What is the “World’s Best Cartridge”?


I believe that a cartridge and a speaker, by far, contribute the most to SQ.

The two transducers in a system.

I bit the bulllet and bought a Lyra Atlas SL for $13K for my Woodsong Garrard 301 with Triplanar SE arm. I use a full function Atma-Sphere MP-1 preamp. My $60K front end. It is certainly, by far, the best I have owned. I read so many comments exclaiming that Lyra as among the best. I had to wait 6 months to get it. But the improvement over my excellent $3K Mayijima Shilabi was spectacular-putting it mildly.

I recently heard a demo of much more pricy system using a $25K cartridge. Seemed to be the most expensive cartridge made. Don’t recall the name.

For sure, the amount of detail was something I never heard. To hear a timpani sound like the real thing was incredible. And so much more! 
This got me thinking of what could be possible with a different kind of cartridge than a moving coil. That is, a moving iron.

I have heard so much about the late Decca London Reference. A MI and a very different take from a MC. Could it be better? The World’s Best? No longer made.

However Grado has been making MI cartridges for decades. Even though they hold the patent for the MC. Recently, Grado came out with their assault on “The World’s Best”. At least their best effort. At $12K the Epoch 3. I bought one and have been using it now for about two weeks replacing my Lyra. There is no question that the Atlas SL is a fabulous cartridge. But the Epoch is even better. Overall, it’s SQ is the closest to real I have heard. To begin, putting the stylus down on the run in grove there is dead silence. As well as the groves between cuts. This silence is indicative of the purity of the music content. Everything I have read about it is true. IME, the comment of one reviewer, “The World’s Best”, may be true.
 

 

mglik

@mikelavigne 

..but most of the best phono preamps are not true balanced designs, which is another issue.

This is the key issue.  As ralph points out just using an XLR means nothing and in order to take advantage of a balanced interface one must adhere to AES48.  Just because a XLR connector has the ability to be wired to that standard does not mean that everything that it is plugged into also adheres to that standard.  If one aspect of the standard is not met, the whole concept collapses.

@dover 

A moving coil cartridge is an inherently symmetrical device ( coil and 2 tails ).

A MC step up transformer provides an inherently symmetrical input ( coil and 2 tails).

Therefore why would you use an asymmetrical cable where the +ve and -ve sides are different in this application. It makes no sense.

This is an instance where the necessary aspects of the AES48 can exist at the source and the load but in order to operate 'properly' the interface cabling must also be done to the standard (twisted pair with a shield) and I have only experienced a few cases where using this interface worked the same or better than the 'conventional' method.   In all of the cases that worked, the tonearm was specifically (re)wired for this purpose.   With a SUT the RCA cable interface is fine for running the AES standard since the shield can simply be joined externally to the tonearm/table and SUT grounds making sure the primary of the SUT has no ground reference.  In fact at no point in the AES48 is an XLR connector called out, it just happens to be the industry accepted connector.  

 

dave

 

 

OTOH with short phono cables it’s all execution. whatever sounds best. possibly all things being equal balanced might be superior technically......but......of course.....all things are pretty much never equal. you have to listen to pick the winner. the LFD execution is crazy stuff. if LFD used XLR i suppose it might be even better..

You get the same benefit with short cables as you do long cables. The idea that balanced really only benefits you when the cables are long is a common myth. The advantages are several as I showed above, and these become more important when the signal strength is lower. Of course the LFD cable would work better balanced, as well as any balanced cable if built correctly.

@intactaudio is correct in his post just above. It really sounds to me as if all the balanced gear you've heard doesn't support the balanced standard; if that is the case then the results will be highly variable.

If you really want to do single-ended connections a 50Ohm coax is really the only way to do it properly without cable interactions, but to do so you need appropriate driver and receiver circuitry.

The funny thing is other than the balanced input on the phono preamp, running a proper balanced connection from the cartridge is actually easier than running single-ended. The arm wiring doesn't change; its all about the tonearm cable being built properly. You know that weird ground wire that other single-ended sources don't seem to need? That' s because its a balanced system being run single-ended and you have to do something with the ground, which isn't connected to the cartridge- that's the ground wire. When running balanced that is the shield connection (pin 1 of the XLR), which is a continuation of the shielding the arm tube provides, and its not able to intermodulate noise into the signal since ground is ignored by the receiver (in this case the phono input, which could be an SUT with a balanced connection).

So when running balanced the only tricky bit is that just like any phono cable, its best to keep the cable capacitance low so as to keep the electrical resonance as high as possible. With LOMC cartridges, this resonance is typically in the MHz region.

The hardest part about all this is something called the Veblen Effect. Literally people think that because they are paying more that there is more value. This isn't always the case! Veblen causes people to want to spend more on a cable, thinking that they will get greater performance/SQ. Its important to know that can sometimes be illusory.

