Dear @mijostyn : Boron alone is way more stiffer that any other cantilever but natural diamond ( again, I don't know if the synthetic/industrial diamond shares exactly the same characterisitcs than the natural jewel. ).
Boron Young Modulus is 656 when aluminum is 68 or synthetic ruby 372.
I think that exist a limit where above it higher stiffness makes no difference, so maybe the higher stiffness of the natural diamond ( 1,050. ) could not make a true differences in this specific cantilever " job ". Who knows?
In the other side many things around the cartridge cantilever diamond models makes no sense other that manufacturers goes way higher in the cartridge price tag and I say this because from some years now has in its cartridge catalog 1 or 2 diamond cantilever models ( not expensive ones. ) and things are that no one is the top of the line but ( like today ) cartridges with boron cantilevers ! ? ! ?
@dover is rigth and I disagree with you about LOMC quality level performance that can be outperformed by MM/MI cartridges that's an " inferior " cartridge design.
Now and this is critical: dover said the importance of the rigth phono stage that can or can't be the " problem " with LOMC cartridges because for a LOMC one could shows all its glory we need a very good phono stage and these units are not inexpensive one ( except the PS Audio Stellar unit. ).
Everything the same a LOMC quality level performance beats an MM or MI cartridge. As dover I prefer too MI.
Everything has its own quality levels and I have to say that there are MM and MI cartridges that are ( specially MI ) really good performers.
If we comment this with JC he will tell us that MM develops higher distortions that LOMC cartridges and I know because that was his answer in the long MM thread.
Yes, I'm with LOMC but I know too that I can't totally diminish the other cartridge design contenders.
R.
Boron Young Modulus is 656 when aluminum is 68 or synthetic ruby 372.
I think that exist a limit where above it higher stiffness makes no difference, so maybe the higher stiffness of the natural diamond ( 1,050. ) could not make a true differences in this specific cantilever " job ". Who knows?
In the other side many things around the cartridge cantilever diamond models makes no sense other that manufacturers goes way higher in the cartridge price tag and I say this because from some years now has in its cartridge catalog 1 or 2 diamond cantilever models ( not expensive ones. ) and things are that no one is the top of the line but ( like today ) cartridges with boron cantilevers ! ? ! ?
@dover is rigth and I disagree with you about LOMC quality level performance that can be outperformed by MM/MI cartridges that's an " inferior " cartridge design.
Now and this is critical: dover said the importance of the rigth phono stage that can or can't be the " problem " with LOMC cartridges because for a LOMC one could shows all its glory we need a very good phono stage and these units are not inexpensive one ( except the PS Audio Stellar unit. ).
Everything the same a LOMC quality level performance beats an MM or MI cartridge. As dover I prefer too MI.
Everything has its own quality levels and I have to say that there are MM and MI cartridges that are ( specially MI ) really good performers.
If we comment this with JC he will tell us that MM develops higher distortions that LOMC cartridges and I know because that was his answer in the long MM thread.
Yes, I'm with LOMC but I know too that I can't totally diminish the other cartridge design contenders.
R.