: Jade/Coral/Titanium/etc, bodies or sophisticated build material cantilevers and sophisticated stylus shape. ), very very… what I say? Extremely low prices from 40.00 to 300.00 dls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, well one of my cartridges I buy it for 8.99 dls ( one month ago ): WOW!!!!!!, so any one of you can/could have/buy ten to twenty MM cartridges for the price of one of the MC cartridge you own today and the good notice is that is a chance that those 10-20 MM type cartridges even the quality performance of your MC cartridge or beat it.

Other characteristics is that the builders show how proud they were/are on its MM type cartridges design, almost all those cartridges comes with a first rate box, comes with charts/diagrams of its frequency response and cartridge channel separation ( where they tell us which test recording use it, with which VTF, at which temperature, etc, etc. ), comes with a very wide explanation of the why’s and how’s of its design and the usual explanation to mount the cartridge along with a very wide list of specifications ( that were the envy of any of today MC ones where sometimes we really don’t know nothing about. ), comes with a set of screws/nuts, comes with a stylus brush and even with stylus cleaning fluid!!!!!!!!!, my GOD. Well, there are cartridges like the Supex SM 100MK2 that comes with two different stylus!!!! One with spherical and one with elliptical/shibata shape and dear friends all those in the same low low price!!!!!!!!!!!

Almost all the cartridges I own you can find it through Ebay and Agon and through cartridge dealers and don’t worry if you loose/broke the stylus cartridge or you find the cartridge but with out stylus, you always can/could find the stylus replacement, no problem about there are some stylus and cartridge sources.

When I’m talking about MM type cartridges I’m refer to different types: moving magnet, moving iron, moving flux, electret, variable reluctance, induced magnet, etc, etc. ( here is not the place to explain the differences on all those MM type cartridges. Maybe on other future thread. ).

I made all my very long ( time consuming ) cartridge tests using four different TT’s: Acoustic Signature Analog One MK2, Micro Seiki RX-5000, Luxman PD 310 and Technics SP-10 MK2, I use only removable headshell S and J shape tonearms with 15mm on overhang, I use different material build/ shape design /weight headshells. I test each cartridge in at least three different tonearms and some times in 3-4 different headshells till I find the “ right “ match where the cartridge perform the best, no I’m not saying that I already finish or that I already find the “ perfect “ match: cartridge/headshell/tonearm but I think I’m near that ideal target.

Through my testing experience I learn/ confirm that trying to find the right tonearm/headshell for any cartridge is well worth the effort and more important that be changing the TT. When I switch from a TT to another different one the changes on the quality cartridge performance were/are minimal in comparison to a change in the tonearm/headshell, this fact was consistent with any of those cartridges including MC ones.

So after the Phonolinepreamplifier IMHO the tonearm/headshell match for any cartridge is the more important subject, it is so important and complex that in the same tonearm ( with the same headshell wires ) but with different headshell ( even when the headshell weight were the same ) shape or build material headshell the quality cartridge performance can/could be way different.

All those experiences told me that chances are that the cartridge that you own ( MC or MM ) is not performing at its best because chances are that the tonearm you own is not the best match for that cartridge!!!!!!, so imagine what do you can/could hear when your cartridge is or will be on the right tonearm???!!!!!!!!, IMHO there are ( till today ) no single ( any type at any price ) perfect universal tonearm. IMHO there is no “ the best tonearm “, what exist or could exist is a “ best tonearm match for “ that “ cartridge “, but that’s all. Of course that are “ lucky “ tonearms that are very good match for more than one cartridge but don’t for every single cartridge.

I posted several times that I’m not a tonearm collector, that I own all those tonearms to have alternatives for my cartridges and with removable headshells my 15 tonearms are really like 100+ tonearms : a very wide options/alternatives for almost any cartridge!!!!!!

You can find several of these MM type cartridges new brand or NOS like: Ortofon, Nagaoka, Audio Technica, Astatic, B&O, Rega, Empire, Sonus Reson,Goldring,Clearaudio, Grado, Shelter, Garrot, etc. and all of them second hand in very good operational condition. As a fact I buy two and even three cartridges of the same model in some of the cartridges ( so right now I have some samples that I think I don’t use any more. ) to prevent that one of them arrive in non operational condition but I’m glad to say that all them arrive in very fine conditions. I buy one or two of the cartridges with no stylus or with the stylus out of work but I don’t have any trouble because I could find the stylus replacement on different sources and in some case the original new replacement.

All these buy/find cartridges was very time consuming and we have to have a lot of patience and a little lucky to obtain what we are looking for but I can asure you that is worth of it.

Ok, I think it is time to share my performance cartridge findings:

first we have to have a Phonolinepreamplifier with a very good MM phono stage ( at least at the same level that the MC stage. ). I’m lucky because my Phonolinepreamplifier has two independent phono stages, one for the MM and one for MC: both were designed for the specifics needs of each cartridge type, MM or MC that have different needs.

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

we have to load the MM cartridges not at 47K but at 100K ( at least 75K not less. ).

I find that using 47K ( a standard manufacture recommendation ) prevent to obtain the best quality performance, 100K make the difference. I try this with all those MM type cartridges and in all of them I achieve the best performance with 100K load impedance.

I find too that using the manufacturer capacitance advise not always is for the better, till “ the end of the day “ I find that between 100-150pf ( total capacitance including cable capacitance. ) all the cartridges performs at its best.

I start to change the load impedance on MM cartridges like a synonymous that what many of us made with MC cartridges where we try with different load impedance values, latter I read on the Empire 4000 DIII that the precise load impedance must be 100kOhms and in a white paper of some Grace F9 tests the used impedance value was 100kOhms, the same that I read on other operational MM cartridge manual and my ears tell/told me that 100kOhms is “ the value “.

Before I go on I want to remember you that several of those MM type cartridges ( almost all ) were build more than 30+ years ago!!!!!!!! and today performs at the same top quality level than today MC/MM top quality cartridges!!!!!, any brand at any price and in some ways beat it.

I use 4-5 recordings that I know very well and that give me the right answers to know that any cartridge is performing at its best or near it. Many times what I heard through those recordings were fine: everything were on target however the music don’t come “ alive “ don’t “ tell me “ nothing, I was not feeling the emotion that the music can communicate. In those cartridge cases I have to try it in other tonearm and/or with a different headshell till the “ feelings comes “ and only when this was achieved I then was satisfied.

