But, some get closer to it than others. Â And that is what I hear and try to describe. Â The differences may be very subtle, but they are there. Â To me, the Decca sounds closer to the sound of music as I know it than the Shure does. Â So, if that is to be the case, then there have to be differences between the two. Â I suspect that you are reacting more strongly to what I am describing as the differences (and reason for the preference) than is warranted? Â Also keep in mind that, as should be obvious, that for me the most important aspect of all this is to all issues. Â For me that is the most important aspect of it all. Â
I get it Frogman....đ€
And I appreciate how as a musician....this is surely the most important thing for you.
For me however....there are too many variables in the performance, recording-quality, mastering, editing, cutting and stamping of the vinyl discs that I am not consciously 'comparing' the sound to 'live music'.
I've been to so many live concerts (classical, rock, electronic, reggae, jazz) that I know, when the sound is at its best (and particularly with amplified music)......there is no way that a recording can compete with the guttural, body-tingling, stomach-churning, ear-splitting and mind-blowing sound of 'LIVE' music.
Conversely.....when the live sound is POORLY produced (at the mixing desk with amplified music or due to the acoustics of the venue or seating position with unamplified music)....I can easily prefer the sound I achieve at home.
So despite the fact that the instruments are 'REAL' and their sounds are 'AUTHENTIC'....if the END RESULT is flawed in any way.....I am not moved đ„¶
HEREÂ is a concert I attended a few years ago in Ravello (Italy) performed by theÂ
Shenzhen Symphony Orchestra on a clifftop overlooking the Amalfi Coast.
Despite the presence of 65 live musicians playing REAL instruments in open air.....the 'sound' was abysmal!!!!
I firstly sat in the middle, three rows back and could not believe what I was hearing...
No oomph, no bass, no dynamics, no 'soundstage', little volume and definitely no MAGIC đ±.
I changed my seating on 5 occasions to see if the sound might improve with elevation or positioning....all to no avail.
When I listen to a particular cartridge in my system at home....It needs to have the tonal balance from lower bass, mid-bass, midrange to treble reasonably balanced.
The midrange to me is fundamental....
If it is not convincing and doesn't reproduce a palpable three dimensionality to my ears....it fails.
The important differences I hear between cartridges are in their presentations of 'Soundstage'...side to side, front to back, illusion of depth, separation of instruments and the air around them.
As much as I like the LDR.....the Ultra 500 goes slightly down lower with more authority  in the bass. The 'highs' on the Ultra 500 have slightly more 'air' and 'transparency'.
The LDR is definitely not a 'soundstage' champ đ
Its 'width' remains inside the two speakers whereas the Ultra 500 extends past the outsides of both.
The LDR has little 'back' depth and virtually no forward projection whereas the Ultra 500 fairly 'bulges' in a parabolic manner INTO the listening room so that if I turn the volume really high...I fear it might 'push' against me đ
These characteristics I believe, may only be apparent from my listening position 'in situ'.
We can't expect them to be heard or appreciated over a Youtube video...
And that's why I think we are not quite connecting Frogman...đ€
But then I'm surprised you manage to hear ANY of the distinctions you so ably describe via such a limited medium..
I'll keep 'em coming as long as you keep liking and contributing...đ„ł
Regards