Dear @mikelavigne : Some way or the other @dover is telling you almost the same as me and you still hide behind that " I like it " in exactly the same way the manufacturer/distributor Mick did it. Again, the main issue is not what you or any one else " like it " but what is wrong or rigth ! ! ! !

I already told that Mick says " the proof is in the listening " as an answer to a direct questions to him looking for specs/science but things are as I posted that they not know nothing about and as you they trust in a very well regarded but heavy limited " tool " named EARS that foolished not only you with the Dava terrible FR spec but to all wbf gentlemans excatly as with the LFD.

But you just don’t get or do not understand the main issue because you just posted @mijostyn " you need to hear it with the DaVa sometime.......freaking awesome ", go figure ? ?

Btw, Mick posted there that a change of cables inside the electronics makes a wide change for the better using LFD cables with out think that the best cable inside electronics is NO cable at all. These LFD people are not crazy and they know exactly how to take money from the in good faith audio customers and they do it with huge success because always are gentlemans like the ones in wbf.

 

Dover posted exactly what I posted at least 3 times to you that’s not the issue under discussion:

 

" I do not doubt what you have heard in your system " and he continued confirmed what other posted here:

 

" There is no science discussed. "

 

and he is rigth when he said that almost all of you in that wbf use the IC cables as TONE CONTROLS. It’s less expensive and way better to have a good designed equalizer and exist several to buy.

Please, I posted you that/your beloved cartridge 6db FR deviation function as an equalizer because any single discrete frequency deviation affects almost two octave including harmonics and these are facts.

 

Not the manufacturers of those audio items and certainly no one of their owners have any single fact/spec that can explain that what all of you is rigth, no one has any single evidence about and again the ! ears " of all of you just foolished all.

 

You have very good relationship with Mick and bonzo75, invite both to have a friendly dialogue here . Maybe there is something we are loosing down there.

 

Please think on these: you are really dedicated and with high commitment with all your room/system choices and very special with analog where your DD and ID TTs are top quality performers, both mounted in vibrations-free plattforms, controled electrical sources, with two top tonearms and along those and several other characteristics you own the Dartzeel phonolinepreamp and I wonder for what that huge commitment for your self with the signal cartridge if just at the output of the tonearm that cartridge signal be destroyed/demolished and in this thread are the evidences of that destruction.

 

R.

Talking of the proof being in the listening, I just realised I have been making an elementary mistake, and I bet most of you do it too.

This is about getting the volume right when comparing cartridges. I expect we all know that volume influences how we perceive sound, and are aware of the warning that a constant desire to turn the volume up indicates there is something inadequate in the sound chain.
I have been continuing to compare cartridges, and have begun to revisit some that I initially discarded as lacking. After struggling for an hour with some 309 headshells (I would like to have a word with the designer about the stupidity of arranging a nut and bolt that do not line up until they are actually fully engaged...) I replaced the Ortofon Kontrapunkt C with the Grado Statement 3. Not a permanent change, just for fun and comparison. I like the Ortofon, but had been disappointed with the Grado. But since my last try I have changed my phono amp, and it is more obvious now when cartridge outputs vary (the new one can cope with five inputs and remembers their settings). I noticed straight away that once I had set the phono to MM for this MI cartridge, I was having to crank up the pre-amp volume control compared to where it had lived for ages when dealing with the London Reference (output 5mV into an MM input) and the Ortofon (0.47mV into an MC input). The Grado puts out 1mV, so it makes perfect sense it would require a twist of the volume knob compared to the London Decca.

I don't remember there being such an obvious difference when using the Quad 24p last time, and that was probably me rather than the phono stage. To be fair to myself, I have also been coping with now-you-see-them-now-don't Quad 2905s that seem to require frequent repairs (I may have a Heath Robinson fix applied).

So now I have set the volume so that an app that measures SPL on my phone reads between 50-60dB where I sit (it doesn't matter if it isn't very accurate in absolute terms as long as it is consistent I can compare). Now I have to listen to a bunch of albums and compare to the Decca on the other table, with its output set to something similar. Doesn't seem fair to compare without getting this right. Probably should pick a single track to set SPL level whenever I change cartridge so I can be consistent. I am moving forward with a pair of tonearm pods so I can have four tonearms and cartridges on the go at once, and it rather makes sense to have a level playing field for them.

When at my friend's home who has produced my Tonearm, this a system where many of the comparison / demonstrations are carried out between various Cart's brought along to be used. All comparison / demonstrations are undertaken with a db metre monitoring the listening levels to keep an accuracy and control measure for the evaluation.

Only when all is done and dusted in the comparisons, will the listeners ask to hear a replay of choice at a level they are accustomed to. 

For myself at times, I have found this measure a bit like using a Headphone as a Speaker, it takes a little time to become accustomed to a level not usually selected, especially when used on an owned and very familiar Cart', but once a few tracks are played, the benefits of controlling the levels between the candidates are soon noticed.