Fleib, Do you know how they loaded the cartridges in that German survey? I cannot read the German. Between you and Dover, an interesting point is raised. The Koetsu cartridges are often damned for having rolled off hf response. Perhaps their sin is really that they don't exhibit the rising high end common to other brands, thus suffering in the "brightness" category, by comparison.
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.
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.
13,665 responses Add your response
Lew, There's a description for each cart and within that description a range of preamp loads are mentioned. I'm not fluent in German either. AFAIK all tests were done per manufacturer recommendations. I was told that Stereoplay uses the Test Factory to plot the carts. They are said to be one of the most highly respected facilities and many manufacturers use them to test their products. Amplitude response in LOMCs doesn't change much, if at all with loading. What changes is stage and dynamics vs focus and detail. Exceptions to this are loading at or near the cart internal impedance or coreless models with high inductance and low output like the DL-S1. I read of someone loading an OC9II at 20 ohms to tame harsh overtones, but I think that's unusual. The Koetsu Black has big full bass, sort of like a Grado. As you go up the line the carts sound faster and have response more like other expensive carts. The transition between the Black and Rosewood seems especially revealing. I'm by no means expert in Koetsu, but I don't think the more expensive models are rolled off, and maybe the Black sounds mellow due to the bass? Regards, |
Dover, I just went through this for the umpteenth time on Asylum so please excuse me if I try to abbreviate. With regards to amplitude response there are two types of MC, those with a rising high end and those with flat extended response. Many of the Dynavector or Accuphase/Monster models are flat. Probably ZYX also. Because MM/MI carts have inductance as a property of output, it combines with shunt capacitance and creates what's known as electrical resonance. There is no phase shift at electrical resonance. Phase shift occurs at high frequency resonance in all carts. What electrical resonance does is lower the frequency of high freq resonance. This lowering of high frequency resonance is used by MM designers to augment midtreble droop. A specific recommendation for capacitance loading is for just that, or to keep capacitance low enough not make it brighter. There's a good article in TNT called "Load the Magnets" that illustrates this with a Shure M97. 250pF should be maintained and people report 62K load is best. A MC like the Ortofon MC200 has high frequency resonance at 27KHz. There's a phase shift there approaching 180° and it extends down to around 7KHz. Typical MMs have a shift that extends down to possibly 1 or 2KHz (worst case among "decent" models). If you have a MM with a short or exotic cantilever and low inductance (some are < 100mH) it could have better phase linearity than some MCs. We naturally think of phase nonlinearity as a problem, but it might actually be a design feature. Records have a rolled of response and a rising high end might make up for this deficit? If you go back and look at Sonus Blue test report you'll see what that cart looks like loaded at 100K. Response went up like a rocket ship and extended to 27K. That's a low inductance cart and must have been way too bright for stereo. I don't think it was one of Raul's favorites. Load a higher inductance cart at 100K and you could tune it with capacitance. The genius of Atlas is lowering high frequency resonance to 20K and the rise stops there. Not only that phase nonlinearity will extend down to mid treble. The phase error is + or forward and combined with the amplitude response the image should jump out at you. That's why I said it's a 3D cart. The PDFs I post is what I can find. There are only a couple of European mags that have lab reports. The rest is vintage. Regards, |
Now that we're into MCs I think there's one thing everybody should realize. Two samples of the same model will probably be different, and they might be very different. On DIY forum John Curl said he couldn't find two samples of the same model that were the same. He didn't mention what brand(s) he was looking at. Did anybody look at the lab report of the Clearaudio Concerto? Apparently the tip was mounted 10° off and response was really screwed up. It fell off like a rock from 10KHz and the commentary said it was voiced for rock. This is a $3K cart? Awhile back I opened a thread about Clearaudio MMs. They rolled back the specs for V2 and now they're virtually identical to the AT95. Read what poster Kiddman had to say about high end QC: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1392385752&openfrom&1&4#1 I'm sure some companies are better than others, but what are your options for getting out of a bad decision or getting rid of a lemon? What if something comes up and you don't have time to play it for months, then find out that it sucks? MM coils are machine wound and consistency is generally higher. I imagine AT and Ortofon have the best QC in the business regardless of type. Not having a user replaceable stylus/cantilever is a selling point for MCs, but it's also a liability. The coils move with the cantilever and that's why HOMC have such high moving mass. The notion that LOMCs having lower moving mass than MM/MI is a myth. It depends on design. Thinking about this thread and the motivation that inspired it makes me wonder about recent developments. There was always a self serving aspect of preamp sales, but MM/MI awareness seemed genuine. Now, not so much. Ranking seems contrived. Regards, |
Tubed1, What kind of cantilever does it have, and is it in tact? There's a new guy in Washington state, Andy Kim is said to do nice work. He might be somewhat limited in tip and/or cantilever selection, I haven't used his services. Of course there's Soundsmith and Axel in Germany. Expert Stylus in the UK is highly respected. Regards, |
Tubed1, Van den Hul I is the same as Gyger I. Gyger I and II are not anymore in production but some re-tipper have some in their stock. Axel offers Gyger II with aluminum cantilever , Torlai with boron cantilever. I would try Torlai (www.torlai.it). If your cantilever is in good condition Torlai can retip with Gyger II. |
