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.

Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas

Surplus Sales of Nebraska. Many values, all small. At least, that was years ago.

@lewm  Interesting experience of yours. I ended up using my teflon film and foil for component level power supply filters. Don't suppose you'll like to sell some of the RTX?

@mijostyn I should have mentioned a possible x - intercept. What you wrote is true if everything is linear and the x - intercept is 0. That is, there is a noise floor.

Without going into referencing Parts being exchanged. 

My experiences had where Voicing Phonostages and Line Level Pre Amp's and even a Tonearm through Internal Wand Wire exchanges as a Signal Path has been that all Voicing methods used will add,

It is how much perceivable addition one is willing to accept as the goal of voicing. 

Again I have heard identical designs used in comparison, with only a few choice components in use changing the base build. 

When comparing for a short duration a change might be discovered that has increased attraction.

Allow a lesser liked model to have a extended play time, and the preferred model is not pined for. 

This is aldi the same with same models and differing VC's. 

Some VC's can pop with attraction. 

Today I look on it similar to CD and Vinyl. 

A short term comparison there are differences detected. Let either run on and neither not being used are pined for. 

Disclaimer: Many periods of comparison are not carried out with myself in a wooden chair. 

My findings might be accused of being compromised. 

 

 

Dear @terry9  : Thank you. Unfortunatelly the fixed ones hasvery low pf capacitance and are NOS so we can't get it in future and along that in reality for different reasons needs a special circuit board to use it.  It's not a true viable " excellent " option for a phonolinepreamp and non-imaginableforcrossover speakers.

In the other side I read somethings about  that kind of capacitors:

 

" One disadvantage of using air as a dielectric in a capacitor is that it has a relatively low dielectric constant compared to other materials. This means that a larger distance between the plates is needed to achieve the same capacitance as a capacitor with a higher dielectric constant material. Additionally, air is not suitable for use in capacitors that require a high level of stability or precision."

that could means bigger dimensions that other caps.

" In summary, an air capacitor would not be a viable energy storage option because the flowing air would not retain a dielectric constant necessary for the capacitor to work properly. "

An air capac is a capacitor that uses air as a dielectric, and this capacitor can be designed in fixed or variable capacitance form. The fixed capacitance type is not often used because there are different types of fixed capacitors with much better characteristics than it, so the variable capacitance form is more frequently used due to its simple construction.

Air capacitors are usually made of two sets of semicircular metal plates, which are separated by an air dielectric material. Of these metal plates, one set is permanent and the other is attached to a shaft that allows the operator to rotate the assembly to change the capacitance when needed. When the overlap between the two metal plates is large, the capacitance is higher. Thus, the highest capacitance condition is reached when the overlap between the two sets of metal plates is maximum, while the lowest capacitance condition is reached once there is no overlap. For better capacitance control, finer adjustment, and higher accuracy, a reduction gear mechanism is used.

In addition, the capacitance value of air capacitors is very small, ranging from 100pF-1nF, while the operating voltage range is from 10 to 1000V. The breakdown voltage of the dielectric is small, so the electrical breakdown inside the capacitor can change, resulting in poor operation of the air capacitor. "

 

So, for me at the endyour adviselooks as useless in practic audio way.

 

Btw, the  self by-passing Multicaps means higher developed inductance that's not good and maybe from therecomes its kind of coloration that's away from the neutral Wima/Vishay or Kemet ones. Only my opinion through first hand experiences.

 

Thank's again, I learned.

 

R.