"Harder" cartridge recomendation

Timeltel,
Myself, I dont have a religious preference. I value speed and timing, transparency which in my view derives from resolution and/or removal of resonances. My two favourite cartridges that fulfill this preference are the Decca London Garrot ( MI ) and the Ikeda ( MC ). Both of these cartridges have no conventional cantilever and are demanding of both arm and phono stage. I have also heard excellent sound from Garrot P77 ( Dynamic coil ), Soundsmith SG400 ( Strain gauge ) and Stax ( condensor ) all of which have their different attributes.
I have no issue with the proposition that in many systems MM's will be the optimal choice. I do have an issue if someone makes a blanket statement that MM's are better than MC's.
Frequency response claims are nebulous, when I first heard my Dynavector Nova 13D, it sounded lean in the bass. Then I heard it in a system flat to 13hz - different view entirely.
One point that we should all agree on, that is continually ignored when making cartridge recommendations, is that cartridges that are low compliance or push a lot of energy into the arm should not be used with mediocre arms.

He thinks digital has less distortion.

Ironical when digital is a mathematical approximation of
analogue, ie 100% distorted. The argument becomes is the distortion inherent in
digital relevant when asking the question "Is this medium accurate enough for
enjoying music ?".
Or to put the question to digiphiles 11110101010100001010101010101100 ?

According to Lew I made a 'blanket statement' about 'some' MC cart while according to Dover Timeltelt deed the same the other way round. He made a 'blanket statement'
about the MM carts. Herr Professor can speak for him self, in prose or verse, but I like to explain my own. I am not sure what a 'blanket statement' exactly means but if the
generality is assumed then I need to onderline that there
are two kinds according to the logic of quantification.
The 'general without exception' and the so called 'general
existential'. The last mentioned assume existence: there is some x
such that Fx&Gx. Fx= MC kind and Gx (better than any MM kind). This kind
of statement is true if there is at least one MC of this kind. There are: Olympos, A90, Audio Note,Anna, Universe, FR-fz to name some of the possible candidates. So anyone
who likes MC's more than MM's can choose his own. If I could afford Netrepko I would choose Anna but alas. I can choose from what I own(ed) and know and my choice was the Krell KC 100 , alias Miyabi Standard. But in comparison to
'all MM carts' I own(ed). This to my mind is a particular statement, not a 'blanket one'.

Regards,

Nandric, I am equally guilty of this, but if you sold several of your tonearms and cartridges that are not in use and never will be in frequent use, I would wager that the resulting funds might pay for an Ortofon Anna. I know this is true in my case. However, I personally am suffering from a bad case of stylus drag from which I do not have the mental torque to recover.

Nice job on the logical dissection of my term, "blanket statement".

OT & apologies, Bydlo:

I wrote, relative to something I read about MM carts being more forgiving through the mid to top end:

"I heard a ("a" = singular, one) cart that rolled off at 18kHz, a veritable festival of resonance, it was a MC with a conical stylus/aluminum cantilever. This is my proof that a MC cart has a limited hf response. I heard a (one) MM cart that, measured, makes 45k without breaking a sweat."
"I now have "faith" in the superior capability of MM carts to reproduce hf signals, it is my postulate that MCs are inferior in this capacity. The difficulty is that postulates defy reason, those who are interested in verification seek broader confirmation."

And: "-not to be described in terms of either generalities or universals."

Nikola, thanks for bringing this to my attention. Mea Culpa, Dover is absolutely correct. I should have phrased it as SOME postulates defy reason.

Now, about Bydlo's question?

Peace,