Tubed1, If you want to keep it original and the cantilever/suspension are in good shape, then you should have it retipped with a micro type similar to the VDH 1. Maybe Nandric could advise you about that. I think he said that Axel has those tips, or similar. You could send it to VDH. If you're in the US that would have to be through a VDH dealer or the distributor. Regards, |
"Diamond encrusted titanium cantilever." Sounds like something you'd give your girlfriend or a prize awarded on a daytime TV quiz show. Fleib, You really seem to have a good grasp on these concepts. I typically do understand what you're talking about, but the details recede into dim memory in between visits to this thread. I got into a brief brouhaha with a guy on Vinyl Asylum who claimed that he "scientifically" proved MCs are inherently superior to MMs, just based on that issue of high frequency resonance that is peculiar to MMs. Wish I had you by my side to debunk his BS by pointing out the other issues that apply to MCs. He went on to say that it was all well and good to have a personal preference for a particular MM but having that view was close to delusional, because "science" says otherwise. My retort was mostly to point out the hf anomalies of MCs, their need for much higher phono stage gain, and their tendency to inferior tracking ability compared to MMs, in general. But I also was careful to say that I personally do not choose to make such a general judgement of "all MMs" vs " all MCs". |
Lew, I must have missed that thread. I discussed this with John and we've seemed to come to an understanding although I don't know if he believes it. That has to do with electrical resonance a la Hagerman and its affect on phase performance. It's tied in with high frequency resonance and is usually the basis for these value judgments. High frequency resonance is another way of saying cantilever resonance. If you have an extended amplitude plot you can see where it peaks in the high frequencies. Lighter and more rigid cantilevers will tend to resonate at higher frequencies. Cantilever length is a big factor too. Shorter cantilevers will resonate at a higher frequency just as a pipe organ high frequency pipe is short. Because some MCs are made with exotic (boron) cantilevers they tend to have higher high freq res. For example an Ortofon MC200 has hi freq res @ 27KHz and this is higher than others with an aluminum cantilever of the same length. It also seems fairly typical of boron cantilevered carts. The desirability of extended response (beyond 20K) is a matter of opinion, but carts will tend to have response way past high freq res. I think Nikola's list of favorite carts is headed with ones with aluminum cantilevers. Is a Kisiki, Miyabi or DL-S1 inferior to all carts with more extended response? Most carts made for 4-ch were MMs and had to retrieve rear channel info at 30 - 35K. This was somewhat of a challenge as the inductance of a MM will lower high freq res. The shibata tip was invented for this and all MMs intended for 4-ch retrieval had low inductance. The AT-12S has 250mH and the AT-12E, 13Ea etc. were around 1KmH. This same aspect that "limits" a MM is also an asset. The designer can use inductance to tune response, and the end user has much more flexibility in that respect. With a MC there's not much you can do. It is what it is and loading only affects stage vs. focus/detail, with only odd ball exceptions. With a MM you can use resistance and capacitance loading to change amplitude response. It's ironic that most high end phono stages have no provision for MM loading options, and of course the preamps have no tone controls. You're lucky if they even tell you the input capacitance. It's the fault of the press - their incompetence and of course the advertising dollars. Tracking is another related issue and traditionally MCs were low compliance and lousy trackers. That's not entirely true today, but I have to take the trash out or I'll miss the collection truck. Later. Regards, |
Dgarretson, We last heard about your XP-25 saga with great results from the 20SS. Did you switch back to the ART7? Your posts bring up the question of cart-preamp synergy. Wasn't your previous unit tubes? Sorry, I forgot what that was (MP1?), a phono stage built into a preamp and modified for MCs? I think the ART7 is much like the 50ANV. It would be interesting to hear what you say. Regards, |
This is an interesting thread. Robert Green on his website Regon audio tested MC vs MM's Vs Original Mastertape. HHe was of the view that the MM's were closer to the mastertape, whereas MC's - especially as they got more 'exotic' had a tendency to emphasise backround ambiance artefacts and somehow gave them a central stage, whereas the reality was that they didn't take such a spot on the mastertape. In other words MC's very much had their own sound, and we associate this as 'high end' It could be that MC's are more sensitive in picking this low level info, but if this is done unrealistically then we are moving away from HiFi and towards simply music reproduction - the question is what do you want. I have an MM in my Townshend Rock - I am curious about changing the viscosity of the oile depending on compliance |
Lohanimal, your words was like fresh air in a hot summer day. Robert Green´s insight is something that I have experienced over the years, although my knowledge/experience on MCs is very limited. I have a handful of top of the line MMs and they all perform more or less superbly and as Green says (I would assume) differencies are minimal, usually it´s very hard to find them at all (this means they are closer to the master tape). My latest find the Audio-Technica AT-ML180/OCC, that I bought from Nandric a few months ago is probably the very finest MM from AT. As I realized that he was selling his MMs on eBay I didn´t waste time (grin). I just wanted the 180 and had to pay a minor fortune on auction but it was worth. Still. my finest cartridge (MM) is from 1989 and can be taken away only over my dead body. About MMs in general, the less capacitance the more accurate performance and upper frequency response. Total maximum capacitance is now 40 pF. Additionally, the lighter the wand the better fit to a high compliant MM. The super rigid titanium nitride teak & fluid damped wand of the SME III is barely 5 g. |
'In the other side', as Raul would say, my aunt Natalija who has real gold in her ears is of the opposite opininon from Robert Green. Not to mention the best ears in this as well the parallel universe of 'some' Mexican who is able to hear distortions in Halcro's system all the way from Mexico. This Mexican at last, after 12.000 contributions in his MM thread , confessed that MC carts are much better. |