All the tests were made with a volume level ( SPL ) where the recording “ shines “ and comes alive like in a live event. Sometimes changing the volume level by 1-1.5 db fixed everything.

Of course that the people that in a regular manner attend to hear/heard live music it will be more easy to know when something is right or wrong.

Well, Raul go on!!: one characteristic on the MM cartridges set-up was that almost all them likes to ride with a positive ( little/small ) VTA only the Grace Ruby and F9E and Sonus Gold Blue likes a negative VTA , on the other hand with the Nagaoka MP 50 Super and the Ortofon’s I use a flat VTA.

Regarding the VTF I use the manufacturer advise and sometimes 0.1+grs.
Of course that I made fine tuning through moderate changes in the Azymuth and for anti-skate I use between half/third VTF value.

I use different material build headshells: aluminum, composite aluminum, magnesium, composite magnesium, ceramic, wood and non magnetic stainless steel, these cartridges comes from Audio Technica, Denon, SAEC, Technics, Fidelity Research, Belldream, Grace, Nagaoka, Koetsu, Dynavector and Audiocraft.
All of them but the wood made ( the wood does not likes to any cartridge. ) very good job . It is here where a cartridge could seems good or very good depending of the headshell where is mounted and the tonearm.
Example, I have hard time with some of those cartridge like the Audio Technica AT 20SS where its performance was on the bright sound that sometimes was harsh till I find that the ceramic headshell was/is the right match now this cartridge perform beautiful, something similar happen with the Nagaoka ( Jeweltone in Japan ), Shelter , Grace, Garrot , AKG and B&O but when were mounted in the right headshell/tonearm all them performs great.

Other things that you have to know: I use two different cooper headshell wires, both very neutral and with similar “ sound “ and I use three different phono cables, all three very neutral too with some differences on the sound performance but nothing that “ makes the difference “ on the quality sound of any of my cartridges, either MM or MC, btw I know extremely well those phono cables: Analysis Plus, Harmonic Technologies and Kimber Kable ( all three the silver models. ), finally and don’t less important is that those phono cables were wired in balanced way to take advantage of my Phonolinepreamp fully balanced design.

What do you note the first time you put your MM cartridge on the record?, well a total absence of noise/hum or the like that you have through your MC cartridges ( and that is not a cartridge problem but a Phonolinepreamp problem due to the low output of the MC cartridges. ), a dead silent black ( beautiful ) soundstage where appear the MUSIC performance, this experience alone is worth it.

The second and maybe the most important MM cartridge characteristic is that you hear/heard the MUSIC flow/run extremely “ easy “ with no distracting sound distortions/artifacts ( I can’t explain exactly this very important subject but it is wonderful ) even you can hear/heard “ sounds/notes “ that you never before heard it and you even don’t know exist on the recording: what a experience!!!!!!!!!!!

IMHO I think that the MUSIC run so easily through a MM cartridge due ( between other facts ) to its very high compliance characteristic on almost any MM cartridge.

This very high compliance permit ( between other things like be less sensitive to out-center hole records. ) to these cartridges stay always in contact with the groove and never loose that groove contact not even on the grooves that were recorded at very high velocity, something that a low/medium cartridge compliance can’t achieve, due to this low/medium compliance characteristic the MC cartridges loose ( time to time and depending of the recorded velocity ) groove contact ( minute extremely minute loose contact, but exist. ) and the quality sound performance suffer about and we can hear it, the same pass with the MC cartridges when are playing the inner grooves on a record instead the very high compliance MM cartridges because has better tracking drive perform better than the MC ones at inner record grooves and here too we can hear it.

Btw, some Agoners ask very worried ( on more than one Agon thread ) that its cartridge can’t track ( clean ) the cannons on the 1812 Telarc recording and usually the answers that different people posted were something like this: “””” don’t worry about other than that Telarc recording no other commercial recording comes recorded at that so high velocity, if you don’t have trouble with other of your LP’s then stay calm. “””””

Well, this standard answer have some “ sense “ but the people ( like me ) that already has/have the experience to hear/heard a MM or MC ( like the Ortofon MC 2000 or the Denon DS1, high compliance Mc cartridges. ) cartridge that pass easily the 1812 Telarc test can tell us that those cartridges make a huge difference in the quality sound reproduction of any “ normal “ recording, so it is more important that what we think to have a better cartridge tracking groove drive!!!!

There are many facts around the MM cartridge subject but till we try it in the right set-up it will be ( for some people ) difficult to understand “ those beauties “. Something that I admire on the MM cartridges is how ( almost all of them ) they handle the frequency extremes: the low bass with the right pitch/heft/tight/vivid with no colorations of the kind “ organic !!” that many non know-how people speak about, the highs neutral/open/transparent/airy believable like the live music, these frequency extremes handle make that the MUSIC flow in our minds to wake up our feelings/emotions that at “ the end of the day “ is all what a music lover is looking for.
These not means that these cartridges don’t shine on the midrange because they do too and they have very good soundstage but here is more system/room dependent.

Well we have a very good alternative on the ( very low price ) MM type cartridges to achieve that music target and I’m not saying that you change your MC cartridge for a MM one: NO, what I’m trying to tell you is that it is worth to have ( as many you can buy/find ) the MM type cartridges along your MC ones

I want to tell you that I can live happy with any of those MM cartridges and I’m not saying with this that all of them perform at the same quality level NO!! what I’m saying is that all of them are very good performers, all of them approach you nearest to the music.

If you ask me which one is the best I can tell you that this will be a very hard “ call “ an almost impossible to decide, I think that I can make a difference between the very good ones and the stellar ones where IMHO the next cartridges belongs to this group:

Audio Technica ATML 170 and 180 OCC, Grado The Amber Tribute, Grace Ruby, Garrot P77, Nagaoka MP-50 Super, B&O MMC2 and MMC20CL, AKG P8ES SuperNova, Reson Reca ,Astatic MF-100 and Stanton LZS 981.

There are other ones that are really near this group: ADC Astrion, Supex MF-100 MK2, Micro Acoustics MA630/830, Empire 750 LTD and 600LAC, Sonus Dimension 5, Astatic MF-200 and 300 and the Acutex 320III.

