Man, talk about pressure!
Excellent and astute observations by all. With a couple of exceptions, I agree with most of what has been written about these two cartridges. I may be stating the obvious, but I should also point out that while I generally prefer MCâs over MMâs, I donât believe that any and every MC is superior to all MMâs. This thread has shown that handily; Halcro owns many fine MMâs. So far there seems to be pretty general agreement that cartridge A is superior to B. However, the question is not about preference, but identification of the type that each is.
By comparison, cartridge A exhibits some of the typical MC traits. As has been pointed out it seems to offer higher resolution than cartridge B leading one to think that it is of the MC type. However, the detail that this âhigherâ resolution gives is of the âmore in your faceâ type. Cartridge B requires (allows) that the listener âlean intoâ the music instead of it being pushed in the direction of the listener.
âAâ seems to present a more generous soundstage and with larger individual images. âBâ âs soundstage seems more compact with smaller individual images. However, although it is smaller, âBâ âs soundstage seems better proportioned, hence more realistic. When the voice enters, the accompanying woodwind arpeggiated filigrees are much more clearly set behind the singer, as they should be. That is a type of âresolutionâ, no?
At first, âAâ seems to be more rhythmic. However, this may be due in part to the above observation about the more âup frontâ quality and possibly also the fact that the volume level heard from âAâ is slightly higher than that of âBâ.
âAâ is more generous through the lower midrange and bass. However, it is also a little plummy in that range with a bit of overhang of bass notes. âBâ is slightly leaner through this frequency range, but sounds more realistic due to the lack of the overhang which results in better pitch definition; it is easier to hear actual pitches from the basses and not just low frequency energy. This also makes it easier to hear when the bassoons play in unison with lower strings. Again, resolution of a sort.
To my ears, âBâ is a better tracker than âAâ. With âAâ there is audible breakup, not just on the vocalâs dynamic peaks, but also leading up to those peaks. With âBâ the sound sound stays fairly well controlled up until those peaks. âBâ also does a better job with the passages in which the full orchestra plays along with the singer. âAâ sounds more congested in those passages.
So far it could go either way. With the possible exception of the slightly plummy quality in the bass, which is fairly typical of MMâs, I have heard cartridges of either persuasion that exhibit the above characteristics. What tipped the scale for me is the following:
I canât claim to have owned anywhere near as many different cartridges as have been heard on this thread, but in my experience there is one characteristic that I have heard from practically all MMâs that I seldom hear from a good MCâŠ..with two exceptions. I almost always hear some degree of a kind of âgrayâ or bleached tonal quality in the sound of music played with even the best MMâs that is almost always absent with a good MC. This robs the sound of instruments and voice of their natural color; and hence their distinctiveness as heard in real life. I hear that quality from âAâ. âBâ lets one hear more of that natural timbral color. I mentioned the arpeggiated woodwind filigrees heard when the voice enters. With âBâ it is obvious that the piccolo is a wooden piccolo. With âAâ its not so obvious. Wood or metal? In the same passages, with âBâ one hears more of the clarinetâs wonderful round quality; what players call a âpingyâ sound. More importantly, each instrumentâs color is very different. Once again, higher resolution of a sort. âAâ homogenizes their (and the voiceâs) individual colors and sounds a bit dry overall. Â
There has been one MM cartridgeâs that I have heard here that does not exhibit some degree of that tonal bleaching, the Victor X1. Another is the Azden which I own, but which is not nearly on the same level as the Victor overall; and highly unlikely to have been Halcroâs choice for MM. So, if âBâ is in fact the Victor, then all bets are off. Otherwise, I will go out on a limb and in spite of the things heard that tell me that âAâ SHOULD be the MC (and I do prefer âAâ in some ways) I will play devilâs advocate and buck the trend by stating that âAâ is the MM and âBâ the MC.
đ±
Btw, âAâ is very reminiscent of the sound heard from the recent âSignetâ MM with FR headshell. Edgewearâs âBâ/Denon comment is something that also came to mind; although the Denon 103R that I own is not on the same level overall.
Excellent and astute observations by all. With a couple of exceptions, I agree with most of what has been written about these two cartridges. I may be stating the obvious, but I should also point out that while I generally prefer MCâs over MMâs, I donât believe that any and every MC is superior to all MMâs. This thread has shown that handily; Halcro owns many fine MMâs. So far there seems to be pretty general agreement that cartridge A is superior to B. However, the question is not about preference, but identification of the type that each is.
By comparison, cartridge A exhibits some of the typical MC traits. As has been pointed out it seems to offer higher resolution than cartridge B leading one to think that it is of the MC type. However, the detail that this âhigherâ resolution gives is of the âmore in your faceâ type. Cartridge B requires (allows) that the listener âlean intoâ the music instead of it being pushed in the direction of the listener.
âAâ seems to present a more generous soundstage and with larger individual images. âBâ âs soundstage seems more compact with smaller individual images. However, although it is smaller, âBâ âs soundstage seems better proportioned, hence more realistic. When the voice enters, the accompanying woodwind arpeggiated filigrees are much more clearly set behind the singer, as they should be. That is a type of âresolutionâ, no?
At first, âAâ seems to be more rhythmic. However, this may be due in part to the above observation about the more âup frontâ quality and possibly also the fact that the volume level heard from âAâ is slightly higher than that of âBâ.
âAâ is more generous through the lower midrange and bass. However, it is also a little plummy in that range with a bit of overhang of bass notes. âBâ is slightly leaner through this frequency range, but sounds more realistic due to the lack of the overhang which results in better pitch definition; it is easier to hear actual pitches from the basses and not just low frequency energy. This also makes it easier to hear when the bassoons play in unison with lower strings. Again, resolution of a sort.
To my ears, âBâ is a better tracker than âAâ. With âAâ there is audible breakup, not just on the vocalâs dynamic peaks, but also leading up to those peaks. With âBâ the sound sound stays fairly well controlled up until those peaks. âBâ also does a better job with the passages in which the full orchestra plays along with the singer. âAâ sounds more congested in those passages.
So far it could go either way. With the possible exception of the slightly plummy quality in the bass, which is fairly typical of MMâs, I have heard cartridges of either persuasion that exhibit the above characteristics. What tipped the scale for me is the following:
I canât claim to have owned anywhere near as many different cartridges as have been heard on this thread, but in my experience there is one characteristic that I have heard from practically all MMâs that I seldom hear from a good MCâŠ..with two exceptions. I almost always hear some degree of a kind of âgrayâ or bleached tonal quality in the sound of music played with even the best MMâs that is almost always absent with a good MC. This robs the sound of instruments and voice of their natural color; and hence their distinctiveness as heard in real life. I hear that quality from âAâ. âBâ lets one hear more of that natural timbral color. I mentioned the arpeggiated woodwind filigrees heard when the voice enters. With âBâ it is obvious that the piccolo is a wooden piccolo. With âAâ its not so obvious. Wood or metal? In the same passages, with âBâ one hears more of the clarinetâs wonderful round quality; what players call a âpingyâ sound. More importantly, each instrumentâs color is very different. Once again, higher resolution of a sort. âAâ homogenizes their (and the voiceâs) individual colors and sounds a bit dry overall. Â
There has been one MM cartridgeâs that I have heard here that does not exhibit some degree of that tonal bleaching, the Victor X1. Another is the Azden which I own, but which is not nearly on the same level as the Victor overall; and highly unlikely to have been Halcroâs choice for MM. So, if âBâ is in fact the Victor, then all bets are off. Otherwise, I will go out on a limb and in spite of the things heard that tell me that âAâ SHOULD be the MC (and I do prefer âAâ in some ways) I will play devilâs advocate and buck the trend by stating that âAâ is the MM and âBâ the MC.
đ±
Btw, âAâ is very reminiscent of the sound heard from the recent âSignetâ MM with FR headshell. Edgewearâs âBâ/Denon comment is something that also came to mind; although the Denon 103R that I own is not on the same level overall.