Leave it to a lawyer to put spin on the situation that seems favorable to his opinion. The Mexican didn't confess anything. He arrived at that conclusion after revising the high gain stage of his phonolinepreamp. He would probably be of that opinion anyway if his MC stage were better, but that's not how it happened. Loading all his MMs at 100K, it seems obvious he liked the rising high end of most MCs. Whether you like the accuracy of master tape performance or the added "clues" of a MC is a matter of opinion. To each his own. You could look at this another way. His preference coincides with prospective sales. I'd prefer to think the former reason is correct. Regards, |
Fleib, I and Dave Garretson both own Atma-sphere MP1 preamplifiers. He and I have modified the phono gain stage, which uses a dual-differential cascode topology, such that the "bottom" element in the cascode is a dual-section bipolar transistor, an MAT02. I got this idea from Allen Wright and passed it on to Dave. I also changed the top tube in this stage; Atma-sphere uses 12AT7, and I use an ECC99 because it is higher in transconductance than a 12AT7. The result of this mod is dead silent gain and oodles of gain for even the lowest gain imaginable MC cartridge. In fact, my only problem with this set-up is too much gain for any MM. I've had to build a separate MM dedicated phono stage. Dave's purchased an XP25, I guess, but I don't know whether it totally replaces his MP1. Ralph Karsten would probably be very upset with you for referring to the MP1 as a "preamplifier with an added phono section" (or whatever similar description you wrote above). The MP1 is his pride and joy for its performance on phono, and rightfully so, IMO. If Raul can "confess" that MCs are superior to MMs, may I also confess that I don't agree with him? I still take cartridges as they come, MC or MM. And does my confession have as much of a shattering effect as his? I always wondered whether Raul's original tendency to favor MMs over MCs was at least in part due to some failing of the high-gain input of his own Phonolinepreamp. Perhaps he late in the thread made some changes that brought its performance up to that of the MM section. Some supporting evidence for that is his other "revelation", that SUTs, against which he railed for years, were really good in fact, and we should all love them. I guessed that perhaps running a SUT though his MM phono stage sounded better than his flawed MC high gain stage. And suddenly, MCs could sound good. |
Lew, I doubt Ralph would be upset referring to Dave's phono stage as being built into a preamp. The MP1 appears to be a full function preamp and we're talking about it. I just read the manual and it seems to be made for MCs. The gain isn't stated. It's about 55dB? I question the choice of a 12AT7 tube, but maybe any tube on the input would have far too much capacitance for a MM anyway, so it's best suited for a LOMC? Any benefit running it balanced in from your table? What kind of MM stage did you build? Using a SUT is like using a DL103. If you get it right you're trading detail/resolution for dynamics and musicality. Also, the output of a SUT has a lot of capacitance and you're still going into a MM input. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I like and use both MMs and MCs, but the MCs I like tend to be the accurate variety with extended response. Nandric can keep his Kisiki and other romantic MCs. I'm glad he enjoys them, they're not for me. I want to hear what's on the record, not what some cart designer thinks it should be. I realize Raul started this thread, but I never gave his rankings much credence. It would be nice to talk about this stuff without someone referring to the Mexican. He's not responding any more. Who cares? Regards, |
I'm with Fleib on this one......😷 For 5 years, because of Raul's influence.....I ran all my MM cartridges at 60K Ohms Resistance as this was the highest the Halcro DM10 could go. Only in the last year have I moved away from this 'mantra'.....and been amazed at the differences...😳😍 Not only is 60K Ohms too high (bright😖) for most of my MMs (let alone 100K)😱.....I find that some of them sound better when loaded as low as 10K Ohms...😎⁉️....and 20K, 30K, and 40K are all very much the norm in achieving a smooth, lush and convincing presentation....👍👏 Combining this versatility in Resistance loading with the variable Capacitance the Halcro DM10 allows....gives me the opportunity to 'contour' many of my MMs to sound very much the same as each other 'tonally'...😳 Of course things like Soundstage, Attack, Depth and Emotion are all unaffected by Loading and are fundamental to each cartridge's individual character. Unlike Resistance....which generally tilts the upper frequencies as it itself rises.....with Capacitance I find no such universal relationship 👀⁉️ Sometimes a figure of 70pF Capacitance will give the correct delicacy and translucency to the 'highs'.....whilst sometimes a figure of 430pF will be correct for another cartridge.....depending always on the Resistance being used...😱⁉️ And because of the varied competencies of the recording, mastering and mixing engineers involved in the myriads of records out there.....I find myself often changing the loadings on specific recordings.....and sometimes even for different tracks on the SAME recording....😡😑😰⁉️ All this does not make my life easier or more fun 😢.....but I am now 'trapped' in this endless contouring for perfection.....but never really sure that I have achieved it....❓😳 I need help...😗 |
From the contributions of my dear friends Fleib and Lew one can easilly deduce: if one can't afford a really good MC phono amp one should stick to the MM kind. The advantage is obvious: double discount. The MM amps are much cheaper and the same apply for the MM carts. As much as I admire Lew for his numerous capabilties his persistence is remarcable. Messing with tubes, capacitors, resistors, etc. for 35 years and still trying to improve his phono-stage. No wonder he is not yet able to decide one way or the other. |