The other ones are very good too but less refined ones.
I try too ( owned or borrowed for a friend ) the Shure IV and VMR, Music maker 2-3 and Clearaudio Virtuoso/Maestro, from these I could recommended only the Clearaudios the Shure’s and Music Maker are almost mediocre ones performers.
I forgot I try to the B&O Soundsmith versions, well this cartridges are good but are different from the original B&O ( that I prefer. ) due that the Sounsmith ones use ruby cantilevers instead the original B&O sapphire ones that for what I tested sounds more natural and less hi-fi like the ruby ones.

What I learn other that the importance on the quality sound reproduction through MM type cartridges?, well that unfortunately the advance in the design looking for a better quality cartridge performers advance almost nothing either on MM and MC cartridges.

Yes, today we have different/advanced body cartridge materials, different cantilever build materials, different stylus shape/profile, different, different,,,,different, but the quality sound reproduction is almost the same with cartridges build 30+ years ago and this is a fact. The same occur with TT’s and tonearms. Is sad to speak in this way but it is what we have today. Please, I’m not saying that some cartridges designs don’t grow up because they did it, example: Koetsu they today Koetsu’s are better performers that the old ones but against other cartridges the Koetsu ones don’t advance and many old and today cartridges MM/MC beat them easily.

Where I think the audio industry grow-up for the better are in electronic audio items ( like the Phonolinepreamps ), speakers and room treatment, but this is only my HO.

I know that there are many things that I forgot and many other things that we have to think about but what you can read here is IMHO a good point to start.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
rauliruegas
An earlier model from the same manufacturer, sharing the same design concept (air-core MM cartridge).

http://topwing.jp/BlueDragon-en.html
Here is a new MM cartridge that doesn't have any permeable core inside the coils; the same fundamental concept as air-core MC cartridges.

http://topwing.jp/RedSparrow-en.html
Dear @frogman : Thank’s to the AHEE 99% of true music lovers/audiophiles as you don’t takes very seriously measurements and specs in audio items, as a fact almost all just does not care about. What they care is what they are listening with out knowing that what they are listening is a huge clown from what recording microphones pick up.

All kind of measurements has a precise meaning and when you combine several of those measurements and its charts/diagrams you can see its in between relationship and you can have an explanation on the why’s ( not all why’s. but many. ) you are listening that ( example. ): transients are a little soft or slower than in other different system, or diffrences in the midrange in between two audio systems or brigthness or why the bass is not tigth or almost whatever is happening in a room/audio system.

To understand all those we have first to learn the stand alone meaning of each kind of measurements and its charts/diagrams, then we have to learn which ones of those measurements when are " looking/analized " tell us a more " complex " information that gives a more shiny ligth of the whole room/system behavior.

Normal specs are ( example, not all. ): slew rate, RIAA eq, frequency response and its deviations, dynamic range, crosstalk, separation levels, common mode refection, input overload, input impedance, output impedance, gain, different kind of distortions: THD, IMD, FIM, etc,, electrical impedance, phase, lateral/vertical response, step response, spectral decay, square waves, etc, etc.

Now, the whole understanding of measurements/specs and charts/diagrams can’t tell you if that room/system will like you. Maybe in the near future some one can develop a mathematics model to achieve that.

Through all the relationship on those measurements/charts comes everything was pick-up by the recording/playback process and ovbiously with what left of that expression/musicality you taled about and that I agree with you.

So, maybe is time for some of us to begin to learn on what till today is a "demon " for audiophiles when in reality is a " false demon " that the corrupted AHEE with success teached all of us for many years, was them whom build that demon when in reality is a totally and usefull TOOL when you learn how to use it. That’s all. Time to learn.

Here one of many " tools "/analyzers used to obtain audio/digital measurements ( not only J.Atkinson use it but are tools over the world. Even we used ( something similar. ) to measures our self design: Essential 3160 phonolinepreamps. )):

https://www.axiomtest.com/Analyzers/Audio,-Distortion-and-Sound-Analyzers/Audio-Precision/SYS_2322A/...

A target for any manufacturer must be that both channels measures the same like in my Essential or my 20.6's monobloks. Any one can make a test in your own system and will found out that both channels in any single audio item measures different at each channel !  !  !, yes I know that that is what we are accustom to. I think it's time to be better audiophiles , more DEMANDING for.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
And last but not least. A very special thanks goes to Peter Ledermann at SS for his passionate dedication for work on his MI alternative, there are many interesting models and the best part is that they are modern, today´s technology. Especially the Hyperion. At the moment it´s beyond my budget but hopefully some day.
That 2 dB RIAA devitation is way too much for me, well actually my GENELEC active monitors broduce less devitation at that 50 - 12K range :) So it seems to me that SS SG is a romantic approach to vinyl record play.
Don´t be wrong, I am a romantic but prefer female curves instead. Life goes on and I keep searching for other flat (and dull) cartridges, and just recently I suddenly get interested in MI carts, adviced by Chakster, Nandric, Lewn, Raul, bdp24. Thanks, much appreciated.
The DECCA Reference doesn´t look so romantic but on an appropriate arm it is a killer (looks like a piece of a Star Wars weapon to be honest) gadget.
I also owe one of the best MF carts, no other than the (in)famous GLANZ MFG-610LX w/ boron cantilever. The MFG 51L w/ tapered aluminium cantilever is also a superb performer in my system.
And as for MC carts, I´m very curious about certain Highphonic models. I must point out that I do like both frequency extremes but only quality, not quantity. A very few cartridges are able to do it right in quality, in those demanding areas IME.
My search is just begun, again.



Dear @harold-not-the-barrel : The eq. RIAA curve is measured between 20hz and 20khz and when the recording signal in the LP grooves goes inside the phono stage is applied the inverse eq. RIAA that gives as a result a flat frequency as was in the recording process before the RIAA eq.

Any minute deviation in that inverse RIAA eq. makes that what we have inside the phono stage does not mimic the recorded signal. Those inverse RIAA eq. deviations affects not only to a discrete frequencies where are those deviations but affects almost third complete octaves. We have to remember that we are talking of a curve.

Now, normally a decent phono stage comes with RIAA deviation of 0.1db that in theory is near of what was in the recording.

By words coming by the SS owner ( you can read it in the link I posted. ) he measured a deviation in the straing gauge self curve of a swing of  2 full dbs. ( that per sé is terrible. ) between 50hz and 12khz where below 50hz and and above 12khz the deviation is even greater.
Unfortunatelly he deleted from his site the chart/diagram of the italian reviewer that measured the starin gauge curve.

Of course that with that very high deviations levels there is no more flat frequency results.

