Questions about a new Ruby 2 cartridge

Tagyerit: Glad to hear my polemics may have had some practical benefit. I agree with your analogy between what some feel is an attractively exagerated sound in a phono cart and what is done to many pop recordings in terms of studio production - once the ear is educated, the unaturalness of things like a hyped top octave and inflated images becomes repulsive (but then again, so is most of the music recorded that way, my apologies to your friend!). So what loading did you wind up deciding to run your Ruby at?

still on the path actually.
a few months back I felt that 825 ohms was the best I would find. I've had it there most of the time since then, but I was bothered at times by the highs seeming a bit too strident, like a HINT of too much edge. I attributed it to the nature of the Ruby 2H in my system as compared to the previous carts I'd been used to - which were all Grados(mellow mellow mellow). so I thought "give it time" as it may just be unrolled off highs being new to my ears. then it became clear to me that it also still sounded less SOLID then it should. (((just for fun before trying other loads I reached over to my old "audionics of Oregon" David Berning designed ba150 amp and switched it's FEEDBACK on. that did cut the airyness, implying more solidity, but paying for it with unwanted compression. back to zero feedback...))) and sure enough, dropping the load to 475 ohms brought it into focus; with smooth and clear upper mids, a touch of liquidity, sweet tight bass, killer soundstage & imaging, (wonderfully transparent but not unnaturally so) and the highs less biting but still quite present. now I am playing between 475 and 452.06: Abbey Road sounds best at 475 while Beethoven (the 9th - Von Karajan 63), Bach and Albert King just LOVE it at 452. Bill Evans and Louis Armsrong sound great everywhere. so I want an external switch, which I ain't got, so I guess I'm gonna have to compromise somewhere sometime. thank God and Harry W. that I at least have VTA on the fly!
so I'm deciding between 2 perches in heaven - things could be worse...Such sweet torture.

I agree that at some point one just has to conclude that there is a certain setting which represents the most accurate overall response for the cartridge in question, with an 'average' record played back through that system, and any variations in balance beyond that setting must be chalked up to individual recording idiosyncracies and taken in stride for what they're worth (truth in reporting, or something approaching it). I for one feel that screwing around with the phono settings on a record-by-record basis would do more to destroy the enjoyment of my listening sessions than it would enhance. It is interesting that you seem to be winding up in the same loading neighborhood that I have with my Glider M2, but you're really speaking my language when you talk about solidity and focus (and I could also add transient precision/cleanliness) - if going through this process taught me anything, it was that concentrating on the tonal balance alone is only an initial tendancy, one which likely won't get you to the optimum setting taken by itself. Happy listening! :-)

one strange thing: I just read the specs that came with my ruby 2h and it says: load from 1000 to 47k ohms. so in my case i'm halfing their (low) recommendation vs your doubling. awhile back Wayne at Pass Labs told me to completely forget any cart mfg suggestions as it is all so dependent on variables in each particular system. I believe he must be correct.

My Glider's documentation says "200 to 47K Ohms". Such a range is meaningless by definition.