Dear Fleib, Can you share with us which 'not romantic' MC carts you own as well which MM carts you bought, tested and recommended in this MM thread? Raul invested a huge amount of money is his search for, uh, the 'cart of the month'. Since he left this thread I have hardly seen any new MM cart in this thread. So if anyone care's about new MM carts he should care about Raul's absence I would think. To give some idea about my 'romantic carts' such that we can compare those with your 'not romantic' kinds here is a list of my MC and MM carts. MC carts: Magic Diamond, Miyabi Standard , Benz LP S (aka mr), Kiseki Goldspot, Kiseki Milltek, Shiraz (Roksan), Van den Hul EMT, EMT LZi, Blue Oasis, Ortofon MC 2000,Shinon Red boron, Sony XL 88 D, Sony XL 44 L, MIT I (aka Coral 81/82), Yamaha MC-1 S, Hiyphonic AC-A3, Klipsch MCZ-2 and FR-7 . MM carts: ADC TRX II (beryllium), AT 150 ANV,AT 155 CL, AT 20 Sla, AT 14 SA, Pickering XLZ 7500, Stanton TH 981 S, Stanton 980 LZS, Signet TK 10 ML, Signet TK 9CL, Signet TK 7 CL, Signet TK 7SU, Glanz 71 L, Glanz MFG 61 and Glanz MF 31 L. If you are right all those carts should be qualify as 'romantic'. |
There's another aspect that makes former rankings absurd. Loading all HO carts at 100K is not only ridiculous, it's stupid. I brought this up before, but some people don't understand the basics. The only reason preamps give you no selection for HO carts is they think MCs are the only ones that matter. Back in the day there were preamps with selectable loads for HO carts, even continuously variable up to 100K. Varying preamp capacitance is mandatory for properly loading a MM. Today, you're lucky if they even tell you what the shunt capacitance is. HO carts have inductance as a property of the output. That inductance is often used by the cart designer to compliment the amplitude response. With such a cart, if you stray from the recommended capacitance you're changing the intended response. The inductance of the cart combines with the capacitance. They talk about electrical resonance (Hagerman), but it's nearly meaningless. What you need to know is that combination of inductance and capacitance lowers the mechanical high frequency resonance of the cart. It does NOT act as a low pass filter at electrical resonance and it does NOT cause a phase shift at ER frequency. Sometimes I wonder how this thread got as far as it did. I know some have read the TNT article Load the Magnets by Werner Ogiers (EE). Nobody understands it? http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/load_the_magnets_e.html Regards, |
Nandric, In a word, no. You want to have a pissing contest? Buy a race horse. You seem to equate money invested - accumulated carts with expertise/discernment. If there's any such relationship it tends to be an inverse relationship. I don't collect carts like that. I have about a half dozen at any one time. I sell the ones I'm not interested in perusing and I've sold a few I wish I hadn't. At one point you said your favorites were the Miyabi and Kisiki Goldspot. They are romantic. Would you argue that? I can't say I'm familiar with all your carts, but I noticed you have a duplication. The Pickering 7500 is the same as the 980LZ - identical. They even take the same stylus. Was this to complete your collection? You collect carts like they're model trains or baseball cards. Those two have different writing on them so it's a keeper? I listen to them one at a time and I usually have a few set up. I consider my Monster 1000 an accurate cart, as opposed to romantic. Response goes past 100K and it's flat as a pancake. Some Dynavectors have similar flat response. If you like a rising high end that's not a problem with me. The point of MM loading is getting it to sound the way you like. The fact of the matter is, a MM is much more easily manipulated. With a MC loading doesn't do much more than open the stage and dynamics vs focus and detail. Loading has virtually no affect on amplitude response. If more people knew about the potential of MM carts we'd have better MM phono stages with loading options. Regards, |
Nandric, those are very good cartridges, which most of us have never heard. I agree that Raul's tenacity in finding new carts was amazing and is missed. The 100k on every cart was always in question, as 47k is sometimes a bit bright to my ears. He was always good for a rabbit chase, 2 subwoofers, distortion, and the way he could tell what a system sounded like from a continent away I have only the Sony 44l and Mit1 on the MC front. I have not been able to hear the Mit1 yet, and am glad to hear from you, Don, and Halcro that it is a keeper. I am using a sut at this time. I love my preamp, so this is best, for me, for now. I am thinking about trying the EMT line. Anyone have any thoughts on that? I have a lot of the same MM's minus the Glanz's. I have enjoyed all the cartridges at 47K, but will drop some down to lower Resistance as Halcro recommends. Thanks Henry for the information. I love all my MC and MM children equally. |
Jcarr, Your contributions are always welcome and appreciated here. I do admit most of the conversation is over my head, but I always leaned something. I realize your abilities make you a target for people trying to boost their ego. It is probably hard to just have fun on a thread, when you are down deep an enthusiast like us. Again Thanks! |
Fleib, You wrote, "maybe any tube on the input would have far too much capacitance for a MM anyway". Can you amplify (no pun intended) on that statement? Sure, tubes present a capacitive input because of the Miller effect, but since the beginning of analog time, some of the greatest (and in my opinion, most of the greatest) MM stages use tubes in their RIAA phono section. If one knows what the input capacitance will be, one can design around that parameter to make the tube work with MM cartridges. But in fact, one of the virtues of a cascode, as used in the MP1, is the cancellation of the Miller effect. Transistors have input capacitance too, by the way, and it's more problematic for the designer but for reasons I no longer recall. So, in sum, Ralph's preamp in stock form will not have an issue with capacitance, because the input voltage amplifier stage is a cascode. But you're right, it is designed with medium output MCs in mind. (Around 0.4 to 0.6mV, I think.) Mine now has much more gain than stock. Wish I could find an Ortofon MC2000. My MM phono is a much modified Silvaweld SWH550. I made no changes to the power supply, which is tube-rectified and choke-loaded and tube-regulated, out of the box. I made changes in the RIAA section but only to maximize the sonics, not to change the RIAA filters. I also own a Klyne 6LX/P. Stan Klyne upgraded the phono section in it, but not to his highest spec. At this point, I would say that the Silvaweld has an edge over the Klyne for MM cartridges. The Klyne is serving as linestage for the Silvaweld on MMs. Nandric, I modified my MP1 about 5 years ago, have not tinkered with it since. In fact, I have reached where I want to be in audio; I am very happy with what I have and don't want anything more or "better". I just want more time to listen. |