I don't know if today he fixed this critical subject or not. The other issue is that with SS electronics you can't use other cartridge but SS starin gauge, again I don't know if this was fixed or not.

Btw, through my posts in those two " old " threads my attitude was not to questioning the SS owner his choosed trade-offs with his design. No one can do it because it was his privilege to do everything he wants it.

What I was " quetioning " was that he said in his site that the starin gauge design coincide en natural way with the RIAA inverse eq. and looking for those italian diagramas ( deleted by him from his site. ) and as he posted that statement is totally untrue because it does not conforms in any way with the inverse RIAA eq.

What I made it in those threads after learned about was to disclose that critical characteristic/subject, that's all. I never try to questioning him in any way.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Dear @frogman : Yes, original performance is the same but it's home reproduction sound is different.

I understand perfectly your point of view. Now, every kind of expression/musicality/rythm comes in what the microphones pick-up during the recording process and I mean everything. That " everything " is reflected in inherent way through measurements as frequency response and many other kind of. We can't say that inside a frequency response chart content only numbers, well in the chart are numbers but inside those numbers comes " everything ".

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
We all have lots of RIAA standard records. When using the Soundsmith Strain Gauge amplifier how does the frequency response (line) look after it has left that amplifier, is it flat or curved in some/certain extent ? And how wide is it ?
Dear Raul, 

Perhaps it IS a linguistic or semantics problem why we don't seem to be connecting on this issue.   Anyway, I have too much respect and admiration for your passion about audio to risk our back and forth getting contentious; and, with my "cartridge drawer"as proof, I have learned quite a bit from you about phono cartridges.  

My comment was in response to your comment "totally different performance" and which you now characterize as a "different kind of sound".  Of course, I agree it would be a "different sound"....as concerns frequency response.  But, to me those are two very different things and what I don't understand is why you don't understand the point that I (and others) am making, which is is that there is much more to the record/reproduce process than frequency response and how "accurate" it supposedly is.  In my book that is not what determines whether the most important aspects of a musical "performance"....the music, are reproduced well.  Even if your use of the term "performance" refers to the technical performance of a piece of audio equipment, to me, again, frequency response is not the most important.  As I said...different priorities when listening to reproduced music.  Not because some of us are "ignorant" about some kind of "truth" in technical matters, but simply because as with all art what moves the listener emotionally can seldom be explained fully with data and numbers.  Personally, I think that's a good thing.

Regards.

The suspension enigma (aka ''parts and wholes'').

I was informed by my friend Axel Schurholz about his problems

regarding parts supply from the supplier. As the general rule :

''one can get only what is available''. This apply for cart producers

as well for the retippers. However Axel never mentioned the problem

 with suspensions (aka ''dampers''). Because Axel retired I was

forced to search for other retippers. My ''new one'' are Expert stylus

and ''some'' person in Slovenia. The curious thing, among other,

is the fact that I was able to communicate about analog stuff

for the first time in my life in my native language. Slovenia was

part of (former) Yugoslavia so this Slovenian and I are (former)

compartriots. He is very reluctant to do retipps because not

only cantilevers/ styli but also dampers are difficult to get.

Now some facts about dampers. The AKG produced the best

ever MM cart,  P 100 Le , but was forced to close the cart division

of their company because they used wrong suspension material

for their carts. The known ''weak part'' by EMT carts is suspension

known for more as 30 years. EMT was not able to fix this problem

in all those years. We already talked about Technics 205 series

suspension problem.

 ''In the other side'', as Raul would say, there is this FR-7 series

carts from, say, the 80is with ''perfect suspension'' 40 years later.

Ortofon, for example, has its own lab in which continous reserch

is done for dampers. J. Carr mentioned in this thread that Lyra

used Ortofon dampers for their previous cart versions.

Now as we all know we use the division between ''low'', ''mid''

and ''high'' compliance as a kind of ''orientation frame'' for our

discussion. This imply at least 3 kinds of dampers which any

retipper should have. What if they can't get them?

According to the mentioned Slovenian a cart can't sound the

same with ''wrong damper''. I assume that tech. specs about

compliance by each cart should be the guideline for any retipper.

Dear @frogman : """  Absolutely not true. """

Look, when we have a 2db deviations in a signal curve as the RIAA against " no deviations " then we have a different kind of sound . Please tell me why that is not true when the fundamental notes and all its harmonics developed are different in between those signal curves.

The digital players in those times was not using the today ADC/DAC levels, even that I posted that with the begin of the DVDA I learned that something was happening in favor of the digital experience.

In the other side on that strain gauge discussion my point is that PL was not saying in his site the true behind its design. He was telling something different to the people and to the customers. That's all. I ask him by email and never gave me an answer and was through my self research/learning work that I " discovery " the whole " thing ". 

As I said, I don't know if today finally that starin gauge cartridge conform the RIAA eq.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

I am very, very sorry chakster but I like to tease persons that

I like because this was the custom among friends in my upbringing.

Add to that my irresistable inclination to be humorous so no

wonder people get angry. But if nobody would try to be funy

we would have no reason to laugh. Again I am very sorry.

I had no idea that Lada is (much) more expensive than I thought.

Dear Raul,

Who was it that said "The more things change, the more they stay the same"?

I wasn't going to respond any further on our analog/digital debate since I felt the subject was getting a little tired, I felt I had said just about all I had to say, I feel that our differences are a matter of different priorities when listening to music, and you would probably have the last word anyway.  Mainly, as I have said, I trust my ears and I know what I hear, and if you need to feel that you are "correct" that is fine with me.  However, I had to chuckle and could not resist when I revisited the "strain-gauge" thread that you linked above; a thread that I had forgotten I had participated in.  I bring this up because my comments (and yours) in that thread are remarkably relevant to the more recent debate:

++++++
frogman
3,650 posts
12-05-2008 8:12pm

I have been following this thread with a bit of reluctant curiosity. I was, at one point, going to chime in and encourage responders to cut Raul a little slack; but only a little. Reason being that as a person for whom the English language is a second language, I understand all too well how sometimes one's statements, particularly those made in writing, can sound more severe and austere than what was really meant; due to a certain linguistic aukwardness. I can't recount how many times I have had to mediate misunderstandings between my Anglo wife and Latino mother; all due to the in-law's less than perfect command of the English language. But alas, after upwards of twenty posts, I think Raul has made his point perfectly clear; language aukwardnesses and all. While I admire anyone who is so passionate about audio as he is, I just happen to think he misses the boat. One comment he makes I think says a great deal:

"...when you play a recording that was recorded with ( before ) a non RIAA eq. standard then you heard a totally different performance of what is in the recording that comes with a different equalization curve."

