|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
174.51.211.143
In Reply to: RE: Lets Start A Favorite MM Cart Thread....Inspired By Opus posted by AudioSoul on June 11, 2011 at 10:15:48
When I got into vinyl only a couple years ago, everyone told me that MC cartridges would produce the best results. I was under the impression that MM's were for beginners.... not unlike training wheels. ;-)
I sold my only MM cartridge and have gone exclusively MC. Is there something worth investigating in MM that I might be missing in a good MC cartridge?
Follow Ups:
I found this comment from Graham Slee on his discussion board set up for his DIY Genera kit interesting, if short on details:
"Eight or nine years ago when we first started getting dealers and distributors interested I was told to cool it regarding my enthusiasm for MM... I'll let you fill in the blanks."
So here it is:
What cartridge, what exotic audiophile wonder of disc playback, was producing these marvels? What cartridge could have the "lowest distortion of all," "uncanny" resolution, better than master tapes?
big j.
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms ."
nt
Never seen one, let alone heard one.
big j.
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms ."
IMO its a very good cartridge. Realistic timbre, detail without bleach/etch, fairly nuanced bass, and hf without unnatural exaggeration.
Its a shame AT doesn't "re-issue" the ML170.
I tried to get one of the AT ML170's from a supplier in Japan several years ago and was told that the 170 used some exotic compound that was not safe for the cartridge builders and was therefor banned by the government.
nt
AT used to use beryllium. I think it was banned for some reason. I believe Shure used it, too. When it was banned, they gave up producing the V15VxMR. I think that was the reason. I could be wrong.
Best regards,
John Elison
Yup, beryllium can be quite toxic: Inhaling of particles not recommended! But that's more a problem during manufacturing rather than being a real threat for the user.
Suitability for cantilevers otherwise is about as good as with boron: Beryllium is even lighter, but on the other hand also a tad less rigid - and iirc speed of sound is still a bit higher in boron. However, the main problem with beryllium is the enourmous price - if you check for beryllium foil in comparision to for example gold foil, you'll see what I mean... Hence I could imagine that the main reason for replacing beryllium with boron cantilevers rather was a financial one, with toxicity being just an excuse - 'cause if the usage really was forbidden, Focal/JMlab nowadays shouldn't be able to offer their beryllium tweeters either.
And just to name a few more manufacturers with beryllium cantilevers on some of their carts: Dynavector, Yamaha, JVC, Pioneer, ADC, B&O... uhm... and probably some more I already forgot. ;) As most sophisticated exemplar ever I'd probably nominate the diamond coated, tapered tubular exemplar as used for example on the Yamaha MC1000 - and I think the Accuphase AC3 sports a funky combination of a beryllium rod within a boron tube...
Greetings from Munich!
Manfred / lini
P.S.: I used to have a Yamaha MC505 back in the day - with tubular, tapered beryllium cantilever. A nice little cart. And I still use two types of AT needles with straight beryllium cantilevers on my AT120 and AT102P family bodies - the ATN150E with nice, sharp elliptical and the ATN152LP with LinearContact tip (both rectangular/square shank nudies).
What's the difference between the 170 and the AT-150MLX, which is currently being offered by LP Gear?
the ML150 sucked compared to my170. It was bright/etched/harsh. The 150mlx looks quite different from the ML170, and also different from the ML150 that sucked. Dunno, maybe the mlx version of the 150 is an improvement.
Click on the link below, then scroll down to the bottom and you'll see a pic of the ML170 and it's specs.
You only been in this a couple years? I think you got some learning to do yet.
Give it another 35+ years.
Give it another 35+ years.
Oh, I have lots of learning to do yet and if I make it another 35+ years I'll be pretty fortunate. That's why I asked why? , and I'm getting some pretty good responses.
Some say that tubes are the only way to go, some say the same stuff about vinyl. If the end result is happiness, it kind of opens the window of what's possible. If only owning the best stuff you read about is the goal, that's also fine with me.
Abe, just to give an example (perhaps not to be taken as a generality): I have two tables, one with a Soundsmith-retipped Shelter 501 Mk II and one with a Grado Reference Sonata1 (actually an MI). On LPs that tend toward the bright, hyper-detailed side, I prefer the Grado. It smooths and rounds out the sound very nicely while still being revealing AND very "musical."
On LPs that tend to be more neutral or darker in sound, I prefer the Shelter. It adds detail, air and a touch of sheen to the treble range.
I think you'll find that a good MM or MI will flesh out the sound vs. a good MC, which will tend to emphasize detail (again, speaking in broad generalities). I wouldn't really want to be without one of both.
I believe those who profess MMs to be inferior by nature are the same ones who prefer a highly detailed sound that favors the upper frequencies. But there are truly great examples of both types.
