Is Coincident Statement Phono pre-amp an overkill

Fair comment. The Stereophile review certainly points out the weaknesses of the phono stage. For instance: "The amplifier's overall dark perspective reflected very laid-back extreme high frequencies and an overly round midbass".

I did not mean to make it a battle between the EAR and the Coincident. I am not stupid. But I do think in the context of the original poster's system $1000 is about the right expenditure at this stage. Perhaps there are much better choices than the EAR around that price point.

Regards,

Hi Metralla,
"Hey all in fun", of course!
Coincident phono = a prime Labron James.
EAR= an aging Kevin Garnett.
Charles,

Let's say the OP buys the Coincident phono preamp. Based upon the go for the best and only purchase once philosophy, what phono cartridge would you recommend?

Good question Onhwy61, but for me more difficult to answer. Phono stages are a fundamental component and a great one has universal appeal and function in many settings. Cartridges are more varied and personal in that they all have an "individual signature" no matter how good they are. So this will really depend on Essrand's taste and overall sonic goal for his system IMHO. Essrand what is your musical/sonic target when all is said and done?
Charles,

Taste may come into it, but the fundamental determining parameters are imposed by the tonearm.

Since the Concept can come with the Clearaudio Concept MC, we could get a line on suitable cartridges from Fremer's review:

The MC weighs 8gm and has a moderately high output of 0.4mV at 5cm/s. Its body is made of an alloy of aluminum and magnesium coated with a layer of ceramic, and its boron cantilever is fitted with a Micro Line stylus. The suggested vertical tracking force (VTF) is 2gm, ±0.2gm; the recommended loading is 100 ohms.

I would imagine that spending more than $1200 on a cartridge for this player may not be cost effective.

Regards,