Absolutely not true. It will be different as far as frequency response goes, but as we all know there is far more, and arguably far more important, to the proper (I deliberately did not use the word "accurate") reproduction of a recorded performance besides absolutely accurate frequency response. In fact, as I understand Peter's comments (and I confess to limited technical knowledge), a deliberate choice was made to make some sacrifices in absolutely accurate frequency response, in order to gain the potentially more musically significant advantages of fewer phase problems. Makes sense to me.

What doesn't make sense to me is how it is possible that one of the most prolific writers on this forum, one with such strong opinions about audio, and the reproduction of sound, one with over seven hundred responses in various threads, has not made one single contribution on the subject of MUSIC. 
+++++

Additionally, while I realize that it was made a few years ago, in one of your comments was this nugget:

+++++
I just don't like what I'm hearing specially on the high frequencies and a little in the un-natural tonal balance of its performance, I'm a little sensitive on both frequency extremes and after a time my ears were " tired " of that SG sound ( maybe because that SG was almost new . ) that was not analog like or music live one it was more like a digital source: a good one digital source ( DVDA ).
+++++

I find a bit of humor in it all; I hope you can as well.

Regards.
@rauliruegas 
Now, when I read and listen for the first time to the SS Strain gauge I did not know that its design just was made it with out conforming the RIAA standards. Latter on and reading the SS site I learned that critical RIAA subject with that Strain gauge system and I knew it because in their site they showed a chart/diagram where every one can observe that the SS cartridge was designed with out that RIAA eq. in mind. PL arguments many things about trying to compensates for that " mistake ". Through my posts in two different SS Strain Gauge threads he posted that he never be again to accept any cartridge re-tipping to my cartridges ( I was a customer from him with 4-5 of my cartridges in the past. ). Btw, sooner after those threads he deleted the link in his site that showed the differences between the SS curve and the RIAA curve.

That's interesting story. Good to know. 
@nandric 

Mother Teresa was even more helpfull but , if I am right she was catholic while the Russians are Greek orthodox.

Please remember that i do not belong to this small group of religious people and all that stereotypes about my country you are using in every 3rd post in your metaphors (vodka, lada, rich people, orthodox, you are only forgot bears on the streets, snow, matreshka and balalayka).    
@pryso 
Cacti styli may now be unusual, but they are not"unique".

Am i said they are unique? No.
But we know that Miyajima use Bamboo cantilever. 
Dear @chakster : I don't think that PL of SS post in this thread never because is me who started this thread. Is a long and " old " history " that was developed precisely because his unique Strain Gauge system.

As you said was Panasonic ( Matushita group member as Technics. ) whom first appeared in the market with a Strain Gauge cartridge that conformed with the eq. RIAA standard.
After Panasonic came Stax, Sao Win and some one else. All of them conforming according that RIAA standards.

Srain Gauge cartridge concept is in true the best way by a wide margin to make a cartridge transducer, no doubt about. It's not perfect but better than MM/MI/MC technology.

Unfortunatelly is not free of trade-offs and the main one is that needs an external " electronics " that must be a real top design and that was not happened in those times as it does noth happens today with the SS one.

Now, when I read and listen for the first time to the SS Strain gauge I did not know that its design just was made it with out conforming the RIAA standards.
Latter on and reading the SS site I learned that critical RIAA subject with that Strain gauge system and I knew it because in their site they showed a chart/diagram where every one can observe that the SS cartridge was designed with out that RIAA eq. in mind. PL arguments many things about trying to compensates for that " mistake ".

Through my posts in two different SS Strain Gauge threads he posted that he never be again to accept any cartridge re-tipping to my cartridges ( I was a customer from him with 4-5 of my cartridges in the past. ). Btw, sooner after those threads he deleted the link in his site that showed the differences  between the SS curve and the RIAA curve.

Here is one of those threads where he thougth that I was attaking him when in reality I was looking for direct and precise answers about because I want it to know why I listened what I listen the first time I heard his Strain Gauge cartridge. I have to say that today I don't know if the SS Strain Gauge electronics in the system confoms according the RIAA standards:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/would-like-to-hear-from-strain-gauge-owners#3

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

chakster, ".  .  .  if you want to talk about unique design. And cacti growed by his friend Frank Schröder"

Cacti styli may now be unusual, but they are not"unique".  At the beginning of home playback the acoustical Victrolas and other models utilized cactus as well as steel needles.  ;^)  

Mother Teresa was even more helpfull but , if I am right she

was catholic while the Russians are Greek orthodox. What

kind of argument is that? Like Polish? When one ask a Pole

''are you Slavic?'' his answer is : ''no I am catholic''.

Right, but Ledermann also fix cartridges for other people like the hardest working man in this business, so i believe his experience is great and he knows the weakness of the carts (of any type) very well.  

My dear brother, The old Roman's already invented the so

called ''oratio pro domo'' argument. I do see J. Carr more as

an scientist than ''producer'' but the fact is that he produce and

sell MC carts while the impressive looking Ledermann produce

and sell MI carts. Besides considering the price of my Allaerts

MC 2 finish gold I would be crazy to prefer MM kinds(grin).

I'm just collect the arguments, i do not take anyone's opinion too seriously. Jonathan Carr did not find any advantages in Raul's long time favorite 100c mk4, but he has mentioned Victor L-1000 MC as very unique design with tiny printed coil right above the stylus, i think Decca MI can be in this category too for its design. SoundSmith video is interesting, how about those 5k MC with very poor channel separation he has mentioned in the video? He even mentioned distortion that MC owners like so much. The stupidity of using conical tip. Strain Gauge cartridge (originally developed by Panasonic) if you want to talk about unique design. And cacti growed by his friend  Frank Schröder

Addition, I knew that love can make people blind but thanks

to my Russian brother it is obvious that t love  also can

cause deafness.

My Gosh, chakster knows better than Carr???

When will we see the first MI cart designed and produced in

''Russia with love''?

Unfortunately J.Carr's statement is outdated on this forum, but the Ledermann's statement is dated October 2017 and he speak about MI (not MM). It worth to watch just to see Peter and to check some technical data he's talking about. 

Who would compare cart manufacturers with philosopher? Well to

refute whatever philosopher the only thing one need to do is

read some other. ''Our own'' J. Carr explained  in this same thread

why he prefer MC - and never even try to design an MM kind.