-Bob
Hi Abe,
Low-output MC cartridges provide the greatest potential for achieving the best possible performance from vinyl because of their very low inductance. The high inductance of MM cartridges produces an electrical resonance that occurs within the audible frequency range thereby preventing them from ever achieving optimal performance. The reason that you rarely find expensive MM cartridges is because it is not worth putting money into a flawed design.
On the other hand, you need a good phono stage to get the most out of a low-output moving coil. When you have the correct equipment you should be able to easily hear the difference between MM and low-output MC. My advice would be to simply let your ears make up your mind. That's what I did 30-years ago and I reconfirmed my decision about 5-years ago. I prefer the sound of moving coils to moving magnets, and I know exactly why.
Best regards,
John Elison
Believe it or not, there are some who own stables of $2-$5K cartridges who also prefer some vintage MM; link attached....
Edits: 06/11/11
Not because of the content, but the writing. I guess if I wrote in his native tongue it would be unreadable too.
I've been reading that damn thread for years with Rauliruegas telling everyone how right he is and how wrong they must be. A couple of times i've even bitten the bullet and tried one of the MMs mentioned as there must be something in it but each time i've come away disappointed and one of my LOMC cartridges has walked all over the MM.
Obsessive compulsive much? I know those types of minds are real nice for science and research, but there is such a thing as boring.
nt
New, a Goldring 1042 GX, Garrot Bros P77 and Nagaoka MP300. I had a Nagaoka MP11 years ago which i liked. Used and what i suppose is classed as vintage, a couple of Signets, a TK5E and M55(?), some cheap Audio Technicas whos nomenclature escapes me which i believe might have been Signets anyway and finally an Empire 600 something. Each one was fine in that they tracked well, had plenty of midrange warmth and enjoyment but none of the fine detail and air that i've had from an Ortofon Jubilee, Cadenza Black, VdH MC10 Special, Phase Tech P-3. That lack of detail especially is what i miss the most and for me is important in a cartridge.
About the only mm's/mi's I'm aware of that are in the same monetary ballpark are the top echelon Grado's and Soundsmith's, which apparently you haven't tried.
Anyway, to each his own. I was just curious. Thanks.
But then again i've not seen a MM that costs as much as either of the Ortofons. I had a Denon DL 304 too which i really enjoyed and that was pretty much on par with the MP300 price wise and i liked the Denon far more. I can certainly see the advantages of using a MM but the drawbacks in the ones i've listened to spoil the listening pleasure for me. I certainly wouldn't use a cheap high output MC rather than MM as i dislike the couple of those i've owned greatly.
nt
hi abe,
many of us cut our teeth on MMs and in those days, MCs had rising top ends that were hard to tolerate. as time wore on, preamps were devised to cope with those problems and the carts were subsequently designed to not have such severe rising tops.
we still have some of those old units and use them now and again. having a detachable headshell is a big benefit here. one must be cautioned though that certain carts like the ADCs really need low mass arms and the technics arms arent suitable. sure, there are those out there that will maintain that they havent had any probs with that but those original ADCs and sounuses were delicate and truly need low mass arms.
MC carts are usually not so delicate in the suspension and many times need a higher mass arm to function properly.
...regards...tr
I guess it comes down to the ugly truth, my records have problems. If I have a flat one, with a good center, with good music, its notable. Why invest in more accuracy than my records generally can deliver, if that accuracy comes with strings attached.
I like the higher compliance designs because for me, the recording is the key part of the playback. Easy on the records is a big plus for me, and having a consumable item (the cart tip) that is DIY is better.
My stereo already sounds better than yours, so why look for complicating the signal chain just so I can have the latest greatest.
I was recently at an audio show and both styles of carts could bring all you could want with the right speakers. That last drop of performance that a moving coil is reported to bring is always a temptation, upgrading the cart is fun and an instant hit.
But a lot of people report a better outcome on non complicated musical lines with a MM. Most of my stuff is rock and jazz, classical rarely makes it to the table.
Easy to own, easy on the records, sounds good to me. A big lesson I learned at the hi fi show was the big deal holy grail stuff that the mags rave about is for a very rare bird, one that also has a big grip of cash. I wouldn't enjoy sitting alone in my special listening room , as almost required by the big money stuff. I like nice sounds , but a system that requires a super cart is not for me.
So I ask, does my system need more cart? Well, yes, I want one, but not really. I'm getting along fine with an easy to live with hot rod type of concept. I don't need a race car approach, as tempting as that is every once in a while. My system is more street than racetrack, because simple play back is more fun for me. Others might like a more science experiment type of listen, a moving coil is right in their sweet spot, I suppose.
If I break a tip, I go to the closet and get out my other tip, stored just in case. A 150 dollar mistake is still better than screwing up even more money. Plus, I take pride in sharing, all my guests can play with my stuff , so far all have declined to use the record player , but they like to listen.
you would not ask, "why?"
Opus 104
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: