What is the preferred cartrige mm or mc and why

I use both MM and MC, like each cartridge - each has strengths and weaknesses. What I have noticed is that of the 3 phono preamps I use, the MC output is quiter - particulary on my new Parasound JC3 Jr - set to MM, it has an audible hiss when close to the speakers, not the case when I use it for my MC cart. YMMV

EDIT: 2 of the preamps I use have XLR output - same experience with XLR and single ended.

I have been through more cartridges than I can remember: MM, MC, MI, and I keep coming back to MC.

For my ears, MC has better detail, better attack/decay, creates a bigger better defined soundstage, better defined images within that soundstage.

I hear more air around instruments with MC. And I have found that MC tend to track a bit better, but they are also more finicky to set up correctly. 

MC cartridges have a lower moving mass than MM cartridges, which accounts for most of the attributes that I like over MM.

When MC cartridges first started gaining popularity, there was an issue with bass being a bit lighter than MM, but that is in the past. 

MM has an edge at the lower-middle price range. A  $500 dollar MM has a good chance at outperforming a $500 MC.   

invictus005

597 posts

03-16-2018 at 11:05pm 

MM is better. MM sounds closer to master tape. MM is preferred by most mastering engineers from the golden era. MM has more drive and bass. MM has more prominent and magical presence region.

MC sounds fake. MC has false over exaggerated detail. MC has a weak presence region. MC has s weak midrange. MC has weak bass and midbass. MC sounds terrible with step up transformers. MC is noisy with a lot of mid fi phono preamps. MC sounds anemic with anything less than 60dB of gain. MC doesn't work well with tube equipment.

 

Wow. Just.......wow......

"MC cartridges have a lower moving mass than MM cartridges, which accounts for most of the attributes that I like over MM."

This little tidbit or variations thereof is repeated over and over again, but where are any data to support it?  It seems to make sense, but many things in the physical world seem to make sense (like the notion that the sun revolves around the earth) but are shown to be incorrect.  And if it's true that moving mass is the singular determinant of SQ, then one ought to be using a low output MI cartridge, which type has the lowest moving mass of all.