Mr. Peter Ledermann of the SoundSmith could post in our thread too, i just realized he's not a fan of MC cartridges at all (serviced many thousands of them). In the middle of this video he explain the advantages of MI cartridges over MC. And Strain Gauge over any of them. Very interesting lecture. I also noticed that he hate conical styli :) 
Dear @analogluvr  @frogman : Each one of us has to do our job. Belive me that I did it for years not months and in all this time I learned a lot.

Unfortunatelly there is no rules about , we have to learn and stay/try to mantain a self training to have sucess. Not easy task and is more of knowledge level  that we go step by step acquiring than too much money to spend. Money is guarantee of nothing, always need it but......

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Dear @analogluvr : """ your preference for digital and solid state tells me that you listen with your head and not your heart. ..................................................................
You may have spent a lot of time studying these things but you need to spend more listening and trusting your heart and feelings while listening.""

If in any audio sytem what I’m listening does not moves me then I stop to listened. MUSIC is " feelings/emotion ", as you I know very well and understand your point.

For years I was a tube lover and owned, listened in my system and in other systems the tube electronics you can name it. I was a lover.

Many times want it to come back to SS and every time I intented was dissapointed with, I never gave a good opportunity and in those years SS was not like today where we have several alternatives of very good SS designs that makes the differences.

With SS alternative happens the same as with digital: gentlemans/audiophiles as you have a deep foundation in analog and tubes and shows it through all your posts but and this BUT is what makes the difference with all of you: BUT almost no one gives a true opportunity and the effort need it to SS and digital.

What means a serious " opportunity ": means that we have to invest money on SS or digital, it’s not that we listen to it for a few hours or few days NO, we have to be serious about. But it’s not only that we have to invest on it but we have to make a new whole system/room SET-UP with the new items.

We can’t imagine that SS or digital will works only connecting it, no it’s a mistake to do it that way. Both technologies hide almost no one " errors " in our set-up as happens with analog and tubes. With SS and digital there is no way to hide the system/room " mistakes " that exist all over the audio chain at each single link. We have to remember that each one system is fine tunned ( in this case ) to those tubes or analog.

Now, when we have a really fine tunned room/system with SS/digital then the analog experiences shines on it as never before and we are truer to the live experience.

Is very dificult to give an opinion ( that I respect. ) when we have not true and serious first hand today experiences on the subjects.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Dear @frogman @pryso : """ you’ve confused me again with your statement, "Remember that my main target in my home system is to stay nearer to the recording not to the live experiences."

How many of us can have the experience of hearing a recording session to then judge how closely the resulting media (in any format) sounds on our home systems? """


"""
to make that very point numerous times in other discussions when faced with the argument that the live music experience is not a valid reference. ........ To use the resulting recorded sound as a reference is problematic as you point out ....... """



I’m sorry for both of you confussions. As you know several times my explanations are not really good because my ignorance levels on the english language.

Here I go: for third time in this discussion I post that my ultimate reference always is LIVE MUSIC ( I posted in this and other forums hundreds of times. ). Period.

Now, of course that I never was on my LPs recording sessions and I don’t need it to fulfill my target: truer to the recording.

Why I don’t need it. Because ity does not matters about the recording sessions that I can’t change it  in any way .My whole/overall home audio system work has its solid foundation in this statement:

TRY TO MANTAIN AT MINIMUM EVERY KIND OF DISTORTIONS OR ADDED INFORMATION LEVELS AT EACH SINGLE LINK IN THE ROOM/SYSTEM AUDIO CHAIN.

The target it self permit that you lost the minimum information you can and that at the same time you add the least information that was not created in the recording process but generated through the playback one.

That was why tubes are forbidden for me as all metal undamped tonearm and poor cartridge trackers and many other things as can be that in a system with passive speakers the owner owns no self powered subwoofers. The list is to long to analize it here as is why tubes are a forbidden item for that precise target.
Yes, we have to look for something that does not exist: PERFECTION but at least to stay nearest to it.

So, when any one of us fulfill the target to in true mantain at minimum the system/room distortions or added information we will stay nearer to the recording and then to the LIVE experience too.

Tha’s all.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

The best MI cart ever produced is the AKG P-100 Le. Lew already

mentioned MI carts in the context of the lowest moving mass

assumptions which postulated  that MC carts have lower moving

mass in comparison with the ''MM kinds''. AKG invented MI system

with a small iron tube on the cantilever end which moved between 4

small rod magnets. Alas AKG made a big mistake by chosing the

wrong material for the suspension. To avoid liability they closed

the carts division of their company. The P-100 Le is made in (very)

limited numbers but appears from time to time on eBay. The only

person who owns one is Raul if my memory still works.

Now speaking about suspension. We are so obsessed with retips

that we totally overlooked suspension. Because I know Axel for

such a long time I know what the problems by retippers are.

One need to discriminate between cart producers who also have

repair service like Van den Hul and Soundsmith and ''ordinary

retippers''. The cart producers  have much better access to

part supplier. This is not the case with ''ordinary retipper''. They

have not only the problems with styli and cantilevers but also with

dampers (aka ''rubber ring'') . According to my new retipper from

Slovenia if he can't get the right damper the cart will not sound as

original.  They can't get coils have  limited supply of styli/ cantilevers

and dampers. So no wonder Axel bought second hand carts as

donors for parts.

So my advice for a new suspension is either Van den Hul or

Soundsmith. Both produce carts with different compliance so

should have different dampers available for their customers.

Not sure "what's the best", Harold, i think it can be the best of the month only :) But i like Joseph Grado Signature TXZ (MI) model. Those Decca are the uglies in my chart, but i never owned any of them and i don't think i have tonearm for them.   
Dear @downunder : That AS TT is nothing especial. Appeared in 1983 along the heavy weigth fashion of all those old times. Yes, a very high inertia moment that can helps to speed stability but with draw backs too. Nothing is perfect.

If you observe this design is very similar to MS one: all metal, four metal arm boards and all these arm board at the worst place: at the TT feets where everything must pass.

