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

I agree completely with lewm’s comments. The “outstanding quality of real live music compared to electronic reproduction of music is the dynamics of the former”. And not just as concerns the wide amplitude one hears in live music, but how the dynamic movement in the music is expressed during the literally infinite number of subtle dynamic gradations one hears in live music (a key element of musical phrasing).

I can’t claim to be able to be able to explain or prove, in technical terms, why this is the case, but “fast transient speed” is closely tied to how well the rhythmic elements of the music are expressed by the equipment. To my simple mind it also explains why some gear (not just cartridges and speakers) sounds dynamically/rhythmically alive while others sound dead or lethargic even when capable of wide amplitude.

 

Dear @lewm @frogman :  So,more or less we agree about the way critical importance of the SPEED transient response.

In a live MUSIC event between you and the MUSIC exist almost only the AIR when in a home audio systems it's a nightmare about and transient speed reproduction is way to way different and totally imposible to achieve that grat dynamics and power that only live MUSIC has.

Both audio proccess recording and playing almost destroy MUSIC, even that we like what we  can listen through.

We can't do nothing with the recording proccess but we can take extreme care for the room/system play proccess.

So, if we agree of the importance of the transient response speed then we must be in alert that the audio signal trip from the cartridge to the speaker output be the shortest as we can:less is more.

Our system set upshould has only the system links neccesaries to listen it. Any additional cables,connectors, after market " enhancers " and the like will modify and and develops a degradation to that transient response speed and I think that could includes the SUTs.

I can't  know what you or others think on this specific system set up issue and obviously opinions are welcomed.

 

R.

**** the audio signal trip from the cartridge to the speaker output be the shortest as we can:less is more. ****

@rauliruegas , My experience has also been that less is often more. I realize that there are other design choices that come into play, but this would explain, at least to some degree, why the Decca cartridges have that wonderful sense of speed and immediacy. No cantilever. Less is more, Shorter (mechanical) signal path. An extension (🤔) of this idea would seem to be the sonic benefits one often hears by having signal paths in electronics that are as short as possible, the elimination of solder joints and, ideally, connectors in tone arm (and high level) cables.

With the Decca cartridges I have owned, I’ve always wondered whether their noteworthy zip and immediacy were not a fortuitous byproduct of mistracking owing to their lack of a cantilever. Sometimes imperfect is more.