Dvd raises an interesting question in the OP--how much is too much money to spend on a cartridge for the Scout? Some would say that a budget table like the Scout will not realize the performance potential of a really high quality (and expensive) cartridge. Others will say the bulk of what you are hearing is the cartridge and as long as you have a competent table/arm spend as much as you can--you will hear what an expensive cartridge has to offer. I had a conversation with Peter from Soundsmith about this some time ago and he(unsurprisingly) took the latter view. The folks who sell Linn tables would likely take the former view. My own view is that the Scout is an overachiever. It may not cost much but even the original Scout/JMW9 that I own will outperform tables that cost significantly more. Having said that, I do not think I would put a cartridge on my Scout that retailed for any more than half the retail price (i.e. $1K). Over the years I have used a Dynavector 20XM, 20XL, XX2MKII and am now using a ATOC9MLII. While the XXIIMKII did sound better than either of the 20X series carts, the difference was negligible and, in my mind, not worth the additional expenditure. The AT, which is the least expensive of the lot, is actually the best sounding, I think for two reasons: 1. It is the best compliance match of the bunch, which goes to Tswisla's point about system matching and 2. When I sold the XXIIMKII and purchased the MUCH less expensive AT I took the leftover funds and bought a much better phonostage (Herron VTPH-2). Which leads me to the view that the quality of the phonostage is very important in getting the best out of whatever cartridge you are using. One final point is this: the AT, like the Scout, is also an overachiever and, when paired with the right table/arm and a very high quality phonostage, can produce some pretty terrific results.
