MC versus MM. Which to choose.

Lew, regarding your question;

Which of the MM/MI cartridges did you audition in your own system? Just curious.

i'm at work, from my memory there was an Ortofon ML20 (or something like that), and an Azden of some sort, then an additional one. i gave the Ortofon to a friend, and still have the other 2.

tonght when i get home i'll get the details on the exact models. Raul very helpful to me in getting these and they did perform as advertised.

i would have no trouble living with any of these as my 'go to' cartridge.

Thanks for taking the time to respond, Mike. For what it's worth, those two just happen to be among the few that I also have auditioned. The top Acutex's and the top Stanton/Pickerings are better, FWIW, and not that I think this will send you out to look for either. Not to say that the Ortofon M20FL or M20E (whichever one you tried) and the top Azden are chopped liver.

Lew,

the 3 MM cartridges were the Ortofon M20FL you mentioned which i gave away, the Azden YM-P50VL, and the Empire 1080LT....both of which i still have.

i was tempted to keep my Dobbins/Loricraft/Garrard 301 for 'messing' around with stuff like these cartridges. then you need another shelf, arms, another phono stage, etc., etc. and it does add quite a bit of hassel to access things and makes the daily ease of use for the system more problematic. it's easier to have multiple RTR tape decks. they are all on wheels so i can just move them out of the way when i need to. just another aspect of my decision tree.

Speaking as someone who has designed cartridges, phono stages and tonearms, my experience is that the choice for best sound between MM and MC depends largely on the phono stage and the tonearm and to a lesser extent, the turntable.

The tracking ability of a cartridge depends greatly on the tonearm that it is installed in, and the sonic performance of a cartridge can be made or broken by the phono stage. Regarding both tonearms and phono stages, I have found MCs to be considerably more demanding of the equipment that they are paired with. Phrasing that observation slightly differently, you could say that MMs/MIs make it easier and cheaper to design a phono stage or a tonearm that sounds relatively good.

Although I have heard many MM/MIs and rather like some of them, I have heard no current or out-of-production product that has made me think that I must add a similar MM or MI to our cartridge lineup.

OTOH, I do believe that MM/MIs have the possibility of conferring certain key advantages over MCs for a cartridge designer who has very specific design goals in mind.

hth, jonathan carr

MC, the designer and salesman dream. Bigger profits from the cartridge itself, better (more expensive) tonearm needed, better or more expensive phono stage needed and or an extra gain stage usually needed which would also be expensive. I need all this to hear a slight improvement over a high-end TOTL MM model? And after all this extra expense, just how much better would it be I wonder? Or would most of my decent sounding records still just sound decent and only the best recordings sound a little better?

Plus what exactly is invovled in designing and building a TOTL MC cartridge that drives the prices up to 4K and even much more being the parts are essentialy inexpensive things. There are MM cartridges with just as good quality cantilever and diamonds as the super expensive MC models, but for a fraction of the cost.

It all makes sense to me that a high quality MM cartridge is a good solution for those of us who are on a budget or budget minded. Example of why someone might be budget minded, "the wife would freak out if I spent 4K on a cartridge" and then probably kill me if told her "well now I need a better phono stage and tonearm to hear how good this cartridge sounds" etc. :)