Nice post, Halcro. The discussion is timely for me. After 3 years of unfulfilled desire, I finally pulled the trigger on a phono stage with variable loading. In particular, this one. I bought it especially for my current favorite cartridge, the victor x-1/2, the recommended loading for which is 47-100kohm. Also influenced by Raul (can I speak his name or is the self-appointed sheriff going to admonish me?), I had a serious hankering to try it at 100kohms. Now that you assert that MM's tend to sound better at lower values, I'll be sure to try those out as well. In conjunction with all the 'knobs' on my technics arm, the Sony's knobs are a tweaker's heaven--or a virtual nightmare when one just wants to sit back and relax. ...I am speaking prematurely as there is still ample time for USPS to lose my package :(. |
Dear Acman, There are value judgements and there are factual statements. Only the later can be true or false. We all reason in the same way but our assumptions can be different. The logic is about deduction. That is to say that deduced statments are true if the premisses are true otherwise false. In the 'old vocabulary' judgments, statements, propositions and sentences were considered to be the same,uh, entity. At present the term 'sentences' is preferred above the other, uh, 'names'. But in our discussions we also want to explain the 'why question' and then need scientific arguments to make some sense. So, for example, Lew is not questioning Fleib's 'values' but his assumptions about the actual working of the tubes in a phono-pre. I.e. he disagrees with Fleib's assertions in this context. Fleib 'in the other side' assumes that I am a'romatic' kind of a person while he 'deduced' his valuation from my own value judgments about two carts: Kiseki goldspot and Miyabi. Well I own and love some other carts also so I posted a list with my selected carts of both kinds. Someting like 'show me the books in your library' so I can see what your,uh, 'flovour' is. However he assumed that I wanted to show off with my collection and was not willing to 'disclose' his own except one single MC cart. From this fact it follows that his judgments about MC carts in general are based on induction and not deduction from wahtever general empirical statement. For such purpose one needs at least two MC carts (grin). |
Thanks Halcro and Fleib. Great ! I followed Raul´s suggestion for higher impedance blindly and just recently let my hi-fi specialist change the input value from 47K to 100K. What a fool I was. The sound became considerably brighter and also somewhat odd otherwise. It was a step backwards and time to learn something new. We must bear in mind that Raul the Great Searcher started this thread and his experiences/opinions are significant nevertheless. Fortunately my preamp has 20K. Very interesting how my current MM candidate will performs with 40 pF and 20K. The search for the right (impedance) values has started again. I got a funny feeling that this thread will go on and on and on... |
Dear Acman, Banquo and Harold...... I think you'll find it illuminating when you experiment with dropping the Resistance......sometimes greatly...😜🎼🎶 And don't be afraid to keep changing it (if it's easily done with your phonostages?).....as it is not a 'sacred' thing...🔓🔑 It also helps if you are able to adjust the capacitance as well...❓ As Fleib has noted.....I remember about 10-15 years ago when there were many new phonostages being introduced which were MC only 👀😖⁉️ It demonstrates well...I suspect...that many designers did not understand or appreciate the intrinsic nature of the MM cartridge? And to this day of course.....most 'serious' designers and audiophiles are under the delusion of the superiority of the MC genus 🙈🙉🙊💤❓ I was blissfully unaware of the importance of loading for MMs when I purchased my Halcro DM10 7 years ago...but I was lucky that Bruce Halcro Candy was serious about it when he designed infinitely variable Resistance and Capacitance controls solely for the MM inputs.....with a fixed 220 Ohms resistance for MCs....😍👍👏 Since that time of course....through Forums like this and knowledgable contributors....new phonostages are becoming available with adjustable loadings. Strangely though.....many more loading options are being offered for the MC inputs than the MMs 😰......a waste of time and space IMHO 👀❓ It goes to show that still today.....many designers do not truly understand or appreciate the requirements of the glorious MM cartridge? |
Nandric, "However he assumed that I wanted to show off with my collection and was not willing to 'disclose' his own except one single MC cart. From this fact it follows that his judgments about MC carts in general are based on induction and not deduction from wahtever general empirical statement. For such purpose one needs at least two MC carts (grin)." I told you I sell the ones I'm not interested in perusing. I've sold all the MCs except the 1000. That includes the Kisiki, Koetsu, Sumikos, etc. Does that disqualify me from commenting? I was a high end turntable guy at the busiest US high end store at the time. I set-up and tweaked tables all day long and often after work I would go to customer's homes and tweak their tables. I became familiar with a wide range of carts I never owned. I don't comment about carts I'm unfamiliar with. What does this have to do with anything? You seem to equate the number of carts currently owned with credibility. Like a subjective reviewer blowing smoke up some manufacturer's ass, it might not have much to do with reality. In the past I gave Raul his due for starting this thread, but that doesn't mean he knows how to load a MM. In the past couple of years I've come to appreciate MMs much more. At this time I have no desire to buy some overpriced MC. MM coils are wound on a machine and sample to sample variation tends to be less than handmade MCs. John Curl said he couldn't find two samples of a MC that were the same. So rest assured the reviewer's cart is probably different from the one you buy. The term romantic was referring to your cart preference, not you. But you know this. You're using your slickster lawyer skill to turn it into something else. This thread was more interesting when it was about MM/MI. Maybe we have gone through almost all the great MMs, but the rankings skewered results and I suspect there's more to talk about. Regards, |
Fleib, There is this silly joke 'about' Peter: 'would you like a book for your birthday Peter?' Peter: 'No thanks I already own one.' I used the analogy with a library to make my point. An eloquent person can make some conclusion about the owner by looking at his book-collection. Fleib's conlusion about my cart collection is: 'look he owns the Pickering 7500 and Stanton 980 LZ without knowing that those are THE SAME-IDENTICAl'. Ergo:' he collects carts like model trains or beseball cards'. Remarcable capability to conclude from two samples of what ever. Kiseki and Miyaby are sufficient to conclude the preference for 'romantic sounding carts'. Two other samples to conclude what kind of collector I am. But in the same post, only two sentences or so further we see his quotation of some HIFI authority with the bold statement that there are no 'identical' carts even by the same carts(aka with the same name). Both have obviously no idea what identity relation means and consequently use the expression as they like. There is, alas, no such thing in logic. Like it or not the logic is the same for all of us. The way out is to use the expression 'equal' instead of identical to avoid (logical)trouble. As Wittgenstein put it: 'for two things to say that they are identical make no sense'. The so called 'substitutio salva veritate' means that we can substitute one name for some other with the same reference without changing the truth value of the same statement. Say Vienna for Wien or Wenen,etc. But to strangthen his conclusions Fleib like to mention: Nandric is a lawyer you know.... Need I say more? Well I would not call insinuations 'valid arguments'. Those say more about Fleib than about Nandric. Working in a HIFI shop is not an adequate 'armament' for all purposes. |
Nandric, In Americia, even when we were young there were such things as public libraries. You didn't have to own a particular book to read it. Moving coils are much more susceptible to large variations in output with a small change in coil size or magnet strength. If there's a 5mm discrepancy in wire length, it will have more affect on a coil with 12 turns of wire than one with 2500 turns. That's why major manufacturer MMs are much more likely to be within a small percentage of specs. Not so much for MCs, depending on the manufacturer. Here's what Kiddman had to say about it: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1392385752&openfrom&1&4#1 "Come on, nearly all of these manufacturers make up the specs. Measuring lots and lots of high end analog, I've found the specs are dreams and wishes. MC's that show flat but have a rise of 8db by 14khz. Turntables that quote .01% wow + flutter but are really .3%." "I've measured, using state of the art equipoment (with AC test signal, the only way to do it right) 30% differences in impedance with some brands. Yes, "mass produced" ones, if you can call the bigger premium MC makers "mass produced". A few manufacturers are quite consistent, and very consistent in sound. And with many manufacturers, I've never heard 2 sound close to identical, tested one right after the other" Kiddman isn't John Curl. Curl is a famous electronics designer who designed the Vendetta phono stage. He made the statement on DIY audio that he couldn't find two MCs of the same model that sound alike. Neither one was talking about MMs. Stanton and Pickering were sister companies and there are duplications in some models. The two we're talking about were TOTL models. Although they are low output, tolerances were checked. The 1 designation on the last Stanton digit is testing and matching to a stylus, like the 20SS is a matched 15SS. I think this is about more than characterizing your MC carts as romantic. You haven't disputed that, only my credentials. I wasn't aware I needed credentials. It's about how much money is currently invested in carts? I can answer that for you no problem. As little as possible and still get great results. I wouldn't trade my 1000 for any of your MCs except maybe the 88D, but I listen mostly to MMs now. I'm with Halcro on this and I suspect that's what you don't like. Peace, |
Fleib, 'there are no identical carts' and 'there are identical carts' are contradictory. That is to say that logicaly both can't be true. Your way out is the assumption that MM carts are, uh, 'more identical' because their coils are made with machines. So you are obviously ill informed. The whole story about the Kiseki MC carts started with some Japanese who invented such machine and made Kiseki carts. Then Dominic from Northwest Analogue uses such machine and is one of the few who is willing to repair broken coils. On his site one can see this machine. I think that you have heard about J. Allearts during your uh, professionall life. All his carts are hand made. But if one look at their specs one will not believe that any machine can produce such carts. Besides each cart has its own identity which should be mentioned on the bill. Two carts may have equal specs but this does not meen that they are identical. Without identity we would be not able to find anything. Identity is not about language or names but objects themselfs. That is why people with different languages and names are able to find and refer to the same objects as we do with other names. |
Nandric, Once again you misstate what I say, and in this case respond to part of what I say. Perhaps you don't believe Kiddman or doubt John Curl ever said that about MCs? Well he did, but I'm not going to hunt for the quote. The pertinent part here is size - percentage of the total. A small discrepancy in high output cart has relatively little affect compared to a low output. I never said one was identical and the other isn't, but you have me saying that. You seem to be trying to turn this into a logical argument about absolutes, but you're assuming a premise not stated. Not all MCs deviate from specs like some others, and most MMs are imperfect. It's a matter of degree. Did you look at the lab report I linked to about the Clearaudio Concerto? It was horrendously bad, a defective cart for $3K. I don't know how typical this is of Concerto, but the implication was of a rolled off response at 10KHz. Have you ever compared the 980LZ to the 7500? You can use the same stylus on both. It would be interesting to see if there's a difference, more interesting than this back and forth. Regards, |
