2. analog
  3. 189527-245

MC-MM-MI CARTRIDGES . DO YOU KNOW WHICH HAS BETTER QUALITY PERFORMANCE? REALLY?

Dear friends:The main subject of this thread is start a dialogue to find out the way we almost all think or be sure about the thread question :  " true " answer.

 

Many years ago I started the long Agon MM thread where several audiophiles/Agoners and from other audio net forums participated to confirm or to discover the MM/MI/IM/MF/HOMC world and many of us, me including, was and still are" surprised for what we found out in that " new " cartridge world that as today is dominated by the LOMC cartridges.

 

Through that long thread I posted several times the superiority of the MM/types of cartridges over the LOMC ones even that I owned top LOMC cartridge samples to compare with and I remember very clearly that I posted that the MM and the like cartridges had lower distortion levels and better frequency range quality performance than the LOMC cartridges.

 

In those times j.carr ( Lyra designer ) was very active in Agon and in that thread  I remember that he was truly emphatic  posting that my MM conclusion was not  true due that things on distortion cartridge levels in reality is the other way around: LOMC has lower distortion levels.

 

Well, he is not only a LOMC cartridge designer but an expert audiophile/MUSIC lover with a long long and diverse first hand experiences listening cartridges in top TT, top tonearms and top phono stages and listening not only LOMC cartridges but almost any kind of cartridges in his and other top room/systems.

 

I never touched again that subject in that thread and years or months latter the MM thread I started again to listening LOMC cartridges where my room/system overall was up-graded/dated to way superior quality performance levels than in the past and I posted somewhere that j.carr was just rigth: LOMC design were and are superior to the other MM type cartridges been vintage or today models.

 

I'm a MUSIC lover and I'm not " married " with any kind of audio items or audio technologies I'm married just with MUSIC and what can gives me the maximum enjoyment of that ( every kind )  MUSIC, even I'm not married with any of my opinions/ideas/specific way of thinking. Yes, I try hard to stay " always " UNBIASED other than MUSIC.

 

So, till today I followed listening to almost every kind of cartridges ( including field coil design. ) with almost every kind of tonearms and TTs and in the last 2 years my room/system quality performance levels were and is improved by several " stages " that permits me better MUSIC audio items judgements and different enjoyment levels in my system and other audio systems. Yes, I still usemy test audio items full comparison proccess using almost the same LP tracks every time and as always my true sound reference is Live MUSIC not other sound system reproduction.

 

I know that the main thread subject is way complicated and complex to achieve an unanimous conclusions due that exist a lot of inherent differences/advantages/unadvantages in cartridges even coming from the same manufacturer.

 

We all know that when we talk of a cartridge we are in reality talking of its cantilever buil material, stylus shape, tonearm used/TT, compliance, phono stage and the like and my " desire " is that we could concentrate in the cartridges  as an " isolated " audio item and that  any of our opinions when be posible  stay in the premise: " everything the same ".

 

My take here is to learn from all of you and that all of us try to learn in between each to other and not who is the winner but at the " end " every one of us will be a winner.

 

So, your posts are all truly appreciated and is a thread where any one can participates even if today is not any more his analog alternative or is a newcomer or heavily experienced gentleman. Be my guest and thank's in advance.

 

Regards and ENJOY THE MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
dogberry
566 posts
 

There isn't a definitive answer to this, Raul. Everything is a trade-off. There is likely an aphorism to be made out of "dynamics, details, low cost - pick any two"!

For me, I'm very happy to use my MI cartridges that can go up against more expensive LOMCs. I think everyone knows my favourites so I won't repeat myself. I think they provide the best price:quality ratio.

mke246
30 posts
 

Raul, I know it’s been a lightning rod in the past and my particular usage case is rather unique to say the least, but I’ve spent the last several months carefully comparing a Soundsmith Strain Gauge with several custom truncated elliptical stylii for 78s with a Shure V15 Vx with the same size and shape truncated elliptical stylii. These tests have been through the same tonearm.

Across the board, I’m fairly confident in saying the Strain Gauge picks up less groove noise and traces the groove better with far less distortion. It’s true I have to do a lot of digital EQ adjustments to reverse the RIAA, but I have to do that anyway when I restore my 78s. The original recording equipment was rather crude and variable in terms of bass response and things like microphone distortion. I’ve also found that on loud transients like trumpet and trombone accents, the Strain Gauge is more tonally pure. It also picks up significantly less inner groove distortion. The Shure tends to be harsh, even when I transfer at half speed and double in software. The Strain Gauge is just pleasing to the ear and brings you closer to the recording. The Shure may be relatively flat in terms of frequency response, but that’s irrelevant if it’s flawed in all those other ways. I keep transfers from both cartridges, but I’m increasingly questioning why I keep the Shure ones being that they almost never sound as good as the Strain Gauge transfers.

I’ll grant that the Strain Gauge has a bit of its own sonic signature and isn’t ruler-flat in terms of RIAA, but 78s need EQ, anyway, so I’m fine making that minor concession in the pursuit of the best raw transfers with the least distortion. I haven’t tested it with LPs and don’t have a strong opinion in that regard. I think both you and Peter Ledermann have made good points in the past worth considering, although I suspect I might side with Peter if the SG with LPs has the same benefits as with 78s.

I wish it was easier to get something like a MC or MI cartridge for 78s at a practical price point. Stylus swappability is not really negotiable. Down the road I may look into getting two or three MC or MI cartrdiges with commonly-used 78 stylii if possible, but I’m currently busy enough as-is, and I’m not sure they would be able to keep up with the Strain Gauge!

jhnnrrs
99 posts
 

The best explanation came from J. Peter Moncreiff (IIRC) who said that moving magnet/moving iron cartirdges impart a fuzziness to the instruments that is missing from a moving coil.  The effect is subtle, but noticeable as an overall cleaner, more transparent sound.

lewm
12,515 posts
 

How can fuzziness improve fidelity to the real? Furthermore any quality “imparted” by the cartridge is per se a distortion. Nevertheless, if you put a gun to my head, I’d say I prefer MI. I don’t say it too loudly because I’ve never heard a $10K+ LOMC in my home systems.

jdougs's avatar
jdougs
182 posts
 

I've used LOMC, HOMC, MM and MI.  All can sound great, but for my money given the suitable supporting equipment, LOMC is where it's at IMHO.  But if you're going to put it through a subpar phono stage, you're defeating the purpose and probably better off with MM or a HO MC or MI.

More to discover