What is the “World’s Best Cartridge”?

It would never have occurred to me that the road to cable Nirvana would be found by combining many strands of wire of different gauges and different shapes (ribbon AND round cross-section) and even different compositions (one strand seems to be copper sheathed in silver; the rest of the strands are pure silver).  I don't know how to rationalize it, but I don't argue with listening tests.  I think Mike and others on WBF are just as surprised at the results.

I was surprised at how much better things got when I went balanced. One of the goals of balanced operation is to eliminate interconnect cable interactions and it does that quite well.

fundamentally using an SUT potentially brings a musical touch, inner artistic view and envelopment that high gain phono preamps such as the darTZeel can’t quite do in the same way. this effect varies with actual execution of the phono and SUT.

SUTs can't pass the RFI that is generated by a LOMC cartridge (its an interaction of inductance in parallel with capacitance that makes the RFI). This suggests that the preamp is sensitive to RFI and so sounds better when its been filtered out. If the preamp isn't sensitive to RFI then the SUT won't bring anything to the table (other than possibly lower noise).

 

For an MM phono stage, such as the one Mike uses, there is no option besides using an outboard SUT or other active gain device ahead of the stage, with a LOMC cartridge.  Thus the sensitivity of the EMIA stage to RFI cannot fairly be judged in this case.  Maybe Mike is comparing the EMIA devices collectively to the high gain phono section of his DarTZeel (assuming it has one).

@atmasphere 1++,  balanced cables are the only way to go with analog signals even with short runs.

yes; the EMIA phono corrector + MC Trio is a package deal; which then can be compared directly with the two high gain internal phono’s inside the darTZeel preamp.

the dart phono’s are very good; overall i prefer the EMIA approach. but then i might prefer it to any phono i have heard. the dart phono is certainly hard to beat at what it does.

my CS Port phono (which the EMIA Phono Corrector replaced) had three inputs; one of which was an internal SUT; the other two were MM inputs which required outboard SUT’s.

as far as balanced cables the only way to go with analog signals, that is a silly thing to say. who has heard all the non balanced choices? no one. i do respect the advantages to a balanced circuit and cables, but things are not so simple as that being the only thing that matters. it's just one aspect to the performance.

once you start creating Frankenstein cartridges, by changing or modifying cantilevers, styli, coils, suspension, bodies, etc, then opinions regarding the net SQ are even more useless than otherwise, not to say that comparing OEM cartridges without respect to different tonearms, turntables, amplification, speakers, rooms, listeners, is a worthwhile pursuit, beyond expressions of love, meh-ness, or hate.

Note: Frankenstein Cart, is a term used that is usually associated with claiming the end product is usually made from parts not selected by a Manufacturer, which then produces a scenario where a product is unpredictable and unique, with only limited persons able to offer an assessment.

As a Sub Context, Frankenstein is made of multiple unrelated parts and is destructive as the result.   

There are numerous Cartridges available that are produced using Trickle-Down Technology from Brands Flagship Models. Each of these Trickle-Down Models would be considered as an inferior model to the Flagship, but offer an essence of it.

It has been seen that a Brand offering a Trickle-Down Technology, where the intent is to produce a derivative version of a of a Flagship Cart', has chosen, not only to reduce the use of the sought-after technologies and design aspects, but also on certain models, include the use an Aluminium Cantilever in place of the more desirable and better performing options that are known off.

I find it hard to look at a Trickle-Down Technology Cartridge produced from this approach, as anything but a Frankenstein Cart'. The uniqueness of such a product in comparison to other options, being the offer of such a variant is available at a reduced fee to the Flagship Model, making the idea of usage more attractive to the mass of interested individuals to experience.

I have no beef with this as a Business Method, I have bought into this method myself. 

Moving on, Return of a Cart' to a Manufacturer for refurbishment.

The likelihood is that the small print is to state that materials will be used that are equivalent for the work undertaken. Equivalent can be very broad in its meaning and is pretty much a statement used with the intention of assuring the Customer there will be a Cart' produced with the Companies interpretation of an acceptable function.

There is not any Guarantee for the exact Cart' that was bought as being returned.

I can't help but interpret that accepting a service under these circumstances, a Frankenstein Cart' is to be produced.

Where it differs from the above is that, not many will be able to share in its uniqueness unless this specific route for refurbishment is chosen by a large number of the Cart' Model owners.

I have no beef with using this as a method, it is one I am yet to experience, but have heard enough to know there are happy customers.

Companies are making decisions for their product that are a derivative of a Particular Design / Model of Cart'. The Companies will be making decisions to use different Materials for Bodies, Different Magnets, Cantilevers and Styli and in some cases Coils to produce a Frankenstein version of their Flagship Cart'. 

Moving on, Third Party Technicians that Work on Cart's.

There are some from this field, who are with very valuable experiences and have worked for, or on behalf of Brands that many would have on a shortlist to own. From my end and in the circle of individuals I deal with regularly, there is nothing being made known that is to be concerned about, if the choice is made to offer a Cart' to a Technician that is known to carry out high quality work, it is viewed as a admirable way forward to let a trusted Third-Party Service sprinkle some of their magic dust on a Cart'. 

It is no secret; I have been an advocate of the method of using a Third Party rebuild service, I find the method totally satisfactory, and know there are numerous other that are satisfied too.

To some the idea of using the Third-Party Service route, is not to be encouraged and is seen to be purported in small groups, as being the least attractive method, and the one that should not be considered.

I can't find any place where there is reconciliation on this very restrictive advice, each individual has the right to experience a Cartridge in any guise as they wish.

There is no Guarantee a alternative option is the better.

What others think does not matter one iota and should not be an influence on a decision to be made.

To have a dialogue with a Company or a Third-Party Service and have a Cart' produced in a manner that considers your made known preferences is an experience that can be had a very fair asking price if options are investigated in advance.