Fleib, I quoted your own statements. If I 'mistate' what you have stated you should say so and correct my quotation with your 'real statements'. I stated that your statements are contradictory while your other statements were insinuations about my assumed character based on two carts which 'proved' my preference for the 'romantic' carts while two 'identical carts' proved that I collect carts like (kids) trains. My analogy between a library and and an cart collection induced you to make the most strenge comment I have ever seen. In America nobody needs his own library because the books collections are in the public library. You missed totaly my intention. My list with carts was meant to show more than Kiseki Goldspot and Miyabi so the members could see which carts I own and make their own conclusion about my preferences . Your method of discussion is the old one. Build a strow man of your opponent and beat him to death. This however is very difficult if one has no idea about the (modern) logic. Then your suggestion that I should compare my Pickering 7500 which is identical according to you with my Stanton 980 LZs make no logical sense. If they are identical as you think they are then they should sound identical. Your problems with logic are obvious by any sentence you made. |
Nandric, This is a quote: "I quoted your own statements. If I 'mistate' what you have stated you should say so and correct my quotation with your 'real statements'. I stated that your statements are contradictory while your other statements were insinuations about my assumed character based on two carts which 'proved' my preference for the 'romantic' carts while two 'identical carts' proved that I collect carts like (kids) trains." Those are your exact words (above). You haven't quoted what I wrote. Instead you incorrectly paraphrase. You have me making insinuations about your character when no such insinuations are made. I don't think cart preference has anything to do with one's character. I already explained that. If you think I was mistaken, why don't you say so? I don't think it makes much difference one way or the other, but apparently you do. The 7500 and 980 are identical models. The specs, output, resistance, inductance and body are identical. The stylus holder is different. That has nothing to do with tolerances or deviation from specs. The lab report on the Clearaudio Concerto that I linked to looked like it deviated greatly from specs. There was a sharp roll-off at 10KHz and the report said the diamond was misaligned by 10°. You're taking statements out of context. "My analogy between a library and and an cart collection induced you to make the most strenge comment I have ever seen. In America nobody needs his own library because the books collections are in the public library. You missed totaly my intention." I didn't miss your point, and everyone has seen your collection. Apparently you missed my point. You don't necessarily have to own a particular cart to know what it sounds like. I owned a Kisiki. I also owned a TK10ML2. I regret selling the Signet. It was a long time ago and I don't think I had enough hours on it. Does that disqualify me from participating here? You probably have some carts you haven't played in years. You talk about logic but seem to miss the distinction between models, specs and deviation from specs. They're different things. That's why I suggested comparing them with the same stylus. I thought it might be interesting. This continued exchange is tedious. Regards, |
Fleib, We express our preferences with 'value judgments'. Everyone is free to chose his owm poison. This is also called 'subjective valuation'. As far as I know nobody question this fact. Such statements are not 'true' or 'false'. Aka the truth values (true or false) are not involved. However we also want to explain the 'why' question and then use technical terminology with objective data as 'proof'. What does this eman? Well everyone who can check the data with measuring instruments should get the same result. That is why such data are considered to be objective. This of course also apply for the deviations in comparison with published specs. If there are deviations those can be also measured such that we get the same result or the same measured values. Such data are also used to explain the difference (in genaral) between the MM and MC carts. But, alas, the aim is to 'prove' which kind is 'better'. That is how the subjective and objective parts of our hobby are confused or conflated. The reason is ,uh, human: "I don't understand why the Arabs like fat women''. |
Hi all, In this thread I come a new punctuation sign across and am wondering about its, uh, meaning. Lew was always willing to explain to me rare English expressions so I hope he will continue to do so. But my guess is that 'some' of our members used up all his question marks and invented a new sign instead. This sign look to me like a hammer but there is no such sign on my laptop. This sign is obviously invented to make some point(s). Four of them in a row to make some strong point more of them to prove some point. But this is only my guess and I hope that my 'Engish teacher' will explain if this guess make any sense? |
Nandric, I've read a couple of posts before about carts deviating from published specs. Kiddman mentioned a large premium brand deviating 30% on cart impedance. The implication was, this is a regular occurrence, although he didn't say that in so many words. He also mentioned wild deviations in amplitude response, specifically a rise of 8dB by 14KHz. Unfortunately, I haven't seen any of these posts mention brands. If someone measures carts professionally, that could be for legal reasons. The offending company could be their client and it would hardly be in their interest to name names. John Curl didn't mention what carts he was using to test. The Concerto with a misaligned tip could be a defective one that slipped by? A cart like that would probably be replaced by the dealer and sent back to the manufacturer, but what if you bought it used? I don't think it's unlikely that someone would buy it new and eventually decide they didn't like it and sell it, not realizing it was defective. The reviewer said it was a rock cart and seemed to think that was the way it was supposed to be. While no cart is perfect and no two channels are perfectly matched, tolerance defines the realm of acceptable deviation. While 30% difference in resistance is unacceptable, what's acceptable, 5% ? Because the output is so little on a LOMC, it's harder to approach perfection. Any small deviation will result in a greater percentage of difference. I would think that's a big part of the price tag. Some companies are known for consistency and some of them had certain problems a couple of times which they rectified. Dynevector had a batch of 10X5 that had the channels mislabeled so it was out of phase with itself. The same thing happened in the '80s with the 10X4. I had one of these and couldn't understand why it had no bass. This is an entry level cart and it might have been a subcontractor mistake, but sheet happens. AFAIK, Dynevector is otherwise said to be very consistent in QC. If anyone has anything to add to this dissertation, please do. Regards, |
