Always start with 47K to see if the preamp works with RFI at its input. If yes (the preamp is unperturbed by RFI), this will get you the best sonic performance. If it sounds better with lower resistance loads, then the preamp does not handle RFI well.
Cartridge Loading for a phono pre amp
Hello,
I have recently acquired a phono pre amp recommended by Michael Fremer. It is “THE VINYL”, from QHW audio, Spain. It got a great review. I have a Benz Micro Glider rated at 1.1MV. I have no idea how to set the dip switches for MC Load impedance for this cartridge. The options I have are as follows: 47K, 1K, 560R, 470R, 100R, and 47R. I have a solid state amp and pre-amp, and also have a sub that I use, rarely.
Any advice would be most appreciated!!
- ...
- 137 posts total
Dear @judsauce : Start with Benz advise at the end is the cartridge manufacturer and knows all around cartridge/tonearm/phono stage to achieve the best of each cartridge. So you can start with 470 ohms and test it with LP tracks that you know very well what should be its quality performance levels. MF loaded his Cadenza Black in your phono stage review at 100 ohms and even at 47 ohm and he did not mentioned any single quality level bad performance because that cartridge loading.
Btw, @holmz , next I pasted what J.Carr ( Lyra cartridge designer ) posted about cartridge loading: "" To claim that the loading affects the measurable frequency response of the cartridge is bogus. However, if inappropriate loading bathes the phono stage in copius amounts of high-frequency noise, it may start to distort (unless the designer implemented various techniques to make sure that this won't happen), and the result will likely be intermodulation distortion. ""
Other gentleman that in the past works for Analog Devices been group leader there and where he made/designed several AD items proved in real time what JC said and that does not exist cartridge frequency response anomalies in any way:
"" may not be a renowned Audio Designer, but I am a somewhat renowned IC designer with credits that include cell phone transceivers and high performance opamps. One of the "joys" of being an IC designer is the compulsion to measure/model everything! However, once the skills are developed it's relatively easy to do as long as someone else has done the hard work of producing suitable models to use. "
All those by this gentleman and J.Carr are facts, something proved not coming from theory or a book.
So, the next statements are totally false and a falacy:
" it will make the cantilever stiffer and less able to trace high frequencies. It can and does affect the interaction between the arm and cartridge (effective mass and mechanical resonance). "
@holmz , not only were proved the statements are totally false but who posted the statements never posted anywhere where he is sharing that false information any tests/measurements/facts to prove it and always only dead silence and not only that but it's just a little of common sense to know that information is false:
first effective mass is not affected and the existence of mechanical resonance for that false " stiffer " cantilever just can't happens at a level where can has a measured effects. Look, if we take a tonearm with 12gr. on EM and a cartridge with say 18cu on compliance and 10 grs. of weigth the tonearm resonance frequency is: 8hz.. Now, you have to change the cartridge compliance from 18cu to 15-14cu ( stiffer ) to change the resonance frequency to 9hz but that does not affects high frequencies.
It will be an stupidity by my self to follow post arguments against something false when exist real test/measurements that already proved are false..
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
It was my question of whether the cartridge was a current device, and whether the ease of pushing the current through the load affected the stiffness… to which @atmasphere answered. I was not commenting on sound, just I was confused about back EMF type of affect upon the cartridge’s motor by having a high, versus low, ohm load. Any change would be like the tail wagging the dog, and small compared to the masses ands mechanical compliance… and resonant frequency… of the arm/cart “system”. |
@holmz : " He never posted that loading to hard a cartridge will cause stiffness to the cartridge cantilever enough to mistracking. " I was who posted that only to clarify that J.Carr never support those false statements by atmasphere. Tha’s all.
" to which answered " with false statements. Good for you if that is what you was looking for.
I paste all those information coming for true experts for we audiophiles can learn and don’t believe in what " some one " is spreading every where with out facts.
Unfortunatelly we are part of these corrupted AHEE. Such is life but people have the rigth to learn out of that AHEE.
Btw, who is: whistleraudio that you show in your last post.
Anyway in your last statement seems to me that in some way we are in agreement on that issue. Good. R. |
It was I that wondered whether the loading affects the compliance in theory
It was not about mis tracking tests, it was about the motor affecting the stiffness in theory, whether or not it had impact on the sound was not my primary focus,
what is AHEE?
a spell check on Raul I think.
Maybe in agreement in that it doesn’t matter. But maybe not in agreement as to whether the load being high or low would affect the compliance and which way it would do so if it did. |
- 137 posts total