Questions about a new Ruby 2 cartridge

I did try it again with different settings and it was always the same: down from 47 k, it will be becoming slower and slower, more dull and lifeless.

But there is another point:

When the gain is set too high for your cartridge, you over-drive the amp stages and clipping and distortion is possible.

I did all with my Miyabi, 0,25mV

( this is low output, but not really low )

When I went too high with gain ( 67 dB and more ) in combination with 47k, then I hear clipping with piano recordings.

Going down to normal 63 dB area,then everything is great with 47k.

I think, most users set their phono stage to the max gain and then they do their ' experiments '.

Wrong way.
I had a Ruby, too, it is designed originally from Benz ( not Lukascheck ) for 47K.
The new Ruby II, which has a higher output, i think, something in the 0.4 mV area ??, when this one is amplified with too much gain ( 64 dB and much more- 68,70,75dB) and a 47K setting, this will be inferior. So I agree, when someone with such a setting is going down to 1k, that the prefers that.

The superiority of a 47K load ( in a phono stage which can handle it without sounding dead ) is only in combination with the right gain for the cartridge.

For those, who own a adjustable phono stage ( gain, impedance ...) and a uncoloured system it is easy to find out.

easy - and fun and time consuming!

still on the path actually.
a few months back I felt that 825 ohms was the best I would find. I've had it there most of the time since then, but I was bothered at times by the highs seeming a bit too strident, like a HINT of too much edge. I attributed it to the nature of the Ruby 2H in my system as compared to the previous carts I'd been used to - which were all Grados(mellow mellow mellow). so I thought "give it time" as it may just be unrolled off highs being new to my ears. then it became clear to me that it also still sounded less SOLID then it should. (((just for fun before trying other loads I reached over to my old "audionics of Oregon" David Berning designed ba150 amp and switched it's FEEDBACK on. that did cut the airyness, implying more solidity, but paying for it with unwanted compression. back to zero feedback...))) and sure enough, dropping the load to 475 ohms brought it into focus; with smooth and clear upper mids, a touch of liquidity, sweet tight bass, killer soundstage & imaging, (wonderfully transparent but not unnaturally so) and the highs less biting but still quite present. now I am playing between 475 and 452.06: Abbey Road sounds best at 475 while Beethoven (the 9th - Von Karajan 63), Bach and Albert King just LOVE it at 452. Bill Evans and Louis Armsrong sound great everywhere. so I want an external switch, which I ain't got, so I guess I'm gonna have to compromise somewhere sometime. thank God and Harry W. that I at least have VTA on the fly!
so I'm deciding between 2 perches in heaven - things could be worse...Such sweet torture.

I agree that at some point one just has to conclude that there is a certain setting which represents the most accurate overall response for the cartridge in question, with an 'average' record played back through that system, and any variations in balance beyond that setting must be chalked up to individual recording idiosyncracies and taken in stride for what they're worth (truth in reporting, or something approaching it). I for one feel that screwing around with the phono settings on a record-by-record basis would do more to destroy the enjoyment of my listening sessions than it would enhance. It is interesting that you seem to be winding up in the same loading neighborhood that I have with my Glider M2, but you're really speaking my language when you talk about solidity and focus (and I could also add transient precision/cleanliness) - if going through this process taught me anything, it was that concentrating on the tonal balance alone is only an initial tendancy, one which likely won't get you to the optimum setting taken by itself. Happy listening! :-)