|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
74.130.29.193
In Reply to: RE: MM cartridge closest to sound and tracking of a Denon DL301MKII posted by bluemooze on September 28, 2015 at 13:11:13
I always speak for myself. I answered Garven's question to the best of my ability. I seriously doubt there is anyone in this forum who has compared one MM cartridge after another until they've found one that they believe sounds similar to the Denon DL-301II. I certainly could be wrong, though. ;-)
Best regards,
John Elison
Follow Ups:
So in your post you were using the royal "we"?
Actually my Shure V15V with JICO SAS VN5MR-HG is tonally very similar (loaded at 47k, 150pF) to my DL301/II (loaded with 400ohms)*. My experiments showed that the response curve was insensitive to changes in load capacitance <250pF.
Tracking ability is superior to the DL301 and tracing superior with the MicroLine stylus.
*At the end of the day, there are so many variables involved, that comments about equivalency are limited to a given users system.
As a point of discussion, would you think that the transducer principle is the key determinant on perceived tonal balance or less significant compared to the mechanical interactions of arm mass, stylus alignment etc?
I certainly hear differences between my cartridges (both MM and MC), but I have Stanton/Pickering low impedance bodies that perform equivalently to MCs in terms of frequency response and transparency combined with superior tracking ability.
My personal view is that the perceived tonal benefits are largely related to the mechanical interactions of the suspension and damping with the arm and plinth vibration modes with additional effects of LF modulation being to add colouration. I'm personally not convinced that the transducer principle of itself is such a significant parameter. If one chooses to use a SUT to match the MC cartridge output impedance, then there is yet another reason why tonal perceptions are unlikely to be defined by the transducer principle.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
I think the transducer principle is a key ingredient to better sound only from the standpoint of reducing inductance. However, the only way to reduce inductance enough while maintaining viable voltage output is to use a large powerful magnet with a low inductance coil. The moving coil principle seems to be the most expedient way to achieve this end.
The cartridges I find most pleasing have always been ultra low-output moving coils with the lowest possible inductance. I've owned only two, the original Ortofon MC-2000 and my present Denon DL-S1. I have heard high-resolution digital recordings from the new Audio Technica ART7 and it sounds like an exceptional cartridge, too. These types of cartridges have ultra low inductance. For example, the Audio Technica ART7 has coil inductance of only 8-microhenrys. A normal low-output moving coil like the AT-OC9/III has coil inductance of 25-microhenrys, which is three times greater.
I certainly agree with you that arm mass, compliance and stylus alignment are also important considerations. However, most modern cartridges seem to work reasonably well with most modern tonearms.
Best regards,
John Elison
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: