MC-MM-MI CARTRIDGES . DO YOU KNOW WHICH HAS BETTER QUALITY PERFORMANCE? REALLY?
Dear friends:The main subject of this thread is start a dialogue to find out the way we almost all think or be sure about the thread question : " true " answer.
Many years ago I started the long Agon MM thread where several audiophiles/Agoners and from other audio net forums participated to confirm or to discover the MM/MI/IM/MF/HOMC world and many of us, me including, was and still are" surprised for what we found out in that " new " cartridge world that as today is dominated by the LOMC cartridges.
Through that long thread I posted several times the superiority of the MM/types of cartridges over the LOMC ones even that I owned top LOMC cartridge samples to compare with and I remember very clearly that I posted that the MM and the like cartridges had lower distortion levels and better frequency range quality performance than the LOMC cartridges.
In those times j.carr ( Lyra designer ) was very active in Agon and in that thread I remember that he was truly emphatic posting that my MM conclusion was not true due that things on distortion cartridge levels in reality is the other way around: LOMC has lower distortion levels.
Well, he is not only a LOMC cartridge designer but an expert audiophile/MUSIC lover with a long long and diverse first hand experiences listening cartridges in top TT, top tonearms and top phono stages and listening not only LOMC cartridges but almost any kind of cartridges in his and other top room/systems.
I never touched again that subject in that thread and years or months latter the MM thread I started again to listening LOMC cartridges where my room/system overall was up-graded/dated to way superior quality performance levels than in the past and I posted somewhere that j.carr was just rigth: LOMC design were and are superior to the other MM type cartridges been vintage or today models.
I'm a MUSIC lover and I'm not " married " with any kind of audio items or audio technologies I'm married just with MUSIC and what can gives me the maximum enjoyment of that ( every kind ) MUSIC, even I'm not married with any of my opinions/ideas/specific way of thinking. Yes, I try hard to stay " always " UNBIASED other than MUSIC.
So, till today I followed listening to almost every kind of cartridges ( including field coil design. ) with almost every kind of tonearms and TTs and in the last 2 years my room/system quality performance levels were and is improved by several " stages " that permits me better MUSIC audio items judgements and different enjoyment levels in my system and other audio systems. Yes, I still usemy test audio items full comparison proccess using almost the same LP tracks every time and as always my true sound reference is Live MUSIC not other sound system reproduction.
I know that the main thread subject is way complicated and complex to achieve an unanimous conclusions due that exist a lot of inherent differences/advantages/unadvantages in cartridges even coming from the same manufacturer.
We all know that when we talk of a cartridge we are in reality talking of its cantilever buil material, stylus shape, tonearm used/TT, compliance, phono stage and the like and my " desire " is that we could concentrate in the cartridges as an " isolated " audio item and that any of our opinions when be posible stay in the premise: " everything the same ".
My take here is to learn from all of you and that all of us try to learn in between each to other and not who is the winner but at the " end " every one of us will be a winner.
So, your posts are all truly appreciated and is a thread where any one can participates even if today is not any more his analog alternative or is a newcomer or heavily experienced gentleman. Be my guest and thank's in advance.
Regards and ENJOY THE MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
@pindac Good Lord man…possibly the board room white paper on why the CD was invented… You left off ( possibly due to brevity ? ) the off center record… of course Nakamichi fixed that…. Not everyone is pitch sensitive… love ya man
and yet… The line at my local RSD. ( Lou’s in Encinitas ) exceeded 5 hours at about noon… Certainly some audiophiles in the line…but… lot’s of music lovers craving physical media…. fun
|
I have been exposed over many years to how a Cart' can be perceived in use, when exposed to the conditions being referred to. Unwanted conditions that can be avoidable or much much improved. Many years past, on a heavily modified Idler Drive TT, a friend introduced a cheap MM to a SME 3009 Tonearm and had visitors assess the Pairing. The intention was to revisit over time, allowing for the Cart' to settle. The Tonearm was to undergo methods to improve its condition, i.e, Servicing and then adding upgrades, from mechanical through to Signal Wire. All revisits as the TA works progressed were assessed using the same MM Cart'. There was a point in time that the Cart' was clearly better than any recollections had, and the perception was it would be hard to better with any Tonearm Cart' configuration. The mind can play games, as a swap out to a different Tonearm and Cart' both known to be better choices, made the SME 3009 > MM sound very very poor. I know through my experiences had, that when a Cart' is used on a set up that has attempts made to address the optimisation of Mechanical Interfaces and methods are in use that are able to support and effectively isolate the Critical Parts from excessive influence of Kinetic Energy Transferral, there is easy to detect changes to the sonic being produced as the outcome, the voicing of the Cart' being used can be very easily distinguished. My experiences around a Certain Cart' Brand, when Cart's are being used between Certain Purchase Values from the same Brands Range of Models, or as a same range of model Cart' having undergone Modification, such a different Styli as a replacement only, or a Cart having undergone further modification. The differences from Cart's in use are quite discernable, when such Cart's Families are experienced in use on a system addressing referred to interface issues already mentioned. I avoided the subject of off set Spindle > Groove centring LP's, as there is always a risk of this condition being present, when known the Vinyl Manufacture Quality Tolerance, where the Spindle Hole Centre is acceptable to be offset to the Groove by approx' 0.2mm. The following will suggest why a 0.2mm off set can be classed as not too concerning issue, and the last one needing to be addressed, as it does not really contribute detrimentally to the energy being sent by the Styli. I think on this matter the Industry, if able to maintain the standard for a tolerance of 0,2mm, has been fair to the Customer. Much Much more expensive items are produced to assist with extracting recorded data from the LP that are being sold with conditions much more detrimental to the quality of the sound to be produced. Most record pressing standards have a production tolerances that are producing a centre hole to groove eccentricity tolerance of 0.2 mm maximum. Apply the 0.2mm to a playback radius of 100 mm (approximately the centre of the LP modulated groove area) equates to a wow of +/- 0.2 % peak ( 0.14 % RMS). As this is for most an people inaudible, it does seem like a fair tolerance for a standard production item. Does a Premium production Item address the off-set to a Zero mm dimension? Usually, when I refer to eccentricity of a rotation, I refer to the eccentric rotation of the LP, in conjunction, with the eccentric rotation of the Platter Spindle Bearing being the main concern. Where the combined LP/Spindle Off Set eccentricity does become a little more interesting, is when there are individuals reporting that eccentricity is identified up to 5mm as the guestimated off set. Such reports about the off set being more than 0.2mm are quite incorrect, when coming from reports that are claiming noticeable movement of the Headshell that far exceeds 0,2mm. Using the Headshell as the indicator of the LP's off set dimension, is only showing the effect of the force being applied to the Headshell as it passes the groove location of where there is maximum force being exerted, which is then incorrectly described as the full force being generated by the groove off set. There are a Huge amount of variables as to why a reported off set from a visual observation can be seen to be approaching up to 5mm. As a layman, I would suggest the LP's 0.2mm off set is a very small influence on what is being detected and there are other influences contributing in a much larger measure. How many individuals who are willing to report on a Cart's qualities are using a Cart' on a Tonearm that has a noticeable deflection to the Headshell, at a particular area on the LP's surface, that can be seen to be guestimated between 2-5mm as the off set deflection. Does different Cart's on the exact same set up with the LP placed at the exact same orientation on the platter produce identical off set deflection seen on the Headshell? If this type of deflection was made known when one is supplying their report on the impression a Cart' has made, how much would another attach themselves to the report declaring it to be creditable. Once more, where is the 'all things being equal', all thing are uniquely bespoke to each individuals experiences had at the replay environment. |
