2. analog
  3. 153132-541

Cartridge loading

Presently I am using a ZU/Denon DL103 mc cartridge with ZU Audio's highest tolerances.  I had this cartridge mounted on my VPI Prime and after going through all the various loading combinations, I settled on 200 ohms.  I was always satisfied with my choice of setting.  I no longer have the Prime and now use the Technics SL1200G turntable.  After having the same cartridge mounted and aligned by the dealer, I inserted it into my system and enjoyed the sound immensely, never touching the 200 ohm setting.

Yesterday I was listening to vinyl most of the day and for some reason I found the sound to be better than ever, mostly in the treble area.  The highs had shimmer when needed and I had played the same records many times before on the Prime and they never sounded as good as they did yesterday.  Just for the heck of it, I checked the cartridge loading and found it was now set at 1000 ohms.  As I said, when I put the Technics into the system, I never bothered changing the loading which was at 200 ohms as it was the same cartridge, just a different turntable.

I believe I know what happened, when I last used the tone controls on my McIntosh preamp, (you have to shuffle through a menu) I must have inadvertently put the cartridge loading at 1000 ohms.  It truly sounds fantastic, better than I ever thought possible.  The Bass is still very deep and taut, midrange is the same but the treble, oh my, so much better.  Now the million dollar question is why should it now sound better at 1000 ohms, when it sounded great before at 200 ohms?  Can the tonearm on the Technics have an effect on cartridge loading?  I always thought it was all dependent on the preamp, amp and speakers.  What am I missing here?  I am very curious to know.  The specs for my cartridge say greater than 50 ohms for loading.

Thanks
stereo5
rauliruegas
13,129 posts
 
atmasphere : You are so " curios " when posted:

""  electrical damping of an electro-mechanical transducer results in less high frequency output of that transducer.  ""

no one is questioning that ( at least not now. and is not what I asked several times here and in other threads. ).

What I asked you are true evidence of your statement about that: 

""" LIMIT TRACE....."""

wich of your words you don't understand?, that was the issue. Not any more and at least for me is clear that your statement about is totally: FALSE. That's a lie till some one prove that " limit trace .." is not false.

R.


atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
12,193 posts
 
"" electrical damping of an electro-mechanical transducer results in less high frequency output of that transducer. ""

no one is questioning that ( at least not now. and is not what I asked several times here and in other threads. ).

So we are in agreement as seen above. That is the same as:

What I asked you are true evidence of your statement about that:

""" LIMIT TRACE....."""

IOW when the cartridge is loaded (damped) its ability to trace high frequencies is reduced because the cantilever will be stiffer. If you agree with your first post above as you say you do, then you have to agree with this also. They are the same.

rauliruegas
13,129 posts
 
atmasphere : """    is loaded (damped) its ability to trace high frequencies is reduced because the cantilever will be stiffer... """

I said " at least not now...".

For the lectrical loading could " limit trace... " it needs that the cartridge be overdamped and the cartridge designers already has all calculated for that kind of cartridge behavior never be present or even approach it. It's almost the same in tonearm designer calculations when they design the use of oil/silicon damping, they make the calculation for overdamping can't happens because overdamping limit the trace of the stylus tip ridding during play the LP.

Now I ask for numbers/value of that loading resistor to " limit trace... "  and you don't show any " numbers " about that can be corroborated.

No one wants an overdamped cartridge: electrically or mechanically, these is out of question.


This is what I posted to lewm in this same page for you can read it:


"" did you know how much " force " do you need to apply/need/ at the base of the cantilever to really impedes at the stylus tip position its free movements, a tiny movement? no?
Btw, do you know the " power forces/inertia " generated at the stylus tip when ridding the grooves at 33/45 rpm and what " force " is need it to " limit the trace " of the stylus tip to track when appliyed that force/loading at the other end of the cantilever? ..."""

Which is the force need it to broke that very high inertia generated by the friction between the groove modulations and stylus tip when the cartridge is ridding/tracking those grooves that can " limit trace HF "" ?

I don't know that answer concerning the loading resistor value to broke that inertia. We have to think that load resistance takes its effect at the cantilever base and the stylus tip is ridding at the other end/extreme of the cantilever and this makes " things " extremely complicated to that " limit trace " issue.  """


Did you read it?  because is all common sense.

So, your " limit trace ..." statement continue be false.

R.

atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
12,193 posts
 
So, your " limit trace ..." statement continue be false.
Your feculent argument is also specious. You can't have it both ways.
Post removed 
More to discover