What's new with? what advantage has over any today top TT? . I have no curiosity about.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Raul your preference for digital and solid state tells me that you listen with your head and not your heart. Both analog and tubes do a much better job at capturing the emotion of the music. 
In fact I believe that SET when run within its proper parameters also offers less distortion than ss and sounds natural when doing it. 
 You may have spent a lot of time studying these things but you need to spend more listening and trusting your heart and feelings  while listening 
Raul and all,
My Dynavector Karat Nova 13D. It was for sale at Hart Audio UK and advertised as a demo cart direct from Japan. The seller said they had used it just for 10-15 hours at most, so the cart was practically as new.
It came w/ original wooden box but no papers, in ad there were specs about and if my memory serves me right the average VTF was stated as 1.4 g.  So I used 1.5 g to be in "safe area" as I also understand that too lower weight may cause damage to vinyl groove.
Raul, I may have a slightly different sample of the Nova 13D, it also looks that the body is longer than yours.
Anyway, now I have 1.65 g and it tracks 100 microns :)
Thanks for advice.
**** if I attend enough live performances I can fix in my sonic memory the tones, colorations, dynamic abilities, and details of say a trumpet. Listening to trumpet recordings at home may not be an exact replication but I can judge how close I've come to some average of those ****

That is such an important point; and you made it very succintly.  I have tried, with varying degrees of success, to make that very point numerous times in other discussions when faced with the argument that the live music experience is not a valid reference.  Whether in a hall or a recording studio the mics pick up the sound of a live performance and do so with varying degrees of fidelity depending on the mics used and how they are used.  To use the resulting recorded sound as a reference is problematic as you point out and should be obvious.
@rauliruegas

Hi Raul.
MikeL is now buying a 6 figure reproduced American Sound high mass turntable to be made by David Karmeli.

He has a very good digital system, but he still prefers turntables.
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?18161-The-American-Sound-Turntable-Beyond-s-Minimalist!

cheers
Raul, now you've confused me again with your statement, "Remember that my main target in my home system is to stay nearer to the recording not to the live experiences."

How many of us can have the experience of hearing a recording session to then judge how closely the resulting media (in any format) sounds on our home systems?

At least in attending acoustic musical performances I can "refresh" my auditory memory of the sounds of the instruments being played.  For me that furnishes a basis for judgement of my system at home.  No my recording will not (likely) be the same musician with the same instrument in the same acoustic environment.  But if I attend enough live performances I can fix in my sonic memory the tones, colorations, dynamic abilities, and details of say a trumpet.  Listening to trumpet recordings at home may not be an exact replication but I can judge how close I've come to some average of those.

Attempting to understand the basic sonics of each and every recording to judge the accuracy of playback seems an impossible task.

Sorry if I've diverted from the analog VS digital discussion which is a diversion from the original cartridge design type topic. ;^)
Dear @frogman : For years Mike was an analog lover and as thousands of audiophiles and music lovers digital was a forbiden alternative. For some time now he " understand " digital scenario and its top quality performance and today he is really deep learning about.

Today digital alternative is working in the beginning of its maturity step and what it shows it is just fabolous and the good news is that it’s every day improving it so the best is forth coming. Nothing can stop it, not even we analog lovers because I’m one of them.

I don’t dimish you or other gentlemans that think like you, things are that I see " things " from a different approach. Remember that my main target in my home system is to stay nearer to the recording not to the live experiences.

I’m not talking of " numbers " per sé I only pointed out clear sources ( and many more than exist in analog. ) where in this alternative the original information is losted and this like it or not alter everything on what we are listening.

As you I know what I listen what my ears, brain and body perceives. Years ago I was a furious defender of analog against digital but as digital through the time I learn what happens all over the recording/playback process of what we are listening.

Like it or not what you and every one listen in its systems are reflected through ( at least. ): frequency response, noise/distortions levels and SPL. Inside this characteristics and other goes everything we percieves at listening sessions.

Mike is a gentleman that’s polite and mind opened to any kind of subjects as the one we are touching and I?m sure that he never did the " 3 months digital test " but I’m sure too that you and tyour friends and furious digital detractor neither and if we don’t do it then we can’t talk inside the same scenario.

You can tell that maybe you don’t need that test as Mike that does not need it but today he knows and through many of his posts you can read that that " expression " exist even for his musicians/composer friends as he pointed out in the link I posted:

" Friday night I had a few serious analog focused guys over and we listened to quite a bit of digital; mostly string quartets, and classical piano. they were quite amazed at the natural, spacious and focused presentation. one of them is a classical composer and music professor. he was especially taken with a redbook Haydn String Quartet and the sound staging and natural tone. "

" he was especially taken...

and his friends was not in the daily listening in digital.

Btw, if we analize a little to the Mike’s system we can note that exist no tubes that can’t honor music/expression ( impedes to stay nearer to the recording, no matters what. ), DD TT, no LT tonearm ( he was owner for year of a Rockport series 3 TT that came with LT. ), no all metal tonearm and no undamped tonearm, speakers with two self powered subwoofers. His TT is not only a DD but the most importan issue is that the manufacturer before builded TTs is an expert in damping devices for audio and that TT has that expertise including in the arm boards.

Now, maybe we don’t like or don’t want to stay truer to the recording and this is up to each one of us.

For me this dialogue with you was and is a learning one and my target is not who has the reason because both alternatives has its own trade-offs. Maybe what you and other gentlemans need is to be exposed more frequently to decent or top digital listening sessions.

Btw, in this subject we are discussing is happening the same that happened when I touch for the first time in this forum the necessity to have: a pair of self powered subwoofers, DD turntables, tonearms with removable headshells, well damped tonearms and the like. Many many people was and posted against what I was telling but years latter almost all of them areb using exactly what they were against it. Such is life.

@toddverrone said: " well said. ", with out explanation why is good said because I’m not using " the data " as a main argument.

frogman even in this audio system subject we have to walk ahead, digital is a step ahead and not as you posted somewhere a backwards. It¿’s not this way. As Mike there are several analog lovers that " knows " about and like it .

I think it’s a good time for every one to start to build a digital rig at least: just for fun ! !


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


Well said, frogman. This same dichotomy appears in the cable debates. Those who say the data show cables don't matter and those who say their ears say cables do matter.

