Hi Blix,
Thank you for the kind words….
The problem with any individual’s preferences in cartridges is that they are totally personal and subjective and depend to a large extent on the total system in which they are heard?
I also hesitate to ‘rank’ my cartridges as the ‘ranking’ tends to vary with the records (and even the tracks), which may be played at any listening session?
There are also cartridges (with metal bodies) which tend to sound better in my system with wood headshells (like the Yamamoto or Ortofon) whilst cartridges with plastic bodies tend to sound better with metal headshells…..and a cartridge with a wood body (like the Clearaudio Virtuoso) blossoms with the ceramic headshell of the SAEC WE8000/ST….:-)
Then there are cartridges I own, which have been re-tipped with perhaps different cantilevers and/or stylii to the originals and sound better than the originals…..but what point is there in recomending these as they may indeed be ‘one-offs’?
And then we arrive at a phenomenon I have recently discovered…..
With MM cartridges and their dependence on Loading and Capacitance to attain a neutral ‘flat’ frequency response…with the infinitely variable Resistance and Capacitance controls built into the Halcro DM10 phonostage/preamp….it is possible for me to contour many of my preferred cartridges to sound almost identical to each other?!
But that’s not all……
The recording, engineering, mastering and mixing of various records are never equal and rarely ‘flat’ in frequency response themselves…so having a cartridge which IS truly ‘flat’ merely reveals the inadequacies of most of our collections?
That’s why many ‘audiophiles’ are reduced to a handful of discs when trying to ‘impress’ others with their systems IMHO? ☹
But why should our listening pleasure be governed by the vagaries of the recording process and the individuals whose talents vary so greatly?
If I can use the ‘contouring’ of the Resistance and Capacitance controls to ‘tame’ a rising top end and ‘flesh-out’ a ‘thin’ midrange….why not?
I now find that I am adjusting the loading for my MM cartridge’s almost on a ‘per record’ basis…and sometimes on a ‘track by track’ basis….
And that for me….is another clear advantage of MMs over MCs….. whereby with MC cartridges which are not so susceptible to Resistance loadings and are mostly unaffected by Capacitance…what you get is what you get?!
Notwithstanding all of the above……and not in any order…
With LOMC cartridges I like
• ZYX Universe
• Dynavector XV-1s
• Fidelity Research FR-7f (although with Line Contact in lieu of Spherical stylus)
• MIT-1
With MM cartridges I like
• Garrott P77 with SAS stylus
• Signet TK-7LCa
• Signet TK-7SU
• Signet MR5.0Lc
• Shure ML-140HE
• Shure V15/Type III with SAS stylus
As you can see……..I don’t rank any ‘modern’ MM cartridges with the crème-de-la-crème of the vintage stuff….but two that are quite enjoyable
• Clearaudio Virtuoso
• Audio Technica AT150ANV
Regards
Thank you for the kind words….
The problem with any individual’s preferences in cartridges is that they are totally personal and subjective and depend to a large extent on the total system in which they are heard?
I also hesitate to ‘rank’ my cartridges as the ‘ranking’ tends to vary with the records (and even the tracks), which may be played at any listening session?
There are also cartridges (with metal bodies) which tend to sound better in my system with wood headshells (like the Yamamoto or Ortofon) whilst cartridges with plastic bodies tend to sound better with metal headshells…..and a cartridge with a wood body (like the Clearaudio Virtuoso) blossoms with the ceramic headshell of the SAEC WE8000/ST….:-)
Then there are cartridges I own, which have been re-tipped with perhaps different cantilevers and/or stylii to the originals and sound better than the originals…..but what point is there in recomending these as they may indeed be ‘one-offs’?
And then we arrive at a phenomenon I have recently discovered…..
With MM cartridges and their dependence on Loading and Capacitance to attain a neutral ‘flat’ frequency response…with the infinitely variable Resistance and Capacitance controls built into the Halcro DM10 phonostage/preamp….it is possible for me to contour many of my preferred cartridges to sound almost identical to each other?!
But that’s not all……
The recording, engineering, mastering and mixing of various records are never equal and rarely ‘flat’ in frequency response themselves…so having a cartridge which IS truly ‘flat’ merely reveals the inadequacies of most of our collections?
That’s why many ‘audiophiles’ are reduced to a handful of discs when trying to ‘impress’ others with their systems IMHO? ☹
But why should our listening pleasure be governed by the vagaries of the recording process and the individuals whose talents vary so greatly?
If I can use the ‘contouring’ of the Resistance and Capacitance controls to ‘tame’ a rising top end and ‘flesh-out’ a ‘thin’ midrange….why not?
I now find that I am adjusting the loading for my MM cartridge’s almost on a ‘per record’ basis…and sometimes on a ‘track by track’ basis….
And that for me….is another clear advantage of MMs over MCs….. whereby with MC cartridges which are not so susceptible to Resistance loadings and are mostly unaffected by Capacitance…what you get is what you get?!
Notwithstanding all of the above……and not in any order…
With LOMC cartridges I like
• ZYX Universe
• Dynavector XV-1s
• Fidelity Research FR-7f (although with Line Contact in lieu of Spherical stylus)
• MIT-1
With MM cartridges I like
• Garrott P77 with SAS stylus
• Signet TK-7LCa
• Signet TK-7SU
• Signet MR5.0Lc
• Shure ML-140HE
• Shure V15/Type III with SAS stylus
As you can see……..I don’t rank any ‘modern’ MM cartridges with the crème-de-la-crème of the vintage stuff….but two that are quite enjoyable
• Clearaudio Virtuoso
• Audio Technica AT150ANV
Regards