Raul, several years ago I acquired an MF2500 that is in bad shape. In fact Andy Kim advised me not to spend money on it, but I think that’s because he didn’t think it was worth much to begin with. Can you recommend someone? It certainly needs a retip but may need more. Thx.
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
@lewm Perhaps I am misusing the terms, and you could correct my usage. I am using similar pairs of transistors, NPN and PNP, such as Toshiba 2SC3421 and 2SA1358. Or pairs from the MAT series. Also available on one chip, as in THAT 340. That’s what I mean by complementary. And since positronic tubes are in short supply ... Is that poor usage? If so, how should I refer to a circuit in which components on the positive rail are pretty much a mirror image of the negative rail? And yes, in the phono / pre. It’s quiet. |
When I refer to an Improvement, Bettered, Betterment. At no time do I suggest the circuit has been changed, I only offer a comment on how the end sound has been perceived, and if there is a detection it leans toward my own unique preference. In my experiences of witnessing the end result of component exchanges, this is commonly the end assessment. One on a redesign for a CDP, hand wound OCC Silver Tranx's were added to compliment all mod's already undertaken and experienced by myself. The Silver Tranx's were awful to myself and had undone a lot of good work in place. Another listener and the EE doing the mod's were very appraising of the influence. |
Terry, my expertise with solid state is not very high. And my interests run toward learning about gain stages. But suffice to say that I followed advice from the late Allen Wright in his "Tube Preamp Cookbook", to learn how to build a balanced, hybrid cascode input stage with a solid state device on the bottom and tube on top. One of the devices AW recommended for that, and what he used in his own TOTL phono stage, is the MAT02, which is a bipolar transistor. After reading his book, I incorporated such a gain stage into my Atma-sphere MP1 phono section. Turns out, Raul and Jose' used the MAT02 or similar in their series of phonolinepreamps, for the MC gain stage. They use an FET, I think, for high output cartridges. (Their phonolinepreamps have two totally separate phono sections, one each for LOMC and MM/MI.) Anyway, maybe you were thinking about a balanced circuit, rather than "push-pull". Which of course you can build with tubes, too. I think I recall that PNP and NPN power transistors can be paired to create a push-pull output stage. That's the better way to do it rather than with PNP on both sides. But that is as far as I can recall without opening a book. With tubes, there is no issue. Anyone who wants to correct me is welcome to do so. |
lewm, for several years now I've used a JLTi phono stage which was designed, at least in part, by Allen Wright. Mine is an earlier unit, intended for use with a wall wart. However, a (more knowledgable) audio pal built a regulated power supply for use with mine which was a worthwhile upgrade. About that time JLTi began offering regulated power supplies as an option. Anyway, it is a SS design so now I wonder if it includes the MAT02? Regarding the performance, early on I took my unit to a friend's to participate in a phono stage shoot out with about five contenders (since forgotten most of the others). Needless to say I was pleased when the JLTi was tied with a Manley Steelhead as the favored sonics by those in attendance. I've not compared it to anything else lately but still consider it a "sleeper". |
- 335 posts total