I tend to go with the ears..
Dear Raul,

I always hesitate to approach discussions/debates such as this from this vantage point for reasons that may be important only to me; but here goes...and for whatever it may be worth to anyone:

I, like the great majority of my "friends" (as you refer to them), have been playing music (mostly, but not entirely, in acoustic settings) on a daily basis for (in my case) almost fifty years. There have been countless experiences in performance and recording settings employing both analog and digital. I mention this not to gain any kind of exclusivity, but simply to set the backdrop that is at the root of my views on the analog/digital issue. All of the "facts" and "clear evidence" that you present mean little when our ears tell us something different. Yet, you expect us to ignore what our ears tell us. You offer a lot of technical data; but, ironically, little or no details about what you actually hear that support your views. In another thread another musician offered a point of view similar to mine that was also in opposition to your point of view and you, likewise, dismissed it. Moreover, you previously referred to the musicians that you say you have a relationship with as "almost deaf". Could it be that your musician friends also feel the way that mine do? Have you asked them? Additionally, there are many intelligent and very musically astute audiophiles here that, likewise, share these views. Do you ever consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, there is something, on a very fundamental level, about how the two technologies capture and present music that transcends all of the "facts" and "clear evidence" that you present? This "evidence" is "clear" only on paper. Remember the THD "wars" of yesteryear? The point is that numbers seldom tell the whole story.

The beauty of art is that it transcends what can be explained factually and only by accepting this can we get closer to the facts. I WANT digital to consistently sound as true to the musical values that I feel are most important as analog does; it simply doesn’t. Btw, as usual I am perplexed by some of the supporting "evidence" that you offer:

In the link that you included in your most recent post the audiophile that you cite wrote this after extolling the obvious virtues of his new DAC:

**** can Lps still be better? sure they can but not by as much as you might think.......****

So, what is your point? Is this not what I have been saying all along?

Regards.

"It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure.” - Albert Einstein


dc_bruce, If moving mass was the whole story, then MI cartridges would be king. They have lower moving mass than MCs.  So do the optical and strain gauge cartridge types.  (But many do say that those are "special".)
Dear @frogman : I dont think we are around circles but if you think are " circles " is better because a circle is closed not something that just left in the " air "/open.

I respect your position on the subject but I posted clear evidence of all the different steps and sources where the analog signal is totally losted and never recovered because there is no way to recover it.
I told you that I was not analizing all the other steps during the playback where that true losting of information is happening and where additional are generated full of different kind of distortions that at minimum puts blur in the analog signal but this kind of blur happens to during the recording process and I did not analize it yet.
Other lost information analog source: if your phono stage was not designed with the Neumann pole in the inverse RIAA eq. then you are losting information too.

All those " facts " not only alter but disappears the original expression you talk about and what we are listening from the speakers through analog is a totally new " expression " if exist at all. and the like

Digital has not that kind of heavy different problems if any.

People think that R2R is the " reference " and better than same digital process but it's not because is way different to record in tape zeros and ones than the complexity of the analog information signal.
We have to think that the analog signal must " suffer " the R2R noise levels, frequency response limitations, speed stability of the recording mechanism, wow&flutter and the like where to the digital recording signal  is not affected by and you can attest what I'm saying:

take one of the D2D Sheffield LP and check it against is counterpart ( same LP recording, same session. ) recorded direct two 2 track tape and you will listen a huge differences in between where the D2D is way superior to the one that was recorded using a R2R.

Analog is a mess, problem for we analog and music lovers is to understand it and accept it's.

I remember very well and I own it several LPs recorded digital in the old times with all the digital limitations that the medium had.

Examples about are the Denon PCM LP recordings that if you listen one of the good Denon recordings you will be extremely satisfied with. Not all Denon's LP sounds good and comes with that " expression " but the good ones are really good.

Telarcs are other very good example of digital LP recordings. Yes, there are the bad ones here too but the good ones you can't say if are full analog or digital/analog, even if you invite one of your friends and with out tell him is a digital recording he just can't take it in count is digital.

Delos is another great example of labels with digital LP recordings.

Delos and Telarc used the rudimentary Soundstream digital machine where Denon, that are experts about, designed his own PCM recording machine that in theory was better than the Soundstream.

From some time now ( in the last times. ) many of the LP recordings are recorded with the latest digital technology and many audiophiles just don't know it and like a lot what they are hearing.

Look this gentleman  in one word is a true reference, take a look on his audio system where he has top reference analog rig including R2R and top digital rig but additional well not additional but before all that he is a true music lover and as a human beeen a true top gentleman . Read what he posted and again read and see his home audio system details:


https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/what-sounds-best-vinyl-or-cds/post?postid=1445044#1445044

https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/615


I'm not closed to your " expression " it's only that other than listen it I analize if in reality is preserved by analog and things says it's not.
Even this I like analog alternative and as he I like digital too and know for sure its inherent today superiority.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.



Thanks Raul, apparently I just assumed wrongly that vinyl was your preference over the years of this post, with MMs being your favorites until recently when you again discovered MCs you found satisfying.  At least up until your most recent statements about digital.

I only have about 3K LPs.  But that has been enough to keep me committed to vinyl playback.  And while I'm not anti-digital (some local audio friends, including a couple you met when you visited San Diego, stated they couldn't stand listening to digital for at least the initial 20 years or so) I find I simply enjoy listening to analog more.  So I'm in a similar place as frogman. 

Peace
Dear @downunder : That original cartridge is just terrific. Good luck with it and yes play with all this warranty days time.

Btw, @pryso maybe we don't need a mk5 new Technics design today but this same MK4 with some kind of up-dates. It's a killer´s cartridge.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Dear @pryso : Easy: I own over 7K LPs and when I re-discovered the MM alternative was really enligthed and I wanted to share every one.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Hi all, j. carr ever proposed to extend this thread to other kinds

of carts. I started this thread but, alas, nobody was interested.

However if there are members who own either: Panasonic strain

gauge EPC 450, 451,etc,; Toshiba electret C 400 or Stax CP-Y

I got the address of an lab in Slovenia where those can be fixed,

improved ,etc. www. eselab.si

My EPS-P100ED4 has arrived and its set up on the SL1000MK3D.

This sounds incredible and what I remember from the EPC-P100CMK4 before vdh did their re-tip. speed, neutrality and transparency.


now - how long will it last? It is definitely riding a little lower than my other P100ED4 stylus. I will keep playing over the weekend and hopefully it does not collapse in the meantime.
In theory I have up to 30 days before I can invoke my eBay Money Back Guarantee. Lets hope I don’t have to.

cheers
I can't remember anyone praised V15 in this thread, but i remember the statement that Clearaudio use the Audio-Technica generator in their MM cartridges. My first switch from MM/MI to LOMC was very impressive until i discovered many more MM cartridges (some very best vintage MM from this thread). Then everything became much more difficult. But the MM cartridges are definitely much