Hello Nandric: >everyone who can check the data with measuring instruments should get the same result. That is why such data are considered to be objective. This assumption may be suspect with phono cartridges, inasmuch as various measurable parameters such as frequency response, crosstalk, distortion, tracking etc. change with ambient temperature, humidity, even the LP groove radius (of the test track). Different test LPs will also show different things. Obviously loading will also alter the frequency response, if the cartridge has high inductance. As an example, the following downloadable links show how different people can come up with different measurements for the same cartridges. http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/index.php/vinyl-lp/25-cartridges/86-ortofon-cadenza-blue-a-bronze-mc.html?showall=1 http://www.bm.rs/Micro%20Benz/Benz%20Micro%20Ace%20-%20HiFi%20News%20July%202012.pdf http://www.fastaudio.com/workspace/uploads/downloads/stp_08_10_sd_tonabnehmer.pdf The Ortofon Cadenza Red is measured by Stereoplay and HiFi News, while the Ortofon Cadenza Blue is measured by Stereoplay and HiFi World, so these are the obvious models to compare. HiFi News' measurements of the ultra-short-cantilevered Dynavector Karat 17D3 may also be interesting to some. Special kudos to HiFi World for acknowledging that frequency response changes with LP groove radius. Wish that they would do the same with ambient temperature. At the same time, keep in mind that various things that affect the sound of a cartridge are level-dependent (one of the things that I was alluding to previously when I pointed out the length of the Technics EPC-305MC's stylus), and may therefore not be easy to measure with most test LPs - although this does not reduce their audibility. Regarding coil impedance, my general experience is that the fewer the components comprising the coil bobbin, and the fewer the number of coil layers, the more consistent the coil shape and impedance will be. Using more components for the coil bobbin (as in a laminated coil) increases the likelihood of bobbin mis-shaping and non-flat surfaces, while each coil layer added results in a less flat surface for the next coil layer to be wound onto. kind regards, |
Dear Jcarr, The Dutch saying is: 'measuring is knowing'. To my surprise there is no English equivalent. The English version is: 'numbers tell the tell'. I wish you wrote this post as contribution to my 'identity conundrum' (grin). Fleib would agree with any of your statemens as he disagrees with any I make. The old European 'theory' of truth was 'veritas est auctoritas'. Everything that Aristoteles has written was true a priori for 2000 years. Well in some sense I would say: 'comrades watch out what you say Jcarr is watching'(grin,grin). Jcarr is our ultimate authority in cart questions. My assumption was based on Popper's so called 'objective knowledge'. I myself am very proud about my capability to check the coils with my Voltmeter (digital one for $20). But the difficulties or rather so many variables involved by measuring carts that you mentioned are not 'subjective' or depending from your own preference . My point was to separate subjective from the objective part in our forum so that no confusion between them should occur again. I was very optimistic I think. Kind regards, |
Jcarr, The Hi Fi news group test looks suspicious. All of the carts have a sharp roll-off at 15KHz ? I think not. A few years ago Werner Ogiers EE, stated the frequency sweep on that record and Analog Productions are inaccurate. I don't know if they're inaccurate in the same way. Other tests of some of those same carts don't agree with the results. I think this was the same test lab (Miller) that tested the Concerto. Maybe it made it look worse than it was, but that one was defective and rolled-off at 10KHz. Regards, |
Fleib, Your revelations re-enforce my belief in subjective judgement. I have an issue for the group: About 6 months ago, I had a Grace Ruby re-tipped by SS using their top of the line LC stylus/ruby cantilever. I only started to audition it about a month or two ago. Initially, my impression was that it lacked some of the endearing qualities of my other Grace Ruby sample, which still bears its original elliptical stylus. At that stage, the Grace LC seemed to "highlight" treble detail a bit excessively, whereas the original Ruby has excellent tonal balance. But the initial listening to the Ruby LC was otherwise promising, in that I figured the very slight tendency to sound shrill would abate with further break-in. Sadly, that has not been the case; it's gotten much worse, to the point where I wondered whether something else in my system might be to blame for "the problem". So, two days ago, I replaced the Ruby LC with my Acutex LPM320, the sound of which I know quite well. The Acutex sounds wonderful in the same system, better than the Ruby LC in every way. This is all done in a Dynavector DV505 tonearm with DV headshell, which I fully admit might be too high in mass for the Grace, but it does not seem too high in mass for the Acutex. I am wondering whether the Grace just needs further break-in (it has about 20-30 hours on it), or the tonearm is a mismatch for the SS LC compliance, or the VTF is not good for the modified Grace. (I am running both cartridges at 1.6gm.) Any thoughts or comments are appreciated. Has anyone else had any experience with the SS Ruby LC re-tip? This is in no way to cast any aspersions on SS. We need them. Most people gush over their re-tips, as well. If you're wondering, it is my best recollection that SS recommended VTF = 1.5gm for this cantilever/stylus. I do mean to check that to be sure. As to the contretemps between Nandric and Fleib, don't fight guys. IMO it is impossible to "prove" by empiric argument that MC is better than MM or vice-versa. |
Hi Lew, I've also experienced an issue with something returned but not checked out in a timely fashion. That can create problems. But I believe SS is pretty straight forward in their dealings so I would explain the situation to them, just as you have here. See what he says about break-in time or other possible reasons. Good luck. |