MC Load Resistance


I am using a Denon DL-S1 Moving Coil cartridge with a VPI Scout turntable. The spec for the cartridge recommends a Load Resistance of 100 ohms, but the test data sheet included with the cartridge showed that they tested it with Load Resistance of 47K ohms. Question is, do you think it is ok to set the phono amp at 47K ohms for this cartridge?
almandog
Lewm, as you are one of the true audiophiles who do NOT settle with what the industry put in the package they bought (you have (have had) parts custom upgraded and modified the amplifiers you use), let me suggest you give it a try with your modified Atmasphere MP-1 and a Jensen or Lundahl transformer.
The Jensen 347-AXT can be used with the Urushi and the Lundahl LL-1931 or 1933 can be used with the Ortofon 7500. However none of these is really ideal suited for a VERY low source impedance (and thus inductance....) LOMC while offering a decent (1:8 to 1:12) step-up ratio. If you want to restrict yourself to one SUT first, I would go for any of the two Lundahls mentioned first - they do offer primary options which can accommodate all your top-3 cartridges (vdH Colibri ...).

In SUT - as in cartridges/tonearm combinations - there is no single "BEST" SUT. There are superb matching combinations - and combinations of great individual components (MC and SUT) which do NOT match.
Its again applied skill and knowledge to get the best possible performance.

If you give it a try, I'd really look forward to learn, if you too do hear the "degradations" Atmasphere (..the human person - not the preamp....) hears with his MP-1.
Select the best (read: .... widest frequency response, close to perfect phase = most expensive...) SUT, settle for low step-up ratio, use Lundahls or Jensens recommendations or spread sheets to careful fine-tune the secondary resistor in accordance with the phono input resistance and try to meet the above stated matching rules.

I bet it will proof worth the effort.
Lewm,
+++ ... Axel, are you saying that you now like a 47-ohm resistor on the primary side of your SUT? I presume you also have a 47K-ohm resistor on the secondary side. Is this correct? +++
No! please see below.

A 30dB SUT (1:31.6 ratio) has a "natural impedance" of 47 ohm when going into a 47k secondary input impedance (the phono-pre).

Since the primary impedance = secondary input imp./ ratio ^2 = 47k/31.6*31.6 = ~ 47 ohm primary impedance.

So what I now like is the 47 ohm primary *impedance* of the SUT without ANY resistive loading (other then the negligible 1.1 ohm of the primary coil winding itself...)

I hope this should clarify the matter.
Greetings,
Thanks, Axel. I am comforted to know that you like that set-up, because I never could quite understand how a 13-ohm load could be superior to any higher value resistance, using your cartridge. 47 ohms is more in the ballpark of what I would guess would work well.

Dertonearm, thanks for the tip. Unfortunately or fortunately, I modified the phono input stage of my MP1 to use an MAT02 bipolar transistor as the bottom half of a cascode, where the top half of the cascode is now an ECC99, in dual-differential configuration. This, in conjunction with the output stage gain section, gives oodles of gain, even for the Orto MC7500. (The MAT02 has a Gm of 400!) And I am very pleased with the sound quality. I guess I could use a VERY low step-up ratio SUT, just to test your hypothesis. And there are tricks I could use to reduce the gain at the input, as well, without changing the topology. (I have to do this when I use the Colibri, which puts out 1.0mV.)
Lewm, I am very familiar with hybrid cascoded phono-inputs.
Getting gain galore in teh 1st stage is always tempting. I am currently using a full balanced differential all triode phono stage with split passive RIAA. I have experimented with a hybrid cascode input stage too, but I went back to the "conservative" triode input stage.
Dertonearm, Re your sentiments on the hybrid cascode, we have another subject where you and Atmasphere are in agreement. Ralph also recommended that I stick with tubes in both positions. I have no axe to grind; I know for a fact that the topology can sound very good either way. The MAT02 is pretty special in this application, so conclusions drawn using other solid state devices on the bottom of the cascode may not be so applicable. But I am a neophyte in these matters and not qualified to argue either way, except based on my own particular listening experience with this set-up. If I get the energy, I could go back to an all-ECC99 cascode and use a low gain SUT to make up the difference.