@rauliruegas It really depends on the cartridge Raul. The Atlas SL sounds better with a lower signal to noise level in current mode, but the MC Diamond sounds better in Voltage mode. The Hyperon only works in voltage mode. It's great that your 3180 sounds so good. Maybe your friend will purchase one?
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.
- ...
- 335 posts total
@mijostyn : I can't talk on the Atlas but the Etna is similar design and sounds better through voltage design. The issue here is not " depends of cartridge " but more depend of phono stage/line electronics design. Even in the CH by a " hair " the Etna performs better than in current mode. Everything the same there is no reason for current outperforms voltage designs.
No he does not buy it because he has only 3 months with his CH that was an important investment around 54K and that's with out a line stage, so is an expensive stand alone phone stage.
Btw, I don't know yet which cartridge can outperforms the Astatic MF 200, is a tremendous and outstanding performer that at least for me tell me that phono cartridge today are only " refinenments " cartridges but I wondering which kind of refinements when a way vintage cartrridge design beats that top today cartridge and things are that at the end the cartridge motors is still the " same " with out a true deep changes. I think I paid 150 for the MF 200 that's in as new condition due that in those times I always try to buy at least 2 samples of the same model ( really inexpensive. ) due that were vintage and almost all second or third hand even in NOS condition a few times the cartridge gone down/failed.
R. |
Perhaps we should consider, without getting quasi-philosophical, to what extent musical experiences are transferable? In other words, will one man's "best" cartridge be perceived as being the "best" by someone else? Put it like that and it seems very likely that it will not. We always end up suggesting and promoting what we like, and that is, after all, pretty much to be expected. But someone else's preference is at best a suggestion for consideration. It is important to listen for ourselves, and to trust our own subjective experience. Fear Of Missing Out is a lousy guide to buying equipment, and while it allows us to feel like an accepted member of the tribe, it does not necessarily provide us with the most enjoyable musical experiences. |
dogberry, To the question posed in the first paragraph of your post, most of us would say "of course not". We each hear differently for reasons that have been belabored here many times over. At the same time, I would like to think that when we say something is "blue", we all have an idea what blue is, except of course those of who are color-blind with respect to blue. So if ten out of ten or eleven of us say that a cartridge sounds like X, I tend to believe I have some idea how that cartridge sounds, in some other systems, and even though I have never heard the cartridge. As far as this business of ascribing separate powers and specific functions that govern our perceptions of audio systems to different regions of the brain (amygdala, limbic system, etc), I say as a physician and scientist (albeit not a neuroscientist) please take that information with more than a dollop of salt. The subject is interesting but the supporting data are conditional at best. Nor do I think it even matters how we process the audible information that comes out of our audio systems. But certainly I don't feel that my life is threatened (necessitating a fight or flight response) when listening to Miles Davis. Pindac, You mentioned a "transconductance" phono stage. By that term do you mean to indicate a stage that uses voltage gain, as opposed to current gain, at its input? With regard to Raul's recent experience with current drive, I tend to agree, but I would not at all feel qualified to say that all voltage gain phono stages are superior to all current driven phono stages. (Nor would Raul, I am sure.) I would only say that current drive is no panacea for all that may ail voltage drive. This is based on my own experiments in my own home system using several different LOMC cartridges |
- 335 posts total